Lieberman declines to endorse in presidential race

We're supposed to be thankful that Senator Joe Lieberman is being less jerkish than usual.

Yeah, kind of like the way you're thankful your most recent flare up of herpes is milder than usual. It doesn't change your opinion of the underlying problem.

Lieberman is pompous, and worse, an ingrate. President Obama saved his behind when Democrats were ready to jettison Lieberman from the Dem caucus after his betrayal of endorsing McCain over Obama. And what thanks did President Obama get in return? Lieberman scuttled a last minute deal to improve health care reform.

Thanks Joe!

So this time, as thanks to Obama, Lieberman isn't endorsing the President's re-election, but rather sitting this one out.

Lieberman has been helpful on gay issues, and I'm thankful for that.  But on so much more, he's just so smug and arrogant.  I'm glad he helped us on Don't Ask, Don't Tell, but for the sake of the party, it'll be good to see him go. Read the rest of this post...

Joe Lieberman is advising Republicans

The man should have gotten a swift kick in the backside years ago.   He loves the Republicans so much.  They'd have known how to deal with someone like him. Read the rest of this post...

Lieberman proposes "privatizing health insurance for seniors"

Paul Krugman (my emphasis):

Every once in a while a politician comes up with an idea that’s so bad, so wrongheaded, that you’re almost grateful. For really bad ideas can help illustrate the extent to which policy discourse has gone off the rails.

And so it was with Senator Joseph Lieberman’s proposal, released last week, to raise the age for Medicare eligibility from 65 to 67.

Like Republicans who want to end Medicare as we know it and replace it with (grossly inadequate) insurance vouchers, Mr. Lieberman describes his proposal as a way to save Medicare. ... And here’s what you need to know: Medicare actually saves money — a lot of money — compared with relying on private insurance companies. And this in turn means that pushing people out of Medicare, in addition to depriving many Americans of needed care, would almost surely end up increasing total health care costs.

Krugman focuses on the last point bolded above, that Medicare actually saves money over private insurance. That's true, and he expands that point in this blog post.

But let's focus on the messenger, Sen. Joe Lieberman. Is he a kind of closet Obama surrogate? Isn't he the guy whom Obama supported in 2006 over the actual (and betrayed) Democratic Party candidate, Ned Lamont?

Didn't Obama save Lieberman's chairmanship after the 2008 election? I think I remember that.

Seems like Lieberman is Mr. Trial Balloon from time to time. Does he speak for Obama now? Because if he does, here's how Krugman characterizes Lieberman's proposal (my emphasis):

The point, however, is that privatizing health insurance for seniors, which is what Mr. Lieberman is in effect proposing — and which is the essence of the G.O.P. plan — hurts rather than helps the cause of cost control.

I think someone needs to nail this down. Does Obama support Lieberman here as well? The President sure hasn't been that strong on Medicare lately.

GP Read the rest of this post...

Lieberman isn't running for reelection

Today, we're learning that Joe Lieberman isn't running for reelection:

Senator Joseph I. Lieberman will announce on Wednesday that he will not seek a fifth term, according to a person he told of his decision.

Mr. Lieberman, whose term is up in 2012, chose to retire rather than risk being defeated, said the person, who spoke to the senator on Tuesday.

“I don’t think he wanted to go out feet first,” the person said,.

He would have been defeated and that would have been a better. In fact, earlier today, PPP's Tom Jensen wrote a post titled, Why Lieberman Would Have Lost.

Yes, he helped on DADT repeal. But, for the most part, this guy undermined the progressive agenda for years. And, let's not forget how he campaigned against Obama in 2008.

Good riddance. Read the rest of this post...

Lieberman wants NY Times investigated for publishing WikiLeaks

Why does Joe Lieberman hate America? And no, this is not even close to being a joke.

Senator Joe Lieberman continues to expand his desire to p--- all over the First Amendment and the very concept of a free press. He's already been pressuring companies to stop working with Wikileaks and has already introduced an anti-Wikileaks bill that appears to be pure censorship, but he's now extending his lack of understanding of the First Amendment to the press: stating that the NY Times should be investigated for criminal activity in publishing the Wikileaks documents.

