Lieberman Says He’s ‘Pleasantly Encouraged’ By Obama, But Disagrees With His Middle East And Health Care Agenda
Lieberman Says He’s ‘Pleasantly Encouraged’ By Obama, But Disagrees With His Middle East And Health Care Agenda
In an interview with Bloomberg’s Al Hunt, Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) — who campaigned hard against President Obama during the 2008 election and supported his Republican challenger John McCain — said that he’s impressed with how Obama is handling the job.
“Put me down now as pleasantly encouraged by the first five months,” Lieberman said. “He has been strong, particularly on foreign policy. I think President Obama is off to a very, very good start in a very difficult time in our nation’s history.” Lieberman lauded Obama’s recent Cairo speech to the Muslim world, saying it was a “significant step overall. … My guess is he opened some minds in the Muslim world.”
Despite the laudatory comments of Obama’s foreign policy vision, Lieberman offered criticism of the president’s efforts to urge Israel to stop its settlement activities. “I thought the focus on the President’s direct call in that speech in Cairo for the Israelis to freeze all settlement activity — including the ‘natural growth‘ of settlements that everybody agrees are no longer settlements — …that was risky in the sense that it may lead listeners to believe that the main reason there is not an Arab-Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement is the Israeli settlement policy,” he said:
HUNT: Do you disagree then with the President and Secretary Clinton that there ought to be a freeze — no growth in those settlements now?
LIEBERMAN: I do. I disagree.
Watch it:
On Obama’s domestic agenda, Lieberman announced his opposition to a public health insurance option. “I don’t favor a public option, and I don’t favor a public option because I think there’s plenty of competition in the private insurance market,” he argued. (He’s wrong.) Lieberman warned that political pressure in favor of the public option may thwart efforts at achieving health care reform. “Let’s get something done instead of having a debate,” he said.
Separately, Lieberman said he “could support” the Waxman-Markey clean energy legislation in the House. “It’s a great act of legislative leadership,” he added, saying the critical issue is convincing “people from states that get a lot of their electricity from coal-burning power plants that we can make this change without skyrocketing the cost of living and the cost of doing business.”
- Comments
- 76
Lieberman breaks with Cheney: ‘We’re not less safe’ under Obama.
Lieberman breaks with Cheney: ‘We’re not less safe’ under Obama.
Yesterday on CBS’s Face the Nation, former Vice President Cheney repeated his claim that President Obama is making the country less secure. Notably, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), who has largely agreed with Cheney on national security policy, disagrees. Today on MSNBC, Lieberman said the U.S. is not less safe under Obama:
LIEBERMAN: No, we’re not less safe. I suppose that’s the short answer, and probably as good as I can give. I disagree with some of the things the administration has done. Even in the closing of Guantanamo, they’re being very methodical at this point.
“Our guard is up,” he said. “On balance, we remain as safe as we can possibly be in a world in which there is Islamist extremists who want to attack us.” Watch it:
Former White House press secretary Dana Perino also has broken with Cheney. “One last question I need a yes or no. Do you feel safe under President Obama?” Bill O’Reilly asked her on Friday. “So far, yes,” Perino responded. (HT: Politico)
Two Days After Defending Waterboarding, Lieberman Now Claims He’s ‘Strongly Opposed’ To It
Two Days After Defending Waterboarding, Lieberman Now Claims He’s ‘Strongly Opposed’ To It
In a letter to President Obama today, Sens. John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) asked him to resist prosecuting Bush administration officials who wrote legal memos authorizing torture. “Pursuing such prosecutions would, we believe, have serious negative effects,” wrote the three senators.
Acknowledging that the Office of Legal Counsel memos were “deeply flawed,” the three senators claim that they have always been “strongly opposed” to torturous interrogation tactics like waterboarding:
We disagree, however, with Administration statements suggesting that the lawyers who provided such counsel may now be open to prosecution. Some of the legal analysis included in the OLC memos released last week was, we believe, deeply flawed. We have also strongly opposed the overly coercive interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, that these memos deemed legal. We do not believe, however, that legal analysis should be criminalized, as proposals to prosecute government lawyers suggest.
