« Democrats Declare Surge a Failure | Main | Third Branch »

Leftist who took over Lieberman's Party Demands that He Resign from the Senate

Back in January I wrote a post about an anti-Lieberman leftist taking over the Connecticut for Lieberman party that Joe created in order to run in the general election for the Senate in November of last year. Now this idiot is demanding that Lieberman resign because he didn't like that Lieberman called for attacks on Iran. Here's the report from WTNH.com:

The Connecticut for Lieberman Party is calling on Senator Joseph Lieberman to resign from the U.S. Senate following his remarks made Sunday on CBS' Face the Nation regarding military action against Iran.


Lieberman said on the national television program that, "we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians."

The Connecticut for Lieberman Chair, Dr. John Orman, called for Lieberman's resignation saying that he "crossed the line" and "no longer represents the views of the citizens of Connecticut."

First, this will never happen. Second, perhaps Dr. Orman would prefer it if Senator Lieberman left the Connecticut for Lieberman party and joined the Republican party, shifting control of the Senate back to the Republicans.

Link via Lucianne.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Leftist who took over Lieberman's Party Demands that He Resign from the Senate:

» And Rightly So! linked with Thursday Morning News & Links

Comments (35)

I guess its not true.... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

I guess its not true.

In the Land of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man gets stoned.

I still think Joe can be Ki... (Below threshold)
kim:

I still think Joe can be Kingmaker in '08. For either party.
====================================

I have an idea.Dro... (Below threshold)
drjohn:

I have an idea.

Drop dead, Orman.

I mean that in the best possible way.

Me in CT.

This story is hilarious how... (Below threshold)
sean nyc/aa:

This story is hilarious how Lieberman's own invented party is calling for his resignation. Clearly Lieberman did not think the proposition of forming his own party fully through.

perhaps Dr. Orman would prefer it if Senator Lieberman left the Connecticut for Lieberman party and joined the Republican party, shifting control of the Senate back to the Republicans.
Kim Priestap

Kim, do some research. Even if Lieberman switchs now, the Dems maintain majority control because they set the rules at the beginning of the session. So this apparent threat is completely worthless.

Sean nyc/aa: If Li... (Below threshold)

Sean nyc/aa:

If Lieberman were to become a Republican, the Republicans could submit a motion to reorganize the leadership of the Senate and name Mitch McConnell as Majority leader. With Cheney providing the tie-breaking vote (the VP can vote in tie-breaking leadership votes as well as legislative), control of the Senate would then shift.

Orman speaks as if the Citi... (Below threshold)
kim:

Orman speaks as if the Citizens of Connecticut are one issue voters.
============================

Since the Governor is a Rep... (Below threshold)
LenS:

Since the Governor is a Republican, even Lieberman resigning would give the GOP control. Perhaps this moonbat is really a Rovian plant?

Len, one might only hope --... (Below threshold)

Len, one might only hope -- but it is CT, after all. You couldn't bet your life that Jody Rell would definitely appoint a Republican, could you?

Sean, you think if the balance shifts any time during the current term, the Dems absolutely maintain control despite that? Go to school, boy.

Has Dem Senator Tim Johnson... (Below threshold)
Les Nessman:

Has Dem Senator Tim Johnson returned to the Senate yet? Last I heard, he was still undergoing rehab.

Is he up to the challenge of representing his state?

Uh... being *prepared* to t... (Below threshold)

Uh... being *prepared* to take aggressive military action against Iran is sort of a no-brainer isn't it?

Sort of the way it would have been nice to be *prepared* to take aggressive military action in response to 9-11 by not having a "peace dividend" Army.

I guess I should clarify th... (Below threshold)
Les Nessman:

I guess I should clarify that 'rehab' for Sen. Johnson is phys rehab for the stroke he suffered last Winter.

Synova, I agree but could s... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

Synova, I agree but could someone tell me where billions of dollars worth of militry equipment disappeared to during the peace dividend years. Is that how Slick and Shrillary got so rich all of a sudden? Someone made several million off the billions of dollars worth of equipment. We had War Ready Material (WRM) all over the world but after 9-11 we didn't have ammo to arm the 'peace' dividend army to fight a brush fire war...and had to resort to using WWII ammo. Something stinks in the democrat party, top to bottom.

"we've got to be prepared t... (Below threshold)
LAB:

"we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians."

This statement is so sound coming from a guy who went
Independent just to gain office. Your right, Synova,
this is definitely a "no-brainer" because Iran has an agenda. They're not waiting for us to pick a fight with them first.