Read the rest of this post...

Like China, Lieberman bullies the internet to censor WikiLeaks

Who died and made Lieberman emperor? More from Glenn Greenwald.

Those are the benign, purely legal documents that have now been removed from the Internet in response to Joe Lieberman's demands and implied threats. He's on some kind of warped mission where he's literally running around single-handedly dictating what political content can and cannot be on the Internet, issuing broad-based threats to "all companies" that -- by design -- are causing suppression of political information. I understand Tableau's behavior here; imagine if you were a small company and Joe Lieberman basically announced: I am Homeland Security and you are to cease being involved with this organization which many say is a Terrorist group and Enemy Combatant. What Lieberman is doing is a severe abuse of power, and even for our anemic, power-revering media, it ought to be a major scandal (though it's not because, as Digby says, all our media stars can process is that "Julian Assange is icky").

If people -- especially journalists -- can't be riled when Joe Lieberman is unilaterally causing the suppression of political content from the Internet, when will they be? After all, as Jeffrey Goldberg pointed out in condemning this, the same rationale Lieberman is using to demand that Amazon and all other companies cease any contact with WikiLeaks would justify similar attacks on The New York Times, since they've published the same exact diplomatic cables on its site as WikiLeaks has on its (added: the only diplomatic cables posted on the WikiLeaks site thus far are the ones published by the newspapers with which WikiLeaks partnered -- such as the NYT, Guardian, Der Spiegel, etc. -- and they include those newspapers' redactions; no other cables have yet been posted to the WikiLeaks site). What Joe Lieberman is doing is indescribably pernicious and if "journalists" cared in the slightest about their own self-interest -- never mind all the noble things they pretend to care about -- they ought to be vociferously objecting to this.

Read the rest of this post...

White House not thrilled with Lieberman's citizenship-stripping proposal

Well that's good news. I just feel like these are "feel good" vengeance proposals that do nothing to make us safer. I mean, really, how many lives is it going to save because a potential terrorist says, "hey, if they catch me, I'm fine with being executed, but I really don't want them to take away my citizenship too, so maybe I shouldn't go through with this." It's a dumb idea that won't accomplish anything other than making people FEEL like they've done something to make us safer, when they haven't.

From Jake Tapper:

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs today indicated no one in the White House supports the legislation introduced today by Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., that would give the State Department the power to revoke the citizenship of American terrorism suspects.

“I have not heard anybody inside the administration that's been supportive of that idea,” Gibbs said.

Gibbs said he had “not heard large enumerations on why, except that I don't think anybody would find that to be such an effective way.”

Lieberman offered the legislation today along with Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., and Reps. Jason Altmire, D-Penn., and Charlie Dent, R-Penn, which would add to the existing federal statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1481, which identifies seven categories of actions for which U.S. citizens lose their citizenship. The legislation, called the Terrorist Expatriation Act, would authorize the State Department to revoke the citizenship of any U.S. national who provides material support or resources to a Foreign Terrorist Organization or who engages in or supports hostilities against the United States or its allies.

Read the rest of this post...

Lieberman to hold fundraiser for Reid

Hell has frozen over. Read the rest of this post...

Lieberman: 'The momentum is with the Republicans.... thank God'

It's so great that Barack Obama stepped in to save Lieberman's chairmanship after Lieberman campaigned so viciously against Obama during the 2008 elections. It's so great to see how Lieberman has been grateful to Obama and the Democrats. He's still such a class act. Now, very pious Lieberman is thanking god that the GOP has the political momentum. And, Lieberman said this to the right-wing publication, Newsmax, no less. Via The Hill:

It's a good thing that voters have moved against the prospect of one-party control of Congress for decades, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) said.

Lieberman, an independent senator who caucuses with Democrats, acknowledged momentum for the GOP, and said that independents had become alienated from Democrats, who control both the House and the Senate.