The idea that Lieberman would sign his name to a letter claiming that he has always been “strongly opposed” to waterboarding is surprising. In fact, just two days ago, he told Fox News that in some situations “we ought to be able to use something like waterboarding“:
Q: First of all, is waterboarding torture?
LIEBERMAN: Well, I take a minority position on this. Most people think it’s definitely torture. The truth is, it has mostly a psychological impact on people. It’s a terrible thing to do. … I want the president of the United States in a given circumstance where we believe somebody we’ve got in our control may have information that could help us stop an attack, an imminent attack on the United States like 9/11 or, god forbid, worse, we ought to be able to use something like waterboarding.
Watch it:
In the past, Lieberman has defended the use of waterboarding in select situations. “You want to be able to use emergency tech to try to get the information out of that person,” said Lieberman, adding that “it is not like putting burning coals on people’s bodies. The person is in no real danger. The impact is psychological.”
Lieberman: Obama releasing OLC torture memos ‘helps our enemies.’
Lieberman: Obama releasing OLC torture memos ‘helps our enemies.’
In an interview yesterday with Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) panned President Obama’s recent release of Bush-era OLC memos approving torture. “I thought release of the memos was a bad idea,” Lieberman said. “It wasn’t necessary. It just helps our enemies. It doesn’t really help us.” Lieberman then said waterboarding should always be on the table:
Q: First of all, is waterboarding torture?
LIEBERMAN: Well, I take a minority position on this. Most people think it’s definitely torture. The truth is, it has mostly a psychological impact on people. It’s a terrible thing to do. … I want the president of the United States in a given circumstance where we believe somebody we’ve got in our control may have information that could help us stop an attack, an imminent attack on the United States like 9/11 or, god forbid, worse, we ought to be able to use something like waterboarding.
Lieberman said he does “believe General Hayden” in that waterboarding “really did work” to prevent terrorist attacks. Watch it:
Last year, Lieberman downplayed the severity of waterboarding, saying, “It is not like putting burning coals on people’s bodies.” In February, he joked about the torture tactic at Washington’s Alfalfa dinner.
McCain Decries ‘Loose Rhetoric About A Minimal Commitment In Afghanistan’ … Like His Own
McCain Decries ‘Loose Rhetoric About A Minimal Commitment In Afghanistan’ … Like His Own
In today’s Washington Post, Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and John McCain (R-AZ) have an op-ed calling for a robust “comprehensive civil-military counterinsurgency approach” to the war in Afghanistan, demonstrating “unambiguous U.S. political commitment to success…over the long haul”:
As the administration finalizes its policy review, we are troubled by calls in some quarters for the president to adopt a “minimalist” approach toward Afghanistan. Supporters of this course caution that the American people are tired of war and that an ambitious, long-term commitment to Afghanistan may be politically unfeasible. [...]
Loose rhetoric about a minimal commitment in Afghanistan is counterproductive for another reason: It exacerbates suspicions, already widespread in South Asia, that the United States will tire of this war and retreat. These doubts about our staying power deter ordinary Afghans from siding with our coalition against the insurgency.
This pivot to Afghanistan is new for McCain. During the presidential campaign, when Barack Obama was already calling Afghanistan the “central front” in the war on terrorism, McCain was still insisting it was Iraq.
Additionally, as ThinkProgress has highlighted, in November 2003, McCain was tossing around all sorts of “loose rhetoric about a minimal commitment in Afghanistan”:
McCAIN: I am concerned about it, but I’m not as concerned as I am about Iraq today — obviously, or I’d be talking about Afghanistan — but I believe that if Karzai can make the progress that he is making, that in the long term we may muddle through in Afghanistan.
Watch it:
Last month when McCain was delivering a speech on Afghanistan at AEI, the Wonk Room’s Matt Duss challenged the senator on his comments. McCain was at a loss for a response, other than, “Well, obviously you are taking that statement out of context.”
Lieberman Joins Republican Attacks On Chas Freeman: ‘I’m Concerned’
Lieberman Joins Republican Attacks On Chas Freeman: ‘I’m Concerned’
At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing this morning, Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) questioned National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair about his selection of Chas Freeman to head the National Intelligence Council.