There is not too much "Norm... (Below threshold)
Fielding Mellish:

There is not too much "Normal" VPs have the power to do beyond that. Except when it comes to the Cheney Administration. The Republicans have always counted on "Smokin' Joe's" vote anyway.

With Cheney providing the tie-breaking vote (the VP can vote in tie-breaking leadership votes as well as legislative), control of the Senate would then shift.
Posted by: Kim Priestap at June 13, 2007 10:50 PM

Lieberman is a crypto-repub... (Below threshold)
Rumors on the internetS:

Lieberman is a crypto-republican advocating maniacal actions against Iran at the risk of blowing up thge entire ME, all to further Israeli ME policy. The little monkey should resign his Senate seat, move to Israel where he could become an MP in the Knesset and carry on his ME bomb-throwing.

Smokin' Joe's ME policy advocation will leave the entire ME in flames and create $25/gal. gasoline along w/ a world-wide economic collapse.

This monkey should be straight-jacketed before he can do real harm.

Sock puppets are up early t... (Below threshold)
kim:

Sock puppets are up early today.

Shorter 'Rumours'---Dam joos.
======================

Joe should switch the the g... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Joe should switch the the good side. He has much more in common with republicans then democrats. I think Guliani and Lieberman are almost identical. Except for fiscal issues I guess. ww

wait, isn't Liebermann (CFL... (Below threshold)
victory:

wait, isn't Liebermann (CFL) pro-choice? Wouldn't it be hypocrisy to accept him as one of yours? Unless it is just all about power.

There oughtta be a Godwin c... (Below threshold)
Rumors on the internetS:

There oughtta be a Godwin corollary...something like "when one criticizes Israel, sooner or later some dumb broad will holler "joo hater."

Victory, Joe Liebe... (Below threshold)

Victory,

Joe Lieberman is pro-life but moderated his views in order to be more in line with Al Gore when he asked Joe to be his running mate. Al also was pro-life at one point, too, but changed his views in order to be more in line with Bill Clinton when he selected Al as his running mate.

Just labeling your hate, bo... (Below threshold)
kim:

Just labeling your hate, boo. Ever again.
=========================

Even if Lieberman... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:
Even if Lieberman switchs now, the Dems maintain majority control because they set the rules at the beginning of the session

I had to laugh when I read this.

Leftist fantasies of declaring themselves dictators for life have hit the point of believing it as fact.

Since the Governor is a ... (Below threshold)
drjohn:

Since the Governor is a Republican, even Lieberman resigning would give the GOP control. Perhaps this moonbat is really a Rovian plant?

Posted by: LenS at June 13, 2007 11:24 PM

No.

Though she's a nice lady, our governor is such a dope she'd appoint whoever Kevin Sullivan orders her to appoint.

sean is curious. Lots of v... (Below threshold)
kim:

sean is curious. Lots of very acute analysis, then out of the blue, a zinger like that one, asserted as baldly as everything else. sean, was that a wish, a hope, a belief? How did you not fact check that one?
==================================

wait, isn't Liebe... (Below threshold)
Farmer Joe:
wait, isn't Liebermann (CFL) pro-choice? Wouldn't it be hypocrisy to accept him as one of yours? Unless it is just all about power.

Believe it or not, there ARE pro-choice Republicans. Party membership (as far as I know, not actually being one myself) is not contingent upon swearing fidelity to every plank in the party's platform.

That said, Lieberman would not make a good Republican for lots of other reasons. The guy is basically a big government liberal. He only really breaks from the dems on the subject of the war. Even then, if he were from a less "deep blue" state, he'd probably still be in the Democratic party.

for all you doubters:... (Below threshold)
sean nyc/aa:

for all you doubters:

The Lieberman Issue: Will It Change The Majority? Maybe Not...

Read this and you will find the issue is not cut and dry, despite what your CW leads you to believe.

The important passage:

Sure enough, according to Senate Rule XXV, Section 1, it does seem as though the organizational resolutions decided at the beginning of a Congress stand for the entirety of that Congress, unless, according to Section 4.(c), an agreement is entered into by both the Majority and Minority leaders "temporarily from time to time...as may be required to accord the majority party a majority of the membership" in committees.

If this passage is correct, then there is zero chance the Dem majority leader would agree this recount if it meant they would lose majority status.

So please show me another researched analysis supporting your beliefs that Lieberman switching to Republican ipso facto makes them the new majority.

It seems as though the inte... (Below threshold)
kim:

It seems as though the intent there is to assure the majority party majority power. I'm not sure you're interpreting that correctly, but I do apologize for thinking you had this zinger out of nowhere.

