Lieberman’s fake ID

January 31, 2007

Raw Story reports today on the general media confusion over how, exactly, to characterize Joe Lieberman’s party affiliation. His office told Raw Story today that he prefers the rendering “ID” for “Independent Democrat”, but said there’s “not particularly” been any effort by his office to convince newspapers one way or another. Lieberman’s website also refers to the senator as “ID.”

It prompted Tapped’s Ben Adler to argue that all of us who write about him should use the preferred designation.

Though good liberals may find his attachment to the Iraq quagmire infuriating, the truth is that, by caucusing with the Democrats, Lieberman has in fact remained one. Before Lieberman there was Jim Jeffords, an Independent in name but a Dem in practice, and Jeffords’s successor in the Senate, Bernie Sanders, had the same situation in the House. Sanders isn’t designated ID, but he should be. It seems logical to categorize independents who caucus with one party or the other accordingly.

That’s perfectly reasonable, and it’s a logical approach to the question. But I find it difficult to accept anyway. The two words — “independent” and “Democrat” — seem entirely contradictory. If you’re a Democrat, you’re not an independent. If you’re an independent, you’re not a Democrat. Isn’t this the essence of what “independent” actually means? That one is neither a Democrat or a Republican? An “Independent Democrat” is a bit like a vegetarian who eats chicken. It just doesn’t add up.

Besides, when push comes to shove, Lieberman acknowledges that he prefers one over the other.

He said so two weeks ago.

For the past eight weeks, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman has asked to be called an Independent Democrat — “capital I, capital D,” he even specified.

But that request was ignored more often than not, with many official records and most press accounts describing him either as a Democrat, his party by registration, or as an independent, a reflection of the fact that he won his fourth Senate term from Connecticut last fall on his own ballot line.

And yesterday, his office made clear that, if the compound modifier that the senator prefers was not going to take hold, then Lieberman’s second choice is to be described as an Independent.

“There was a Democratic nominee, and he wasn’t it,” said Lieberman’s new chief spokesman, Marshall Wittmann. “He still considers himself a Democrat, but the better reflection of his elected position is that he’s an independent.”

To be sure, most of this is procedural trivia. I’m far more concerned with how Lieberman votes and what he says than what letters follow his name.

But as long as it’s a topic for debate, put me in the “Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.)” camp.

I prefer “I”–for ‘Impeachment”

or Ignoramus

or Imbecile

or Icking Fudiot

  • for anyone who wants to know, bernie sanders considers himself an independent, not a democrat, although he caucuses with democrats. here in vt, the democrats nominated him on that ticket as well, and he declined.

  • Dude, he’s not “I” or “D” or any of that. He’s “Connecticut for Lieberman”! A great party. Is “CFL” so hard to fit after his name? Lieberman (CFL- CT).

  • Lieberman is an independent. His “party” was a one-shot intended to get him elected after he lost his primary, and isn’t likely to field any other candidates than Lieberman.

    Assuming some Dem gains in 2008, they should strip Lieberman of his committees and kick him out of the caucus. Will they do so? I doubt it. But they should.

  • Assuming some Dem gains in 2008, they should strip Lieberman of his committees and kick him out of the caucus. Will they do so?

    I think they will. Especially if continues to suck up to the W administration, especially as far as Katrina goes.

  • Joe is everything combined—first he was a Dem, then adopted Indie status as a smokescreen to his “transformation to the dark, Republican side.” So he’s a “De-pend-ican.”

    Yes. I know. It “does” sound like the name of an “adult diaper,” now doesn’t it?

    How fitting….

  • Lieberman is neither an 😀 “r an “”

    After his heartlesss concern for Katrina victims and his pro-surge views lets call him what he really is

    A BUSH DEMOCRAT

    Joseph Lieberman (BD-Conn)

  • I think his second choice is a perfect statement of his politics:

    Lieberman (I-Con)

    Why yes, Joe. you indeed conned the people of Connecticut.

  • Lieberman is neither an Independent or an indep Democrat

    After his heartlesss concern for Katrina victims and his pro-surge views lets call him what he really is

    A BUSH DEMOCRAT

    Joseph Lieberman (BD-Conn)

  • Joe doesn’t represent Connecticut. I think a more apt designation would be Lieberman (L Isr).

  • Joe doesn’t represent Connecticut. I think a more apt designation would be Lieberman (L Isr).

    I think the most apt designation would be Lieberman (I – Lieberman).

  • Yeah, Joe Lieberman represents Joe Lieberman. That’s it. I’m actually surprised he hasn’t started talking about himself in the third person yet. “Joe Lieberman is gonna vote for who Joe Lieberman thinks can get the job done for this country, regardless of what Joe Lieberman’s alleged constituents think Joe Lieberman should do. Joe Lieberman says constituents – especially Democrats – should be seen and not heard from.”

  • I support #17; Joe is probably reveling in all the attention his thorn-in-everybody’s-side status has bought him. I can’t imagine any other reason for his insistence on a party affiliation that doesn’t exist, or is a party of one. Joe is just an ordinary…umm…joe, with an ordinary desire to be the centre of attention and loyalty to whoever flatters him.