Freeman’s views on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute have raised concerns among neoconservatives weeks ago. In recent days, Freeman’s critics have made “unpersuasive attempts at describing [him] as ‘hostile’ to Israel; a radical ideologue; and an apologist for human rights abuses are what remains of the opposition.”
Yesterday, a group of Senate Republicans on the Intelligence committee wrote a letter to Blair questioning Freeman’s selection, and distributed it to the press. “Given our concerns about Mr. Freeman’s lack of experience and uncertainty about his objectivity, we intend to devote even more oversight scrutiny to the activities of the NIC under his leadership,” the senators wrote.
This morning, Lieberman amplified the Republicans’ criticisms. “I’m concerned,” Lieberman told Blair, expressing his worries over “statements that [Freeman’s] made that appear either to be inclined to lean against Israel or too much in favor of China.” Blair offered this cogent defense of Freeman:
A mutual friend said about Ambassador Freeman — who I’ve known for a number of years — there is no one whose intellect I respect more and with whom I agree less than Ambassador Freeman. Those of us who know him find him to be a person of strong views, of inventive mind from an analytical point of view – I’m not talking about policy – and that when we go back and forth with him, a better understanding comes out of those interactions. That’s primarily the value that I think he will bring.
Watch it:
“The concern about Ambassador Freeman is that he has such strong policy views,” Lieberman responded. Matt Duss notes that Freeman is “apparently the only person in Washington not allowed to have any” strong opinions.
Lieberman: Republicans In The ‘Gang Of Moderates’ Are ‘Heroes,’ Deserve The ‘Congressional Medal Of Honor’
Lieberman: Republicans In The ‘Gang Of Moderates’ Are ‘Heroes,’ Deserve The ‘Congressional Medal Of Honor’
Today in his town hall address in Elkhart, IN, President Obama criticized heavy cuts to education funding in the Senate’s economic recovery package crafted by the so-called “Gang of Moderates.” “I’ll be honest with you, the Senate version cut a lot of these education dollars,” said Obama. “I would like to see some of them restored.”
Nevertheless, proud “centrists” Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) appeared on MSNBC this afternoon to tout their version of the bill. Lieberman, in particular, went overboard in praising the gang’s Republicans — Snowe, Susan Collins (ME), and Arlen Specter (PA) — by calling them “heroes” who deserve an award:
LIEBERMAN: And therefore, I think our three Republican colleagues — Olympia, Susan Collins, and Arlen Specter — are really the heroes in this for making a stimulus possible. [...]
Again, I really can’t say enough about Olympia Snowe and the other two Republicans who really deserve the Congressional Medal of Honor on this one. They’ve put national interests ahead of what most members of their party were doing, and as a result, we’re going to get a stimulus bill that’s going to help the American people hold their jobs, create new ones, and get our economy moving again.
Watch it:
Today in the New York Times, however, Paul Krugman had a different idea about what these centrists have wrought:
What do you call someone who eliminates hundreds of thousands of American jobs, deprives millions of adequate health care and nutrition, undermines schools, but offers a $15,000 bonus to affluent people who flip their houses?
A proud centrist. For that is what the senators who ended up calling the tune on the stimulus bill just accomplished.
Despite Lieberman’s claim that the Senate bill will “help the American people hold their jobs [and] create new ones,” CAP’s Will Straw explains that it actually “provides for 12 to 15 percent fewer jobs created or saved than the House-passed Recovery and Reinvestment Act despite costing slightly more.”
Transcript: More »
Lieberman jokes about waterboarding at black-tie dinner.
Lieberman jokes about waterboarding at black-tie dinner.
At last night’s black-tie dinner at Washington’s Alfalfa Club, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) couldn’t resist cracking a joke about torture. Politico’s Mike Allen reports:
More from Senator Lieberman: ‘We had hoped Vice President Cheney would be here tonight. I hope it’s not his back injury that’s keeping him away. Apparently, he hurt it moving some things out of his office. Personally, I had no idea that waterboards were so heavy.
