Good job, Senate Democrats.

[Little_Nemo]

Now’s when the games that count begin. On stimulus/infrastructure, on global warming, on univeral health care.

Exactly. The Democrats should start working on real problems. Not get diverted into a silly squabble over Joe Lieberman’s Committee chairmanship.

I just don’t want a guy wielding a Dem gavel who’s been playing for the GOP, and who might well decide to play the same sorts of games against Obama that the Gingrich crowd did against Clinton.

Then step on him when and if he ever does that. Lieberman’s apparently been an acceptable chairman to the Democratic caucus for the last fifteen months.

I don’t believe Lieberman is part of the crowd that wants to address and fix problems. I believe he’s part of the crowd across the aisle that is willing to fight the efforts to do so, in order to make themselves look better. Only difference is, unlike the gang across the aisle, he’s got a committee chair. He’s got subpoena power.

I thought the official complaint about Lieberman is that he’s been doing nothing with his chairmanship and delegates a Democrat to do all his committee work.

Face facts, Lieberman is a Senator and you’re not going to kick him out of the Senate. You’re not going to kick the Republicans out of Congress either. They’re going to be voting for the next few years and there will be times when the Democrats will want or need some of those votes. How is alienating a marginal ally supposed to advance the Democratic agenda?

Joe Lieberman voted for John McCain. Get over it. I’m betting John McCain voted for John McCain and I’m pretty sure there’s a lot of other Senators who voted for him too. But the election’s over and McCain lost. Move on.

[Squink]

@Little_Nemo

Exactly. The Democrats should start working on real problems. Not get diverted into a silly squabble over Joe Lieberman’s Committee chairmanship.

It’s not Joe Lieberman’s Committee chairmanship.
The chairmanship is a gift from the majority party to Joe Lieberman, or taking Lieberman’s threat to join the Republican caucus if he didn’t get it, it is the price the democrats were willing to pay in order to keep Joe Lieberman around.

[RTFirefly]

@Little_Nemo

Exactly. The Democrats should start working on real problems. Not get diverted into a silly squabble over Joe Lieberman’s Committee chairmanship.

The point is that Joe may well use his gavel to obstruct that work. That’s why it’s not a diversion.

Then step on him when and if he ever does that. Lieberman’s apparently been an acceptable chairman to the Democratic caucus for the last fifteen months.

Committee chairs are assigned in each house’s organizing resolution at the beginning of each Congress. The Dems will need GOP cooperation to get rid of him if they need to. They could get it, but it’s hardly the way to bet.

I thought the official complaint about Lieberman is that he’s been doing nothing with his chairmanship and delegates a Democrat to do all his committee work.

That’s certainly one of them (though this is the first I’d heard about the delegating; where’d that come from?). And there are two possibilities; either he just likes being chair of a Big Important Committee and not doing shit, or he likes not doing shit when a Republican is the beneficiary of his inaction, but not when a Democrat would be. Especially a Dem that Lieberman was recently accusing of being a danger to America.

Face facts, Lieberman is a Senator and you’re not going to kick him out of the Senate.

Don’t want to.

You’re not going to kick the Republicans out of Congress either.

Don’t want to do that either.

They’re going to be voting for the next few years and there will be times when the Democrats will want or need some of those votes.

True.

How is alienating a marginal ally supposed to advance the Democratic agenda?

Look, Lieberman spent the electoral season playing for the other side, telling America that Obama was dangerous, and they should vote for McCain and Palin, and Norm Coleman as well. How many Democrats did he campaign for? He’s not been acting like a marginal ally; he’s been acting like a Republican.

But if he wants to caucus with the Dems, I’m fine with that. But I’m not keen on leaving him in custody of weapons of political destruction.

Joe Lieberman voted for John McCain. Get over it.

What he does in the privacy of the voting booth, I’m over.

I’m betting John McCain voted for John McCain and I’m pretty sure there’s a lot of other Senators who voted for him too. But the election’s over and McCain lost. Move on.

The only reason I’m considering the past is as a guide to what Joe might do in the future. If you don’t get that by now, you’re not reading what I’m saying. If God Himself came down and gave me His personal guarantee that Joe wouldn’t use his chairmanship to sabotage Obama’s Administration or the legislation he’d like to get through Congress, I’d be happy to leave the past behind.

God ain’t talking, and you can’t provide that guarantee.

[gravitycrash]

I believe Lieberman is a good man who is a Democrat who thinks like a Republican. This is a bad thing right now. We can’t have any compromise or Earth and Mars will collide and we are all doomed.

[Mr.Moto]

@Little_Nemo

Remember when the first thing the Bush administration did was launch an investigation against the Clinton staffers for vandalizing typewriters? Instead of running the country, they were playing petty games and still trying to beat the “other side”. We should be better than that.

This is a gross distortion of what actually went down - when allegations were first made the Bush Administration said there was no unusual damage, and they only reluctantly a list of sorts of damaged or missing items when pressed by the investigatory arm of Congress.

Cite:

Dear Mr. Barr:
This report responds to your June 4, 2001, request that we review alleged
damage at the White House during the 2001 presidential transition. We
agreed to determine (1) whether damage, vandalism, or pranks occurred in
the White House and the adjacent Eisenhower Executive Office Building
(EEOB) during the transition by obtaining the observations of Executive
Office of the President (EOP) staff and preparers of White House office
space during the transition and reviewing any available documentation, as
well as obtaining the comments of former Clinton administration staff; (2)
to the extent possible, how the 2001 presidential transition compared with
previous presidential transitions in terms of damage, vandalism, or pranks;
and (3) what steps, if any, should be taken to help prevent and document
any vandalism during future presidential transitions.

