The Lieberman Party Gets A New Member

Chris Hayes ended today by noting Gov. Cuomo screwed Democrats this election cycle, down to not stepping in when someone who ran as a Democrat decided to caucus with Republicans, which matters given state senate control promises to be real close. This apparently was not a big surprise to everyone and he replaces someone who did this sort of thing too.

And Also: Democrat Wins CT Senate Race

Still Upset About Him Winning In '06

A few more months of this tool.

Are Basic Constitutional Values THAT Hard?

Delaware was once part of Pennsylvania. A bit obscure ... unlike things like rights of citizens/persons (both get Miranda rights) or the problems with stripping citizenship based on allegations of whatever group determined at the moment to be "terrorist." Dweebs.

Characters v. Real Character

Dean is right; it's not all about Lieberman. But, Collins has a point:

You can move on, and try to make yourself useful (Kerry, Al Gore). Or you can work out barely suppressed rage by attacking things that you used to be for, like trying to control Medicare costs (McCain) or expanding Medicare eligibility (Lieberman).

In The News This Week

And Also: I could not get into the first book in the series that inspired the HBO series True Blood, in part because too many people close to the heroine are killed in the first hundred pages. Sheesh. Better luck with Girls On The Stand: How Courts Fail Pregnant Minors by Helena Silverstein, looking at the real life experience of bypass laws. The ignorance showed during calls of the key people involved in carrying out the laws alone was informative. Not comprehensive in scope surely, but a well written and researched look at public policy in the real world.

I have watched Keith and Rachel (MSNBC) over the last few weeks and find them worthy of a check, but somewhat tedious after awhile. Keith is surely too bombastic, even if his (especially pre-Rachel) take on the Bush Administration provided some appreciated balance in the dark times. He is too focused on Bill O'Reilly (guy is a boob, no need to overdo the point) and various "oh how stupid the Right is" moments. There is some low brow fun to have here, including Gov. Palin "pardoning" (West Wing underlined the ridiculousness of the practice) a turkey at a slaughterhouse, but sometimes it just is not that exciting. Still, that was a bit dumb.*

There is also the limiting features that make them tiredly predictable, including some annoying lack of follow-up questions (Rachel can be more level-headed than some, but has her blindspots too), leading to me screaming at the screen. Hey, it's almost like sports! This works all over the place, of course, such as this (former HC supporter, so maybe some bias) blog discussing people being upset that Obama has not tossed progressives a "bone" thus far. Some noise aside, I am not surprised Obama is yes a moderate (though just calling him a promoter of "cold-eyed pragmatism" seems unfair), but he is a "uniter" from the (center) left.

This justifies some limits and some involvement with progressive sorts. Take the Lieberman. The guy was Obama's bloody mentor in the Senate, so it was not surprising Obama supported him in the race against Lamont. So, you didn't really expect him to support stripping the guy of his Homeland Security chair, even if he was lousy at it (and so forth). But, Obama didn't just do that. He didn't just say "that's the Senate's call, not mine" ... he sent a signal that it didn't really matter to him. He sent a signal, without saying it directly (leading to the wilfully naive to claim he was not to blame at all), to keep him. This adds insult to injury. Ditto the telecom immunity bill; a not that good but better alternative that was possible. Unpleasant but perhaps necessary. He took the worst route.

And, supporting a Bushie torture supporter would in spades underline the point. I don't want to hear this b.s. that "we shouldn't be surprised" he kills small children since he is a pragmatist that is willing to make compromises to put us in the direction he believes is best for the country. This nihilist attitude is for simpletons and is beneath us. In the real world, people we respect, people who will do us and others much good will do bad things. Sometimes, there is little choice in the matter and/or we have to deal with the situation. After all, no one (writ small) is free from such things in their own life. But, lines can be drawn, things should be expected. Thus, his A.G. pick is imperfect, but overall looks pretty good.

The "screw you" moment on Lieberman need not, should not, be accepted as a necessary evil each and every time. There are usually various levels of good and bad, as the intentional walk and defensive timeout suggests. Torture is a line to be drawn in the sand. [See Update II] This "baby hit me one more time" shit doesn't suddenly become fine given new blood in office. One reason why Obama had to be elected was that he gave us a chance. Chance is a fitting word, since it requires a lot for it to lead to an (imperfect) successful conclusion.

