Sen. Klobuchar echoes Bayh’s call for Lieberman to apologize.
By on Nov 14th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Sen. Klobuchar echoes Bayh’s call for Lieberman to apologize.
On Wednesday night, Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow he expected Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) to apologize for for his ad hominem attacks on Barack Obama, including questioning Obama’s patriotism and wondering whether Obama was a Marxist. Last night, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) echoed Bayh’s call for an apology from Lieberman, and said the question of Lieberman’s “role” in the caucus is “something that we’re all going to have to decide together.” Watch it:
Klobuchar was quick to add, however, that if it were up to her, Lieberman wouldn’t be going anywhere: “I would like him to remain in our caucus.”
Check out ThinkProgress’s new report, “Joe Lieberman: The Progressive Who Lost His Way.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Would someone please explain to me why they think LIEberman should stay? Even if it’s in hopes of a 60 vote majority in the Senate, who the hell thinks he’s going to cast his votes in line with the democratic caucus?
November 14th, 2008 at 12:54 pmI would like to see him kicked to the curb and in the party he is backing, thank you very much….And what’s with every one asking this ass hat to say he is sorry, we know he’s a sorry ass..He should of done the apolegy on day one…Blessings
November 14th, 2008 at 12:55 pmOF COURSE HE SHOULD APOLOGIZE -
JUST BEFORE HE STEPS DOWN FROM THE CHAIRMANSHIP.
Rachel Maddow Makes the Case for Why Lieberman Should Not Keep His Committee Chair
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/rachel-maddow-makes-case-why-lieberman-sho
November 14th, 2008 at 12:57 pmKick that traitorous scum to the curb!!!!
November 14th, 2008 at 12:58 pm[...]
Responding to Evan Bayh’s promise that they’ll take the chairmanship away from him if he tries to pull any investigative shenanigans on Obama, Maddow notes adroitly:
Are you really going to wait until he starts his first off-base witch-hunting investigation of Obama into whether he’s a Marxist or a traitor or whatever, and then you’re going to take away his gavel. [Laughs] I’m sure that’s going to go over great.
… Listen, Democrats, you have lost Lieberman anyway. If you boot Lieberman out of his chairmanship, I know you probably won’t get your 60 votes. But you do get a guy who politicized national security and homeland security in a disgusting fashion during this election, you do get him out of one of the most important security jobs in the government.
November 14th, 2008 at 12:59 pmI don’t want an apology. I don’t think he believes that anything he did was wrong, and it would be a lie for him to say so.
He should be removed from his current chairmanship, and offered a subcommittee chair on something that’s less critical.
If he refuses it and joins the Republicans then he’ll have no chairmanship whatsoever and will lose all seniority in their caucus to boot. But that would be his doing, not the Dems. Even so, there’s no reason to think that he would start voting the Republican party line on everything.
Let’s give him enough respect to assume that he actually believes in what he did and that he would continue to vote as his conscience dictates on each issue, rather than trying to punish Dems for removing his chairmanhsip. If he turns out to be a big baby, then that’ll be on him.
His only chance at getting re-elected would be to gracefully accept a demotion. It’s still a slim chance, but it’s his only one.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:01 pmJust kinda emphasizes that the ‘100 Club’ is very much an organization that looks after it’s own.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:03 pmPerhaps he should begin caucausing with the other members of teh Lieberman for Connecticut party.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:05 pmWho will sell their soul for the chance a fillibuster proof Senate majority? Line up and be counted.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:06 pmFiredoglake has a tool that makes it easy for you all to call the Steering and Outreach Committee members and voice your opinion on Lieberman.
http://tools.advomatic.com/7/kickjoe
Just 19 phone calls!
November 14th, 2008 at 1:15 pmWhen President-elect, Obama, said he would restore a bipartisan approach to government, he was referring to the Likkud party of which Liebermann is a long term member. Having him aboard will insure Likkud’s voice is heard and the hegemony of Israel is vaulted to new heights. Isn’t a two-party system grand?
November 14th, 2008 at 1:20 pmAny bets on whether he stays? I am at 4 to 1 myself.
He is being kept on the HOPE that the Dems get near 60. I am sorry — it does not forgive L’s actions — going back all the way to his election. He isn’t a DEM anymore (not even in name only).