Anybody expert?
===================================

"wait, isn't Liebermann (CF... (Below threshold)
Ken:

"wait, isn't Liebermann (CFL) pro-choice? Wouldn't it be hypocrisy to accept him as one of yours? Unless it is just all about power.

Posted by: victory at June 14, 2007 08:28 AM "

It is not about power it is about saving this country from the dangers of Democratic control. If we need to make some concessions on the abortion issue to save this country from the party despartely seeking someone to wave the white flag to then so be it.

It seems as though the i... (Below threshold)
sean nyc/aa:

It seems as though the intent there is to assure the majority party majority power.
kim

That probably is the case to prevent deaths or resignations (or underhanded, cough, Lieberman, cough) of senators from causing majority to suddenly switch. It typically should not be a huge deal as the each session of Congress only lasts for 2 years and historically people could usually wait, but that is much tougher in these hyper-partisan times.

Funny, the GOP didn't see t... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Funny, the GOP didn't see the need to do this in 2000 before Jeffords bolted.

Weird, huh?
-=Mike

Mike, I think he's just rea... (Below threshold)
kim:

Mike, I think he's just read the spin. I think his cite means the majority party gets the majority power. Surely we need not speculate; I doubt the question is as close as he claims. But, I'll readily admit, I'm guessing. It's just not a wild guess.

Don't guess, look it up.
====================================

Sean may be right about Sen... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Sean may be right about Senate rules allowing the Dems to continue as the "majority" party, however, not having a majority of votes is what actually counts. The inability to pass or prevent legislation from passing beoomes a problem for the "majority" as they have the responsitilbity and none of the power. Not a very smart move if you wish to blame others for your failure.

The inability to pass or... (Below threshold)
sean nyc/aa:

The inability to pass or prevent legislation from passing beoomes a problem for the "majority" as they have the responsitilbity and none of the power.
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III

They would still have one very important power: subpeona power.

For me, that was the most important thing the last election, more than any specific legislation the Dems said they would enact. The Republicans didn't know how to govern other than rubber-stamp the president. There was no accountability or oversight and our gov't agencies were hurting because of it.

Take for instance the US Attorney scandal. If there is no wrongdoing (as some Republicans claim) answer me these three questions:
1) Who put the names on the list? Very simple question, yet so far no one has answered this. If everything is above board as it should be, someone should be willing to admit they were responsible.
2) What were the criteria for firing? The original excuses of "poor performance" didn't hold up, but even if true they need more specifity and documented evidence. Of all the document dumps, I have yet to see a detailed chart demonstrated how the fired USAs were chosen (so far the most logical, albeit circumstantial, explanation is the one being put forth by liberals, ie either lack of voter fraud/Dem indictments or investigations/indictments brought against Republicans, but at least there is a direct and verifiable relationship).
3) Where is the analysis/discussion of how firing these attorneys would affect their ongoing investigations and cases? I think this is the most damning lack of evidence. If the DOJ were truly concerned about how justice was being carried out, there would be a hefty discussion of this, but so far I haven't seen it. If I'm mistaken, please direct me to the proper documents.

There's also the fact that the White House set up a parallel email server which conveniently "lost" 5 million emails, but I'm sure nothing valuable or pertinent to the investigation was among them.

In a way though, this investigation is probably good for the Administration because it keeps the focus off NSA wiretapping and lax use of NSLs, which are also very circumspect.

kim,
you love to hypothesize about the USA story (usually with a bit of wingnutty flair), but certainly have a knowledgeable background and understanding of the issues. Do you care to answer any of those questions?

Sort of the way it would... (Below threshold)
jim:

Sort of the way it would have been nice to be *prepared* to take aggressive military action in response to 9-11 by not having a "peace dividend" Army.

Uh, well, Synova, we were prepared and able to take aggressive military action in response to 9/11...and we did. That's what Afghanistan was about.

We just weren't prepared to do that AND have a reckless and unnecessary invasion and occupation of another country, that had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11.

I personally doubt that Lie... (Below threshold)
jim:

I personally doubt that Lieberman would switch to the GOP. It would make it very hard for him to get re-elected; granted that's 6 years ahead, but people are always looking ahead.

More importantly, most of his particular influence has come from being a Dem who is useful to the GOP. Even though he is now technically an Independent, this remains basically the same; he still caucuses with the Democrats, and can be almost guaranteed to speak against them with talking points useful to the GOP at any key moment.

I think that if he were to join the GOP, he would actually be somewhat less useful to the GOP.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy