Lieberman skates

One drawback of the Democrats' having won two election cycles fairly convincingly is that it gets harder and harder to accuse our dear leaders of being pathetic and hopeless. But letting Joe Lieberman remain the chairman of an important committee in the 111th Congress... that really smarts.

I don't think it's purely the absence of sweet, sweet retribution that has me so disappointed, either, although it could be 70% of it. It's that I can't believe it isn't a net negative to let your party's nominee and your party get so thoroughly slimed by somebody, and then pass up the opportunity to inflict as much damage as possible on that person's political career. More than that, actually. They're letting him retain authority that a) he hasn't made any use of so far, and b) could so easily be transferred to an actual Democrat.

If Reid et al could make a convincing case for the move on political/agenda-enacting grounds, I'd love to hear it. But they aren't going to be able to make that case in public (it has to be about not seeking "retribution" and "looking forward") and I don't even know what it would be in private. Nobody that follows senate committee assignments is going to switch parties over one. The people who don't follow committee assignments probably wouldn't be shocked to hear that a guy got demoted by the party that he said was essentially traitorous. And what's he going to do? Vote against Obama's domestic agenda out of spite? Everybody would know was his rationale, if he did it, and it would probably be the definitive end of him in 2012 (hopefully he'll be out anyway).

I just don't think you have to assign a huge amount of weight to the ultimately ephemeral notion of self-respect to think the need for its preservation outweighs the political downside of treating Joe Lieberman like the Republican mole he is. In fact, you'd think there'd be some downside in legitimizing the Republican mole by publicly declaring him a Democrat in good standing... when he's literally no longer a Democrat.

Again, they probably know what they're doing. But it's just staggering.

Update:
I'm going to have to stop reading the MSM accounts of this. Time's Jay Newton-Small:

In supporting Lieberman's continued inclusion in the Democratic caucus, [Obama] may have effectively defanged his toughest potential opponent in the Senate Democratic caucus. If Lieberman is anything, as he proved with John McCain, he's loyal — and now he owes Obama a big one.

Would that be bigger than the "big one" Lieberman owed Obama for endorsing him in his competitive 2006 race against the duly nominated Democrat? Because that little chip was already cashed in, in exchange for Lieberman's endorsing John McCain, and asking Americans to consider just why Obama was favored by Hamas. Joe Lieberman is nothing if not loyal!

Now is the time for pettiness

Why is there even discussion about what to do about Joe Lieberman?

This scumbag was re-elected representing the Connecticut for Lieberman Party, running against the duly nominated Democrat as the de facto Republican in the race. He just finished stumping across the country for the Republican nominee. He should be treated as hostile and efforts should be made to have a real Democrat replace him in 2012. Ned Lamont wasn't a very good candidate, but he still put up a pretty good showing despite his batshit crazy opponent getting endorsed by Barack Obama and other national Dems, and of course the GOP, which provided the bulk of his votes.

There are limits to what the Democratic leadership can do to him, but it should definitely explore them.

Lieberman hours away from his Zell Miller moment

The Caucus's Kate Phillips:

Senator Joseph I. Lieberman’s speech tonight will likely be a testament to his deep alliance and friendship with Senator John McCain, but it also will likely fray even further — if not sever — his longstanding affiliation with the Democratic Party.

One would hope. There's been rumblings about Harry Reid stripping him of his committee assignments or whatever but the slim Senate majority created a disincentive to antagonize him. As we get closer to an election that's almost certain to result in more than 49 proper Democrats, and as Lieberman prepares to speak at the Republican convention, where he is sure to accuse Obama of treason and extol the manly virtues of John McCain, I think it's time to start treating him as hostile.

Are you kidding me?

There's trouble in the Caucasus. The situation is "fluid and dangerous." You're John McCain. Who do you send?

That's right. Your personal backup singers, Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham:


















That'll have Putin thinking long and hard about his next move.

Update:
Attaturk makes a good point, with the emphasis it deserves.

You missed one, Tim

TAP's Tim Fernholz gamely attempts to peel back the layers of wrongness in each Jamie Kirchick column. But he misses something in this sentence:

Netroots vitriol against Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) is the most latent example of their irrationality.

If you guessed misuse of the word latent, congratulations. You're not as bad a writer as Kirchick.