It says something that I didn’t have to create a new “snake in the grass” image for Creepy Joe. I created one last year.
Lots of venting today, from the sarcastic (“In Defense of Joe Lieberman“), to the more sarcastic (“Surprise! Lieberman Stabs Dems in the Back!“) to the straight reporting — see Timothy Noah, “Did Lieberman Just Kill the Public Option?“:
Ezra Klein of Washingtonpost.com and Jonathan Chait of the New Republic both point out that Lieberman’s reason for opposing the public option—that it’s too expensive—makes no sense, because the public option actually lowers the cost of health reform by exerting downward competitive pressure on the private-insurance premiums whose purchase the government would subsidize. The Congressional Budget Office’s scoring of the Reid proposal is expected to show this. But any illogic in Lieberman’s position strikes me as evidence not that Lieberman is likely to change his mind when he becomes better acquainted with the facts but, rather, that Lieberman has already decided facts shouldn’t get in the way of his opposition.
Why would Lieberman want to sink health reform? Klein points out that in the pretty recent past, Lieberman has supported the general goal, if not the specifics, of Obamacare. But consider Lieberman’s political situation. He is no longer a Democrat. That means he no longer has a political base. In the future, he will have to rely more on constituencies and on cash. The White House suggests that Lieberman wouldn’t dare alienate voters by opposing health reform. But what’s the most cash-rich constituency in the Nutmeg State? The insurance industry, which is headquartered in Connecticut and employs 64,000 people.
Pretty much sums it up. See also “Is Anybody Still Surprised by Joe Lieberman?”
I don’t expect Lieberman to back down under any circumstances.
And let’s not forget that his wife who worked for years in PR for the pharmaceutical industry recently returned to work, at Hill and Knowlton, as a health insurance consultant.
And if he decideds not to run, his ‘good work’ has let Lieberman set himself up for a very nice retirement.
JL is a putz, an idiot and totally in it for himself. His motivation probably has a lot to do with the many insurance companies in his area. I do, however, resent the accusations of fifth columnism–that it’s his ties with Israel that are to blame. Just another way of saying it’s a Jewish conspiracy. (I’m ducking now, the eggs are flying…)
Here’s a link to the ONLY constituents of Lieberman who truly matter to him:
http://sickforprofit.com/ceos/
So is healthcare dead then Maha?
Jewish conspiracy? Here comes tha first duck egg….
Common, babe!
Which commedian said that if you have two Jews, you have at least three opinions?
I love my Jewish friends, I just don’t want my tax dollars fundiung their country club in the Levant.
It’s time Reid threatened the nuclear option with Joe: get with the program or strip him of his cherished committee chairmanships. There was a lot of flap about this when JL left the Democratic Party, and I now think it was wise to let him keep his perks until the hour came to use them against him. From JL’s biography:
This thing ain’t over yet.
Let’s consider this in 2 steps. First let JL know that he WILL be stripped of everything but Senate bathroom privileges if he helps a fillibuster. Then put it to a vote and make him declare. Make sure any other Democrat/Ind who joins is known and get’s his just reward this side of eternity.
Step 2. Reintroduce the bill and do it by ‘reconciliation’, the procedure that blocks a filibuster. The measure will go to an up-down vote ANYWAY. But the turncoats have has to fly their true colors, lose any seniority AND lose on the measure. Plus they will face the national (not regional) wrath of voters who contribute.
I see no reason to expect that the public option won’t be included in the Senate, House or FINAL bill – and no reason not to run over the opposition to get ‘r done!
Step 2. Reintroduce the bill and do it by ‘reconciliation’
I’m no parliamentarian but I don’t think they can introduce the “bill” as written with reconciliation rules. (I think this crap is purposely complicated so we mere voters can’t understand it fully) Reconciliation I think can only be used for budget items. They could G-rig and rewrite the legislation to meet reconciliation rules but much of the reform would have to be stripped, I believe it would get real messy real quick.
I don’t get the liberal hand ringing, put the god dam bill on the floor, let Loserman, Landrieu and any other DINO’s join the publicans in a filibuster, let them commit political suicide right on C-Span! It’ll be fun! If the polls that Howdy doody Reid keeps citing are correct it will cost them both dearly.
A Canadian Reader …I think you are mis-characterizing with the Jewish conspiracy description of the fifth column. My objection is not with Judaism, or the people of Israel. It’s more an objection to the blind allegiance to a proclaimed friendship by many American politicians to the State of Israel without regard to upholding traditionally proclaimed American values. Like human rights?
If Lieberman wants to nail a mezuzah to his Senate office door post, or have a Succah on the front lawn of the Whitehouse, then that’s fine with me. My feeling is that with a friendship— either personal or national— an assessment of, and an adherence to common values is crucial to maintaining that friendship. I don’t have friends who beat their wives, or molest their own children, or commit murder or participate in atrocities … behaviors contrary to my values. So I don’t think we should be so eager to have an unquestioned friendship and alliance with the State of Israel when their conduct as a nation needs to be questioned.
If I remember correctly 9/11 was a direct result of our turning a blind eye to the State of Israel in their treatment of the Palestinian people.
Other than his eagerness to kill Middle East Muslims, his other positions don’t strike me as partisan or principle. Simply put, if you have enough money to buy him, he’ll dance your dance, too.
So I don’t expect anything we do will change him in any positive way. I proposed to someone else that we should run a month long contest and reward the best putdown/rant of Lieberman with something like a free trip to DC.
The intent would be to draw massive publicity – not to impact him – but to give other Dems pause about how far they want to go against a sizable majority will. (Plus sometimes, I think it’s plain healthy to vent and rant about truly stinky people with all the aplomb of a middle schooler).
Simply put, if you have enough money to buy [JL], he’ll dance your dance, too.
Absolutely right.
I see Lieberman as a religious fundie, in the way Michele Bachmann is a religious fundie. It’s a personal problem on his part; nothing to do with any “conspiracy.” For instance, if you want to rid yourself of a snake, who do you call? The mongoose. In this case, a mongoose named Rahm could do the job very well, I believe.
Kill the filibuster.
Joe Lieberman? I clearly can’t really begin to express my outrage for the little snake like others have – but let me just point out that he was one of my misgivings about the Gore campaign in 2000. If you think about it broadly, and Connecticut is home to the most insurance companies in the country (isn’t that true?) you can see that he is looking out for his boys. It isn’t just the corporations, but I think it may be true that lots of jobs in Connecticut may be reformed or changed as a result in changing this crazy system/economy we have. I hope it is changed… but hell who knows? It could be Joey’s state could see some lost jobs and he could argue he is representing Connecticut’s status quo by doing this.
Join the Facebook group “Joe Lieberman is a Douchebag”!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=162150099156
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/11/01-1
Maha, your visual is too unkind to snakes. Many snakes lead useful lives dining on vermin. Unfortunately I know of no snake species that preys on vermin like the Whore of Bridgeport.