Consider Sen. Biden et. al. (I was perusing his campaign bio recently and his discussion of the Bork nomination is an important read) efforts that led to the confirmation of Justice Kennedy. An imperfect sort, some on the center and left really don't like him, but essential votes on various issues, including giving people like these a chance to get out of a hell-hole. Note how the Bosnian government wanted to release them. No wonder so many don't trust foreign law, so much even references to it is taken as verboten!

Talking about foreign policy, or imperfect bridges, the talk is that Hillary Clinton as the next Secretary of State is starting to look like a gimmee. I have voiced my opposition to HC in the past and do not know how totally fair it is. Still, truth be told, rather not have her there. This might sound a bit ironic, but what experience does she really have? Seems a domestic policy role is a better fit. As senator, she did some good there, for sure. [A taste.] And, a career in the Senate, maybe taking the Ted Kennedy role at some point, seems pretty fine, even over a term or two in the Cabinet. This isn't 1808; SOS is not really the road to the presidency these days.

But, she seems respected overseas, and actually many Republicans (this is not totally a good thing) often agree, push comes to shove. She is smart and talented. And, the Clinton name doesn't hurt, even if it brings some baggage. So, though Bill Richardson might be more my style, or some other name, I'm willing to wait and see. Money is not my thing (in more ways than one), but his treasury pick also seems a good fit.**

---

* Here's a better way to help animals at Thanksgiving. This also fits into the pragmatic idealism promoted here. The "Trap-Neuter-Return" technique realizes the limits of dealing with the stray cat problem, but doesn't just say "nothing we can do." It takes a pragmatic path that still seems to be a fairly productive path. Compare this with a simple "catch and kill" technique, akin to the drug war perhaps, that doesn't deal with the replacement issue and other concerns.

** In a sequel to The Mouse That Roared, a somewhat clueless politician realized things were bad when he had to pay to play darts at the local pub. My signal that times are tough is that prices all over the place are rising. This includes my Daily News, which is now .75 for Saturday, 1.25 for Sunday. On this front, the fact only I had to pay about $10 more for my glasses than last year, is almost a rebate. Plus, I got that free bag from the Samsung Experience store via my coffee sleeve.

No, We Can't

Hire people without violating their privacy, not keeping some good people out in the process. Care about country enough not to reward incompetent backstabbers or tell the truth about it. [But, hey, don't blame Obama. He had NOTHING to do with it.] Respect your base. Go after criminals, except when "those people" are involved. We are worrying about the important stuff, though!

Bayh: JL Might Resign! The Horror!

Firedoglake underlines why people think Lieberman should not be let off the hook, and it is not some infantile "revenge" thing. As with those who want to let criminals and human rights violators off the hook, this sort of thing is nauseating and invites more of the f-ing same. Worse are those who want us to let him blackmail the caucus! This is as asinine as the feds going after hemp. Seriously, can we have a saner drug policy? Across the board!

Lieberman Watch

And Also: Interesting tidbit in an article about a sad internet bullying (leading to a teen committing suicide) case is the fact that -- even if the defendant wants it -- jury trials cannot be waived if the prosecution does not agree. In some cases, I think a jury trial is important as a way for the public at large to take part. Meanwhile, interesting victim impact case not accepted by the Supremes, though video was supplied with the dissents.

The MNF game btw had a ridiculous number of penalties, even with the multiple flags picked up by the officials.

Talking about ridiculous, why is Obama's name coming up in the Lieberman mess? I know he is now the titular head of the party, due to select the replacement of DNC head Howard Dean (good job), but it is not really his bailiwick. [Bill Clinton is said to be talking up JL as well, but denied it. Obama officially is not saying much either.] OTOH, Obama was a supporter (much to my annoyance) during his primary campaign versus Ned Lamont (remember him?), Lieberman basically Obama's Senate mentor. Luckily, his more asshole qualities didn't rub off, including his lack of respect for the party. This is an issue -- we are talking about his membership in the Democratic caucus.