Last year, Lieberman, who has voted against banning waterboarding, “reluctantly acknowledged” that he doesn’t believe that waterboarding is torture. “It is not like putting burning coals on people’s bodies. The person is in no real danger. The impact is psychological,” he said.
Lieberman: I pledge to ‘do everything’ in my power to help Obama be a great president.
Lieberman: I pledge to ‘do everything’ in my power to help Obama be a great president.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), who was a fierce advocate of John McCain’s presidential run, exclaimed yesterday, “This is truly a great day for our blessed nation!” He said that he was “deeply moved and inspired by President Obama’s eloquent and stirring address,” adding he would “do everything” in his power to help Obama be one of the nation’s “greatest and most successful presidents.”
30 percent of CT voters who voted for Lieberman want a do-over.
30 percent of CT voters who voted for Lieberman want a do-over.
A new Quinnipiac poll released today shows that only 38 percent of Connecticut citizens approve of Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (I-CT) performance, with 54 percent — and 75 percent of Democrats — disapproving. (By comparison, in July 45 percent approved and 43 disapproved.) Thirty percent of the people who voted for Lieberman in 2006 say they would vote for someone else if they could do it again today, including 59 percent of Democrats. Another poll from last month showed that 48 percent of likely Connecticut voters want to replace Lieberman.
Connecticut Democrats backing off Lieberman censure resolution.
Connecticut Democrats backing off Lieberman censure resolution.
Last September, the Connecticut Democratic Party central committee agreed on a resolution censuring Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) for his vigorous support of John McCain and for speaking at the Republican National Convention. But after Lieberman escaped rebuke in the U.S. Senate, it appears now that the “anger is draining“:
“We’re in the process of updating the resolution to be more reflective of the current time and situation,” said Audrey Blondin of Litchfield, one of two committee members who proposed the censure. Words like “censure” are certain to disappear. So is any suggestion that Lieberman end his affiliation as a registered Democratic voter in Connecticut. Instead?
“An expression of disappointment, an expression of disapproval,” Blondin said. “And let it go at that.”
Lieberman contributed to GOP Senate and House candidates.
Lieberman contributed to GOP Senate and House candidates.
The fact that Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) supported Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in the presidential election is well-known. However, the Washington Post reports today that Lieberman was also supporting at least four Republican lawmakers. His Reuniting our Country PAC gave $5,000 to Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) and another $5,000 to Rep. Peter King (R-NY) in October. He wrote an op-ed in the St. Pioneer Press defending Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN), and publicly endorsed and contributed to the re-election of Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME). More recently, Lieberman has said that he fears “America will not survive” if Democrats receive a filibuster-proof majority.
Lieberman lies: ‘I never felt that Barack Obama was unready.’
Lieberman lies: ‘I never felt that Barack Obama was unready.’
In an interview with Hartford, CT, local Fox affiliate Fox 61, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) denied that he had ever suggested that Barack Obama was “not ready to lead.” “I never felt that Barack Obama was ‘unready,’” he told the host. Watch it:
As MyLeftNutmeg’s video makes clear, Lieberman was lying. The host pushed back, warning him that bloggers who watched this interview “are going to have a field day with it.”
Lieberman refuses to apologize: ‘You can take from the word “regret” what you will.’
Lieberman refuses to apologize: ‘You can take from the word “regret” what you will.’
Speaking with Meet The Press’s Tom Brokaw today, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) refused to apologize for actively campaigning against and harshly criticizing Barack Obama, saying only that he “regrets” “some of the things” he said:
BROKAW: I hear the word regret, but not the word apologize.
LIEBERMAN: Well, I do — I regret it. I mean, you know, I’m going forward. You can take from the word “regret” what you will. I wish I had not said some of the things I’ve said. But again, we all do it.
Watch it:
Though Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) had said that Lieberman would need to apologize in order to keep the chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee, he has so far refused to offer an actual apology for his actions.
Lieberman: I’m ‘Grateful’ Senate Democrats Changed The Rules So That I’m Not Singled Out For Punishment
Lieberman: I’m ‘Grateful’ Senate Democrats Changed The Rules So That I’m Not Singled Out For Punishment
Today, Senate Democrats decided to wholeheartedly embrace Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), voting 42-13 to allow him to keep his prized chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee. At a press conference today, Lieberman said that he wasn’t “chastened” by his colleagues at all.