Also, why are committee chairs based on seniority?? What ever happened to merit?!
Man, things gotta change in DC…
November 14th, 2008 at 1:21 pmOK people, we need to discuss how the Senate works. Just because you have X senators in your caucus doesn’t always mean you get X votes. Some of your people might vote the other way, and some of the other people might vote yours. It depends on the individual issue being brought before them.
Even if the Dems had a 60-member caucus, it wouldn’t necessarily mean they could get 100% of them to vote for cloture on a given filibuster. Even if the dems don’t have a 60-member caucus it wouldn’t necessarily mean they couldn’t get 60 Senators to vote for cloture on a given filibuster.
This is particularly important this year, now that the Republicans have lost their ability to march in lockstep and are showing a lot of signs of divisiveness. The inability of Congressional Republicans to rally enough support to pass the first iteration of the bailout bill demonstrates that.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:23 pmI’d rather the Dems. fall short of the coveted 60 votes than to keep this traitor in a position of power.
If Obama and the Dems. back down to him then they will prove to be spineless; and then I believe a Rethug comeback inevitable.
¶ AIO
November 14th, 2008 at 1:23 pmI saw this segment last night.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:24 pmAmy’s thoughts on why to keep joe were similar to: “remember, Sen. Lieberman votes with us on a lot of issues . .” then she named some of them, I think one was health-care but I don’t remember for sure.
I guess she says that right on this video !
November 14th, 2008 at 1:27 pmDon’t hold your breath waiting for JL. The man lacks integrity and is unreliable. Mark y words. If he is allowed to stay in his position, he will cause trouble for BO.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:28 pmThe single biggest problem associated with the last eight years is the total lack of accountability – nobody is punished for their wrong doing. They either quietly resign or they get promoted – failing upwards.
I see Lieberman the very same way. If the Dems don’t punish Holy Joe for his awful and untrue words about Obama, then what is to stop the next attack on the President-Elect? If no consequences are to be paid for the wrong doing, we have to expect it again and again. Heck, even the voters of CT don’t like Holy Joe anymore. Why must the Dems coddle this traitor – is it just to get to 60 seats? I don’t like that trade-off.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:31 pmHaving to be asked to apologize validates what we have always thought of Traitor Joe — he is totally a self-serving, self-interested putz, who doesn’t deserve the overly-generous treatment he will probably get from the Dems.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:31 pmIt’s the people of Connecticut that should apologize for electing him.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:36 pm“EEPH THAT” kick the traitorous bastard out, and do everything you can to make him lose his next election….Joe is scum.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:41 pmRelated to the potential plan of 60 seats:
November 14th, 2008 at 1:41 pmI say they hang his a$$ out to dry until number 59 rolls in, then file a prenup.
RUCerious Said:
Just kinda emphasizes that the ‘100 Club’ is very much an organization that looks after it’s own.
—
Precisely. This is the political class closing ranks against the will of the voting citizenry. Despicable. It’s time for Lieberman to face the repercussions of flying his true colors.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:42 pmYou know, Obama’s been reading up on his Lincoln recently. Between what Obama’s been saying, what Bayh said, and what Klobuchar says, I think Lieberman is being boxed in, herded, and set up very carefully, just like Salmon P. Chase back in the day.
Just dumping the guy, who is still popular inside the Beltway, makes you look mean-spirited partisan nasty, no matter good your reasons.
Looking kind and forgiving and trapping the weasel between his ego, his lies, and his smears, that’s much more effective.
We’ll see how it works out.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:44 pmPerhaps our outrage has been encouraged & used by
Obama & Congress; they started this controversy so that they can GET RID of Lieberman, and say -truthfully- “THE PEOPLE WANT HIM OUT”
Obama is an expert poker player, isn’t he? I bet he’s good at Chess, too.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:59 pmlieberman’s like a mole for the worst of the thugs now, and his first homeland security investigation will be whether obama is a muslim.
throw ‘em out…it’s not like he can’t vote with the dems if he wants to get back in our good graces.
November 14th, 2008 at 2:05 pmFor one willow, lieberman is in the senate, for two, he did this all by his little self. No one made him betray us.
How can you say they want to get rid of him when there is plenty of talk of keeping him in the caucus……just remove his chairmanship……
November 14th, 2008 at 2:29 pmHe has to go.