If we are not going to be concerned about his support of its head etc., why have a party caucus in the first place? Anyway, as TPM and others have noted, unlike Rep. Waxman, Lieberman has been a total loser in the oversight department. There is no chance in hell he should have such a chairmanship. And, the idea Lieberman supported the Dems most of the time, "except" for national security issues is a nauseating line. It is moronic to consider this as some sort of aside, like he doesn't agree with the party on cattle futures or something. It was the prime issue for most of the last eight years. Of course, the guy also supported McCain, and badmouthed Obama along the way. Lieberman was a walking "legitimize Bush" machine, including on Fox News.

And, are we to think that his votes on federal judges are "national security" related too?

Quickies: Reid/Loserman & Loving's Death

I caught Sen. Reid on The Daily Show say that Lieberman supports Dems on everything but the war. Greenwald is right ... though I also think this is somewhat the case of defining "war" somewhat broadly (which only underlines GG's point). On Mildred Loving's death, see here. Damn I hope Obama does good enough today.

Anti-Surge Ho!

And Also: Last year, the Mets disposed of Kris Benson and eventually obtained two key starting pitchers in return. Benson had a predictable off/on year for the Orioles, but is hurt, so they needed another starter. And, what do you know -- they picked up suddenly persona non grata Steve Trachsel, who had a rather quick fall from grace ... his consistent averageness perhaps not fitting for the "new Mets." You served the team well Steve, if not at the very end ... good luck.

According to CNN, only one senator who's running for president has decided to blow off Saturday's surge resolution vote. Who? John McCain.

-- TPM

Ah, the little fake weasel. A few years back, I was given his book on courage. Worth wile reading, really, though this Iraq mess and his desire for the presidency has put a fork in his reputation for courage. Apparently, some things aren't "worth fighting for." After being treated like crap (along with his wife) in early 2004, he became Bush's little buddy in various key appearances. When Bush threw in a "signing statement" on McCain's anti-torture measure, Johnny made out as if it was a meaningless gesture. And, recently, JM disgustingly suggested that disagreeing with a failed policy would be taken as some sort of disrespect of the troops. I know of some online McCain supporter equally having a spine of spaghetti.

Said "respectable sort" -- full of above the fray wisdom and wisdom -- decided party was what mattered. So, he voted for Bush in 2004. Now, I don't take him seriously. Such people are in the same category of those who think raising (Bill) Clinton -- like a five-year-old child -- every time a challenge is made to the current President -- rather annoying, sometimes hard to ignore, but not worthy of our respect. The same applies to Joey Lieberman (Holier Than Thou-CT) who thinks a Senate vote in response to reason, public opinion, and sanity will lead to a "constitutional crisis":

Whatever our differences here in this chamber about this war, let us never forget the values of freedom and democracy that unite us and for which our troops have given and today give the last full measure of their devotion.

Yes, this includes those from Connecticut, who might think once someone is defeated in a primary that said person would actually do the decent thing and go away. At least, if the alternative was not to become the default Bush Republican candidate, the 10% who actually voted for the person with a "R" next to his name about the percentage of the party that currently has a spine. See, for instance, the number of House Republicans that voted for the anti-surge measure. Apparently, JL fears the resolution will be the beginning of some real pressure to change failed war policy. Assumed congressional overreaching more of a "constitutional crisis" than actual failure and overreaching by the executive. But, do we expect anything less from a faux values man / neocon Bush loyalist?

When I heard only seventeen Republicans voted for a resolution that simply supports the troops but opposes the surge, I was a bit surprised. But, clearly party loyalty has trumped principle in the end. Still, I thought "independent" maverick Christopher Shays (CT) -- who barely won in November -- would surely be among the few. Guess not. As with efforts to block a vote in the Senate, tossing in a "screw Democrats" resolution in the mix ("reasonable" Republicans helping, a few then whining about the politics of it all ... blaming both leaders), this underlines why certain sorts think the party is worth a cup of warm spit, and is as worthy of our respect.

Meanwhile, in Europe [see also, Ghost Plane]:

An Italian judge today ordered the first trial involving the American program of kidnapping terror suspects on foreign soil, indicting 26 Americans, most of them C.I.A. agents, but also Italy’s former top spy.... But the indictment nonetheless marked a turning point in Europe, where anger is high at the secret American program of "extraordinary renditions" that whisked away terror suspects in contravention of the law after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Ever forward.