Before today, Lieberman was also chairman of two subcommittees. He has now given up his gavel of the Environment and Public Works subcommittee, but will stay on as chair of the Armed Services subcommittee. This is hardly punishment. As Lieberman explained during his press conference, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has decided not to single him out and simply changed the rules so that all senators will be restricted to only one committee chairmanship and one subcommittee chairmanship:
LIEBERMAN: Senator Reid asked me to relinquish my seat on the Environment Committee. In the spirit of cooperation and in part to make room for freshmen senators, new senators who wanted to be on that committee, I said I would, in the spirit of cooperation, do that. [...]
Incidentally, Senator Reid will be imposing a new rule in light — that is, we’ll be applying a rule that exists in the Senate but hasn’t been in light of the new members, the larger Democratic Caucus, which is that each member can only be the chairman of one full committee and the chairman of one subcommittee.
So in that regard I am very grateful to continue as chairman of Homeland Security and of the Airland Subcommittee of Armed Services, which overseas all Army and Air Force programs.
Lieberman then announced that he would be introducing global warming legislation with his good friend Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) soon after the 111th Congress convenes. Watch it:
Senate Democrats are allowing Lieberman to keep control of the Armed Services subcommittee, even though some of his most misguided and incendiary attacks on Obama were on national security. Lieberman, for example, suggested that Obama hasn’t always “put the country first,” said that President Bush was right for comparing Obama to Nazi appeasers, and worried that Obama was “naive” and lacked the “right stuff to bomb Iran.”
Although the meeting was held behind closed doors, the AP notes that Bernie Sanders (VT), Pat Leahy (VT), and Jeff Merkley (OR) reportedly spoke against allowing Lieberman to keep his gavels. Reid, Dick Durbin (IL), John Kerry (MA), Ben Cardin (MD), and Tom Udall (NM) were those speaking in favor. CQ reports that booting Lieberman from the Democratic caucus altogether “was never really on the table.”
Transcript: More »
Senate Democrats allow Lieberman to go unpunished: We ‘feel good about what we did today.’
Senate Democrats allow Lieberman to go unpunished: We ‘feel good about what we did today.’
Today in a closed-door meeting, Senate Democrats voted 42-13 to allow Joe Lieberman (I-CT) to keep his chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, despite his attacks on Barack Obama during the campaign season. Shortly afterward, Senate Democrats held a press conference during which they stood by Lieberman and surrounded him with their support. Some highlights of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) remarks:
– “We’re looking forward, we’re not looking back.”
– “I understand anger. … I would defy anyone to be angrier than I was. But is this a time when we walk out of here and say, ‘Boy, did we get even?’”
– “I am satisfied with what we did today. I feel good about what we did today. I don’t apologize to anyone for what we did today.”
– “The question is, do I trust Senator Lieberman? The answer is yes, I trust Senator Lieberman.”
Watch the press conference:
Senate Dem leadership expected to allow Lieberman to keep Homeland Security chairmanship.
Senate Dem leadership expected to allow Lieberman to keep Homeland Security chairmanship.
Roll Call reports that when Senate Democrats meet tomorrow to discuss Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (I-CT) future, the Democratic leadership is “expected to propose that he keep his gavel at the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee but lose his Environment and Public Works subcommittee chairmanship.” The paper describes the proposal as only a “slap on the wrist” for Lieberman since Lieberman “may not lose much” if his subcommittee chairmanship is stripped:
Taking the subcommittee on global warming away from Lieberman may be seen as a stinging rebuke, given that he used the panel to push himself to the forefront of the climate change debate in the Senate earlier this year. However, Environment and Public Works Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) plans to deal with climate change legislation at the full committee level next year, which means Lieberman may not lose much even if his colleagues vote to strip him of that plum assignment.
Kos calls the plan “not acceptable,” quipping that “given the Senate Democrats’ history of capitulations, expect Lieberman to come out of that meeting as majority leader.” CNN’s Dana Bash reports that Lieberman “is not happy about” the plan, but will accept it. Watch it:
Check out ThinkProgress’s report, “Joe Lieberman: The Progressive Who Lost His Way.”