  • He was elected as an Independent. He may caucus with the Democratic Party but he’s clearly in the Republican’s camp. He as much stated so himself, so I solved the dilemma between all these conflicting positions by now referring to him as Co-dependent Lieberman of Conn or (CD-Conn).

  • “Joe is just an ordinary…umm…joe”,.. yet Dem Party leaders continue to bend over for him and offer him the perks of senority… now that makes sense!

  • What a pompous ass. I mean really. This guys has is head so far up his own ass he farts when he blinks. He’s got more hot air in him than a sack full of assholes. Here’s the deal on LIEberman: He’s a jew that cares about Israel more than his own goddamn country. I say, “Hey Joe, you egotistical, Kermit the frog sounding, flip-flopping, Israel over America Judas, take your ass back to Israel.”

  • JRS Jr,

    …yet Dem Party leaders continue to bend over for him and offer him the perks of senority…

    Remind me again, from what party does the Senate Majority leader hail? While you’re at it, who is the chairman of the Judicial Committee?

    oh yeah…that’s right, some prices may be steep, but they are worth it.

  • Lieberman lost his primary race as a Democrat, then ran as an Independent against the Democrat who beat him. What’s the confusion? He’s an Independent. I don’t like the idea that he can be either/or, depending on his mood of the day, and I, too, wonder why we and the Democrats give him any attention at all. He surely shouldn’t be sitting on committees of import — he’s made it clear that he’s the only one he’s working for, unless the Republicans need him to stick a shiv in someone. That’s not the kind of leadership this country needs.

  • I agree with Jim M. Lieberman was on the last ballot and elected as CFL and that’s how he should be identified. jimBOB is correct that CFL is not likely to field other candidates but so what?

  • “some prices are steep, but they may be worth it”

    The call a spade a spade (suck it up and deal with Joe to retain the majority) and tell CB to find better material to fill his posts. This shit is getting way old!

  • Lieberman is specifically not an independent nor could he, or anyone, be the oxymoronic Independent Democrat. Lieberman could have run as an independent but deliberately chose to run in a new party of his own creation to get a better listing on the state ballot. He made his bed, now he needs to sleep in it. He is a Connecticut for Lieberman (CFL-CT). There is no other correct designation.

  • How dare he renounce his CFL party status! Maybe the party should vote to remove him from his seat if he refuses to dance with the one who brung him. Where’s that guy with the CFL bylaws …

  • This shit is getting way old!
    ———————————————–JRS Jr

    Well, you could always find somewhere else to freep. Seems you’re worried about something happening that your “ace-in-the-hole” won’t be able to help you with. Maybe the problem is that someone with an “R” next to their name will cross the aisle, and turn your poker hand into so much mush. Or maybe it’s that Lieberman has no influence over the House. It could even be that he has absolutely no input over the mauling that his good friend Abu is getting, and that it could eventually lead up to OVP. By the way—when Cheney does goes under the bus, it’ll take 51 votes to confirm his replacement. Joe only offers the GOP a maximum of 50. It’s my understanding that in the event of a “dead-heat tie” caused by a VP vacancy the majority-party-of-record makes the final decision. So—lose Cheney, and the Dems won’t need Lieberman.

    Lose Cheney, and the Dems can demote poor little Joe to the freshman status that his CFL designation legitimately gives him….

  • Lieberman is an independent. His “party” was a one-shot intended to get him elected after he lost his primary, and isn’t likely to field any other candidates than Lieberman.

    Well, you never know. There’s one member, I think he survived the first legal challenge to his seizing the party, and he doesn’t like Lieberman. Has anyone else been following that guy? I lost track of him.

    It has the potential to be hilarious. If Ned Lamont or another serious candidate runs against Lieberman from the left in 2012, then in addition to the Democratic nomination, he will no doubt have the right to append the letters CFL to his name. Which might catch catch peoples’ attention, or at the very least, be a good conversation starter.

  • I wouldn’t have commented on this were it not for the offensive anti-Semitism in Edo’s and particularly in Citizen Pain’s comments. I’m really surprised they weren’t deleted or at least challenged before this. I have no liking for the Senator from Connecticut, and have used the LIEberman phrase, but if “He’s a jew that cares about Israel more than his own goddamn country.” and “Israel over America Judas” are considered acceptable here, I don’t belong here — and I’m an ex-Catholic athiest.

    As for the question, remember that, for years, any Democrat from Minnesota did not run as a Democrat but as a member of the merged “Democrat Farmer-Labor” Party and kept that label even if he ran for national office (Humphrey, Mondale) as a Democrat.

  • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    I wouldn’t have commented on this were it not for the offensive anti-Semitism in Edo’s and particularly in Citizen Pain’s comments.

    Where is the anti-Semitism in my comment? I object to this characterization.

  • Please except my deepest apologies for unforgivable sloppiness. I had been offended by the (I-Israel) comment, and when I checked back, didn’t realize that you were quoting. It was ‘doubtful’ who said it, and should have been condemned. I am usually more careful than this, and especially on a charge this serious.

    Again my apologies.

  • Having corrected my blunder, my comment about the nature of the comments still stands. I can understand not deleting it, but am I the only person who finds Citizen Pain’s reference offensively anti-Semitic and worth criticizing?

    • Comments are closed.