"There were a lot of people, particularly Democrats, who were declaring after the 2008 election that we were beginning a period of Democratic dominance that would go on for decades," Lieberman said during an interview with the conservative Newsmax magazine. "Now, all of a sudden, the momentum is with the Republicans. And that's -- thank God -- that's the way people have spoken, you know? That's our democracy."

Read the rest of this post...

Lieberman, DeMint lead attack on Obama's decision to try Northwest bomb suspect in U.S. Courts

Two of the Obama administration's leading critics were on the Sunday shows attacking the decision to try the airline bombing suspect in federal court:

Much of the criticism Sunday, however, centered on the decision to try him in civilian court rather than hold him as a military prisoner. "If we had treated this Christmas Day bomber as a terrorist, he would have immediately been interrogated military-style, rather than given the rights of an American and lawyers," Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) said on CNN. "We probably lost valuable information."

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said it was a "very serious mistake" to send Abdulmutallab to federal court.

"He was trained, equipped and directed by al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula," Lieberman said on ABC. "That was an act of war. He should be treated as a prisoner of war, held in a military brig, questioned now, and should have been ever since apprehended for intelligence that could help us stop the next attack or get people in Yemen."

DeMint and Lieberman seem to think our government would be torturing Abdulmutallab -- and both probably still believe in the power of waterboarding.

But, notice how Lieberman never fails to show his true colors. Good thing Obama helped him keep that chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee. It gives Lieberman added authority when he attacks Obama's leadership. Lieberman knows there are no repercussions for challenging Obama. In fact, it seems that the more he does it, the more power he has. Read the rest of this post...

"Joe Lieberman wants you dead"

He also won't let you push the elevator button first. Read the rest of this post...

Franken basically tells Lieberman to STFU

You have to understand a bit of US Senate procedure to fully appreciate this. No one, ever, objects to someone taking just one more minute to finish their speech. I've never seen it in 20 years in this town. It's funny as hell, and clearly Franken has had enough of Lieberman. These are the small ways that Senators can make Lieberman's life hell. It's a small thing, but you know Lieberman walked out as there pissed. (UPDATE: Reid's office says Franken was simply trying to keep the Senate on schedule. Uh huh. That's why Franken didn't say anything of the sort.) Read the rest of this post...

Lieberman open to running as a GOPer in 2012

It's good to be Joe Lieberman. He campaigned against Barack Obama, even speaking at the Republican convention, yet Barack Obama wanted to keep him in the Democratic caucus. He single-handedly weakened and tried to undermine the Senate health care bill, but gets thanked by the President. If he runs as a Republican, the Democrats will probably make him Majority Leader (assuming the Democrats still control the Senate in 2012.) And, Lieberman as the GOP candidate is a possibility:

Lieberman said he wasn't sure which party, if any, he would represent in his next election.

"I like being an independent, so that's definitely a possibility," the Connecticut senator said. "But I'd say all options are open."

He called running as a Republican "unlikely" but added that he wouldn't "foreclose any possibility."

Read the rest of this post...

Lieberman now says he regrets blackmailing the President and Senator Reid. Great, then put the public option back in.

I hope people aren't seriously looking at this as some kind of apology? The man just got everything he wanted, of course he's trying to cover his butt now. Read the rest of this post...

Tuesday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

Well, it's pretty clear by now that this is Joe Lieberman's country. The Democrats have ceded power to him. I guess campaigning for John McCain really worked out well for Joe.

That other, less important leader of the nation, Barack Obama is meeting with Democratic Senators this afternoon. Apparently, Joe Lieberman has deigned to meet with Obama and the other Democratic Senators so he can explain what they can and can't do in the health care bill. It's all about Joe.

I really didn't think I'd be so annoyed in 2009. I thought this year was going to be fun. Boy, was I wrong.

Let's get threading the news. Read the rest of this post...

More on Lieberman and health care reform

TNR: Did Lieberman double-cross Reid?