Sen. Carper: Lieberman needs to face ‘consequences’ for his actions during the campaign.
Sen. Carper: Lieberman needs to face ‘consequences’ for his actions during the campaign.
Today in an interview with the Hill, Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE) said that Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) should be punished for his attacks on Barack Obama during the campaign season. “There need to be consequences, and they cannot be insignificant,” Carper said. More from the Hill:
Carper did not rule out stripping Lieberman of his coveted gavel running the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, or imposing other sanctions like taking away seniority on other committees or a subcommittee on Armed Services.
Carper said he and three other Senate Democrats have been making phone calls to “take the temperature of our caucus.” He said the purpose of the calls was not to lobby senators for any particular action for or against Lieberman, but “just to see where people’s hearts and their minds are.”
Carper said that “many of my colleagues … are very angry with his criticism of Sen. Obama,” but he would not say which sanctions he prefers.
When Lieberman ran for president in 2004, Carper served as his Delaware campaign chairman.
Dorgan: Lieberman’s Actions Were Unacceptable For Committee Chairman
Dorgan: Lieberman’s Actions Were Unacceptable For Committee Chairman
After Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) spoke at the Republican National Convention this summer, Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) expressed his frustration: “Everybody is just profoundly disappointed with what Joe did,” Dorgan said.
Today on Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace asked Dorgan whether he would vote on Tuesday to allow Lieberman remain chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. Dorgan said he was “concerned” and “upset” over Lieberman’s behavior during the campaign, and suggested that Lieberman’s actions were unacceptable for a committee chairman:
As a chairman of one of our significant committees in the Senate, not just going off and supporting a presidential candidate of the other side but also criticizing the candidate on our side, and also involving himself in a couple of senate races on the other side. The question is, is that acceptable? The answer is no.
Watch it:
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) said the Republicans would embrace Lieberman into their caucus “with open arms” in an effort to boost the party’s Senate numbers. Kyl heralded Lieberman has “a great American” and said his party would “love to have him.” Dorgan emphasized that expelling Lieberman from the entire Democratic caucus is “not on the table;” the Tuesday vote will pertain only to his position as chairman.
So far, Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) are the only senators to have explicitly called for Lieberman to lose his chairmanship.
Check out ThinkProgress’s report, “Joe Lieberman: The Progressive Who Lost His Way.”
AUDIO: Leahy Says Lieberman Should Lose His Chairmanship
AUDIO: Leahy Says Lieberman Should Lose His Chairmanship
Since the election, Senate Democrats have been reluctant to punish Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) for the ad hominem attacks he levied at Barack Obama while supporting Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in the election. While a few senators have said that they’d like to see Lieberman apologize, most have said that they’d like him to continue caucusing with Democrats.
Today, Daily Kos diarist terjeanderson caught an interview on Vermont Public Radio with Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT), during which the senator broke from the pack and said that Lieberman deserved to lose his chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee:
I’m one who does not feel that somebody should be rewarded with a major chairmanship after doing what he did. … I felt that some of the attacks that he was involved in against Sen. Obama, whom I did support — I was one of the first in the Congress to support him — I thought they went way beyond the pale. I thought that they were not fair. I thought they were not legitimate. I thought that they perpetuated some of these horrible myths that were being run about Sen. Obama.
I would feel that, had I done something similar, I would not be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the next Congress.
Listen here:
A new Research 2000/DailyKos poll shows that Lieberman is increasingly unpopular among his constituents. Sixty-one percent disapprove of his Senate performance. Among his Democratic constituents, Lieberman’s approval rating stands at just 22 percent.
Check out ThinkProgress’s new report, “Joe Lieberman: The Progressive Who Lost His Way.”
"Appointing someone to a major post who led the opposition to everything we are fighting for is not 'change we can believe in,'" Sanders continued. "I very much hope that Senator Lieberman stays in the Democratic caucus and is successful in regaining the confidence of those whom he has disappointed. This is not a time, however, in which he should be rewarded with a major committee chairmanship."
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll