Politics

Lieberman in a Difficult Position

By  | 

null

One of the interesting secondary plotlines playing out in Washington is the fate of Joe Lieberman. After his vocal support for John McCain, will Lieberman be allowed to stay in the Democratic caucus? Does he want to?

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said, he wants Lieberman to stay in the party’s caucus but that decision is ultimately up to the party itself. Reports are that, if Lieberman stays, he will be stripped of his powerful chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and given Veteran Affairs instead. Lieberman’s people have labeled such a proposal “unacceptable.”

Unfortunately for Lieberman, he doesn’t have a lot of bargaining chips. This is politics and, if you choose to speak at the opposition party’s convention, it doesn’t matter if you were your party’s vice-presidential nominee eight years ago. You’re going to suffer consequences. I respect Lieberman for sticking with his conscience and going with the man he thought best for the job. In a perfect world, politicians wouldn’t be beholden to party. But we don’t live in a perfect world and Lieberman knew full well his actions would anger his party.

At this point, he either remains with the Democrats but has to accept less authority or he caucuses with the Republicans and has to deal with not only being in the minority but being that party’s most liberal caucus member who will undoubtedly infuriate Republican operatives on numerous occasions.

Yes, it’s hard out here for an independent. But once you choose to play the game, you have to deal with the consequences.

  • gljunket

    Or he could try to create a future for the GOP!

  • http://www.johnpeters.com John Peters

    Even the Republicans don’t deserve Lieberman. Get rid of this hypocrite as he has proven his allegiance. He does not stand with America but continues to sell out the taxpayer for the single issue of the neocon jihad against ‘islamist extremism’ and an endless war to maintain Israeli superiority in the Middle East.

  • http://letjoestay.blogspot.com Let Joe Stau

    As a supporter of Senator Lieberman I am offended by the threats from Senator Harry Reid and many of his Democratic colleagues to strip Senator Lieberman of his Chairmanships simply because he chose his friendship with John McCain over party politics. In repose to these threats, I have set up the a blog, Let Joe Stay (http://letjoestay.blogspot.com/) with the hope of mobilizing like minded people to contact their Senators as well as Senator Reid and inform them not to put their pettiness ahead of what’s right. Senator Lieberman is the best man for these Chairmanships and to remove him would be foolish. If this is truly the time for hope and change, then Sen. Reid should forgive and forget and allow Joseph Lieberman to keep his Chairmanship.

  • http://www.warning1938alert.ytmnd.com Jimmy the Dhimmi

    He burned a lot of bridges when he said Obama was more interested in winning an election than protecting our nation. Remember Obama endorsed Lieberman in the 2006 Democratic primary when he lost to LaMont. That is a pretty harsh backstab if you ask me.

  • mike mcEachran

    @ John – I agree with you. Call it what you will, I am sceptical of Leiberman’s priorities.

  • blackoutyears

    I’m with Mr. Dhimmi on this one. Alan, if it were simply that JL had stumped for McCain and broken with his party out of friendship it might have been excusable. His remarks re Obama’s patriotism were insulting and ill-considered. There were certainly ways to support Mccain without descending to the usual tiresome assaults on patriotism. Interestingly it sounds as if Obama has come out in favor of keeping Lieberman in the caucus. No word of what (un)diminished standing JL would have.

  • Andrew

    Not to mention the Iraq War is perhaps the single biggest criticism many people have of modern politics. Obama’s position on the Iraq War was one of the deciding factors in my support for him; I dunno just how much I can respect Lieberman given his stance there. Assuming that it’s sticking to his principles: alright, that’s brave of him, but it makes me question his principles and just how worthy he is of chairing the Homeland Security committee. Having him on the committee is understandable, but chairing it? Nah.