I would very much like to see him apologize, on Meet the Press, to Barack Obama, the Democratic voters and the Democratic Party.
Then, he gets to stay on the committee, but not as chair.
He should be treated the way people used to treat puppies who poop on the floor. Rub his nose in it. (NOTE: This is NOT how to treat a puppy, by the way. Praise works better than punishment).
The more “demanding” part of my nature really wants to see Joe Lieberman grovel. The smarter part wants me to see him kicked off the committee chair immediately. There is no part of me that is willing to forgive and forget.
November 14th, 2008 at 2:50 pmIt’s the same as major league baseball, which for 20 years has basically told Pete Rose that his ban will end if he comes clean.
Let’s see if Lieberman, like Rose, thinks that his celebrity and past exploits will absolve him of responsibility.
November 14th, 2008 at 3:06 pm“The Borgen Project has some good info on the cost of addressing global poverty.
November 14th, 2008 at 3:33 pm$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$540 billion: Annual U.S. Defense Budget.”
The first poster has it right what gives thes people who can’t seem to think beyond their noses that Lieberman would vote with ‘em.Moreoever keeping this scum in the chairmanship position gives Lieberman th balls to once again go to AZ in 2010 & back his very good friend McCain against the Dem candidate(possibly Janet Napolitano)for Senate.Remember the rightwing nuts accuse dems of wanting to offer “therapy & goodwill to our enemies”.Doesn’t this bullshit by Dodd,Bayh & Salazar re-inforces what the Repukes were telling Americans.
November 14th, 2008 at 4:16 pm#flag burner Says:
When President-elect, Obama, said he would restore a bipartisan approach to government, he was referring to the Likkud party of which Liebermann is a long term member.
Wow, you can read Barack Obama’s mind. How impressive. Now, get along little dogie, we don’t need or want your kind here.
November 14th, 2008 at 4:22 pmBuckie Boy Says:
“EEPH THAT” kick the traitorous bastard out, and do everything you can to make him lose his next election….Joe is scum.
There’s no doubt that will happen. Right now he is supported by only 35% of the people in CT.
I say throw him out and tell him to prove himself before he will be allowed back in.
If not that, at least strip him of his Chairmanship.
If the Democrats do nothing to LIEberman, they will be showing the people of this country and even the world that the Democrats are no better than the Republicans who do not believe in there being consequences for your actions. This is not what I want for my country.
Go to change.gov and tell Obama that you want a country that is one where there are consequences for violating the law and consequences for bad behavior.
November 14th, 2008 at 4:27 pmAt least Klobuchar didn’t say that she thinks LIEberman should keep his Chairmanship. I think that Rachel was very disappointed in Klobuchar.
November 14th, 2008 at 4:28 pmIf he were going to, Lieberman should already have apologized. Asking for an apology as retribution is just insane. Such an apology is guaranteed to be hollow.
November 14th, 2008 at 4:36 pmMidland Says:
You know, Obama’s been reading up on his Lincoln recently. Between what Obama’s been saying, what Bayh said, and what Klobuchar says, I think Lieberman is being boxed in, herded, and set up very carefully, just like Salmon P. Chase back in the day.
Just dumping the guy, who is still popular inside the Beltway, makes you look mean-spirited partisan nasty, no matter good your reasons.
Looking kind and forgiving and trapping the weasel between his ego, his lies, and his smears, that’s much more effective.
We’ll see how it works out.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is a very good point. I want the guy gone. I want Dems to show some spine. On the other hand. Making him prostrate himself and getting some assurances out of him making it clear that if he goes rogue with Clintonian investigations or doesnt stand up for Obamajudges he is SO VERY GONE, might be a better strategy
November 14th, 2008 at 6:29 pmWe don’t need to put up with a Judis.
November 15th, 2008 at 7:57 amLiebermann should, by all means, remain with the Democrats. He solidifies their majority in the Senate, has some progressive tendencies, and would be lulled into caucusing with the Republicans if he gave him a justifiable reason to with our actions. Besides, removing him simply because of who he supported in the election will make us progressives look like partisan hacks. We can’t refill the guns of right-wingers with inadvisable decisions such as these.
Let’s look ahead and not dwell on the past.
November 16th, 2008 at 8:13 amPhil Gramm is an idiot
November 17th, 2008 at 11:10 am