Background On January 29, 2001, you wrote us that you had become increasingly
concerned about media reports of damage to the White House and the
EEOB that was discovered by the incoming Bush administration and asked
that we investigate whether damage may have been deliberately caused by
former Clinton administration staff. We subsequently asked EOP and the
General Services Administration (GSA) whether they had any information
that may be responsive to your request. On April 18, 2001, the director of
the Office of Administration (OA),1 an EOP unit, wrote us a letter indicating
that the White House had no record of damage that “may have been
deliberately caused by employees of the prior [a]dministration” and that
“.…repair records do not contain information that would allow someone to
determine the cause of damage that is being repaired.”

In late May and early June 2001, these allegations resurfaced in the news
media and on June 4, you asked us to investigate the matter further. On
June 5, 2001, the counsel to the president provided us with a list of damage
that was discovered in the White House complex during the first days of the
Bush administration. In his transmittal letter, the counsel to the president
said that the list “…may be responsive to your earlier request for written
records documenting damage deliberately caused by employees of the
prior [a]dministration….” Further, the counsel said that the list was not the
result of a comprehensive or systematic investigation into the issue and
should not be considered a complete record of the damage that was found.
The list was prepared by OA, which provides common administrative
support and services to units within the White House complex, which may
include the procurement and maintenance of computers, telephones,
furniture, and other personal property. OA prepared the list on the basis of
the recollections of five EOP officials with responsibilities in the areas of
administration, management, telephones, facilities, and supplies. It listed
missing building fixtures, such as doorknobs and a presidential seal;
computer keyboards with missing “W” keys; damaged and overturned
furniture; telephone lines pulled from the wall; telephones with missing
telephone number labels; fax machines moved to the wrong areas and a
secure telephone left open with the key in it; offices left in a state of
“general trashing,” including the contents of desk drawers dumped on the
floor, a glass desk top smashed and on the floor, and refrigerators
unplugged with spoiled food; writing on the walls; and voice mail greetings
that had obscene messages. The list also indicated that six to eight 14-foot
trucks were needed to recover usable supplies that had been thrown away.

So it is obvious that this wasn’t a focus of the Bush Administration - indeed, I think it is obvious that Barr’s investigation was a distraction for them. Bush clearly didn’t want to embarrass Clinton or his staffers, and was inclined to let the matter go.

[Captain_Carrot]

@gravitycrash

I believe Lieberman is a good man who is a Democrat who thinks like a Republican. This is a bad thing right now. We can’t have any compromise or Earth and Mars will collide and we are all doomed.

I don’t mind that he thinks like a Republican in this area. I mind that he thinks like a Republican and claims to be a Democrat, and is part of the caucus while bashing its members.

[RTFirefly]

Exactly. ‘Thinking like a Republican’ isn’t a useful skill if it’s primarily in the sense of Dem-bashing rather than honest policy debate.

[Little_Nemo]

This is a gross distortion of what actually went down - when allegations were first made the Bush Administration said there was no unusual damage, and they only reluctantly a list of sorts of damaged or missing items when pressed by the investigatory arm of Congress.

So it is obvious that this wasn’t a focus of the Bush Administration - indeed, I think it is obvious that Barr’s investigation was a distraction for them. Bush clearly didn’t want to embarrass Clinton or his staffers, and was inclined to let the matter go.

I’m equally sure that the Bush administration was reluctant to give information to the investigation and was inclined to let the matter go. But it was their own embarassment they were trying to avoid.

It was the Bush staff who started the vandalism story - if they wanted to protect the outgoing Clinton staff, they could have just stayed quiet. But instead they decided to put the story out in order to score points over the departing Clinton administration.

But then they got caught on it. They apparently assumed it would be talked about gossip but not become a formal issue. But the rumors grew to the point that an actual investigation was launched, which as you point out the Bush administration was unhappy with. Because that investigation showed that most of the rumors were false - there had been nothing out of the ordinary about the damage caused by the transition.

[Dob]

They really did have to let him stay. It’s hard to preach “we respect all sides” but then kick out the first guy who disagrees with you. Sucks, but I think this story would be getting a TON more play if they had booted him from the caucus. It would be nothing but “Obama fires people who disagrees with him!” on FOX crawlers all day long.

[RTFirefly]

@Dob

They really did have to let him stay. It’s hard to preach “we respect all sides” but then kick out the first guy who disagrees with you. Sucks, but I think this story would be getting a TON more play if they had booted him from the caucus.

Can I ask a dumb question?

What the holy fuck are you talking about??

[Evil_Captor]

@Dob

They really did have to let him stay. It’s hard to preach “we respect all sides” but then kick out the first guy who disagrees with you. Sucks, but I think this story would be getting a TON more play if they had booted him from the caucus. It would be nothing but “Obama fires people who disagrees with him!” on FOX crawlers all day long.

Who cares what FOX does anymore? Only die hard Pubbie fans. FOX hitched their wagon to the Pubbie star and now they’re as discredited as their masters.