Ezra Klein:

To put this in context, Lieberman was invited to participate in the process that led to the Medicare buy-in. His opposition would have killed it before liberals invested in the idea. Instead, he skipped the meetings and is forcing liberals to give up yet another compromise. Each time he does that, he increases the chances of the bill's failure that much more. And if there's a policy rationale here, it's not apparent to me, or to others who've interviewed him. At this point, Lieberman seems primarily motivated by torturing liberals. That is to say, he seems willing to cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in order to settle an old electoral score.

Ezra, quoting Sam Stein, notes a few options that Reid has. Most include appeasing Lieberman, or finding a GOP Senator to vote for the bill instead of Lieberman. Sam misses an important additional option: Beat the crap out of Lieberman. That is, after all, what we were told Rahm was so good at. So where is he?

Walker Report:

This pattern has been repeated for like the tenth time. Liberals in Congress create a “compromise,” their supposedly left-wing media apologists rush to say how great it is, and the conservative Democrats move the football again. No one should be surprised by the rapid death of the Medicare buy in idea.

It seems the only choice left for progressives in Congress is reconciliation or the nuclear option. Joe Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln, and Ben Nelson have so completely gutted the bill that there is almost nothing of value remaining in it. The few remaining pieces worth passing are quickly being picked apart at the request of industry lobbyists. What is remains is only one of the biggest corporate give-aways in history.

Read the rest of this post...

Monday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

The Senate health care debate has officially turned into the "Joe Lieberman Show." Yesterday, he made it clear to Harry Reid and the other Democrats that it really is all about Joe. After Barack Obama saved his butt -- and his chairmanship, Lieberman is trying to destroy Obama's top agenda item. Classy guy. And, what's clear is that there is no real policy reason for Lieberman's actions. It's spite. He's doing it because he can. Oh well. They can't say they weren't warned.

The House is heading for recess this week. The President is heading for Copenhagen later this week.

Let's get it started... Read the rest of this post...

Its official. Lieberman will filibuster health care bill if it includes Medicare buy-in, after Lieberman told Reid he liked the idea.

Now he's simply being a dick. The question is what Senator Reid and President Obama plan on doing about it. Or is it now open season on the majority leader and the president? Read the rest of this post...

On Lieberman's ego-driven, faulty position on public option: "No one's called him on anything."

Could it be that the Washington Post has actually acknowledged that Joe Lieberman is basing his opposition to the public option isn't based on any facts -- and that his ego is a factor? Could it be that the D.C.-based media, which venerates Lieberman, is actually cluing in that he's not the saint they believe? One article doesn't mean much, but this is the harshest piece I've seen on Lieberman in the traditional media:

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.) has once again inserted himself into the middle of an inflamed partisan debate, raising questions about his motives, his ego and his fickle allegiance to the Democratic Party, which forgave him after he supported Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for president.

Lieberman, a Democrat-turned-independent who caucuses with his former party, says he is feeling "relevant" as he threatens to withhold his vote -- potentially the decisive 60th -- on health-care reform legislation if it includes a government-run insurance plan. And it is hard to dispute that as Capitol Hill moves farther from the "public option," to the consternation of liberals.

"There is no question he's taken pleasure in this role," said Jacob S. Hacker, a Yale political scientist who helped craft the initial proposal for the public option.

Lieberman has assumed such a central role despite what health-policy experts say have been serial misstatements about reform proposals. But, Hacker laments, "No one's called him on anything."

The "no one" in question includes most reporters and pundits. Read the rest of this post...

It's all about Joe

Yesterday, Obama met with Democratic Senators. After the meeting, John posted Ryan Grim's report, which noted that Joe Lieberman was "beaming" because Obama didn't mention the public option. Doesn't matter that most residents of Connecticut want a public option. Nor does it matter that Barack Obama, who saved Lieberman's butt last November, wants a public option. In Joe's world, it's all about Joe. And, the PCCC has a new ad on that very subject:

UPDATE: Josh Orton wrote a post over the weekend that captures this subject perfectly:

Lieberman's ideology IS self-interest, and in DC that's usually good enough.

Read the rest of this post...