ZERO?

lieberman sucks

AMEN!!!

In honor of my zero, let me speak for millions: Please, Joe, just go. We’re tired of your faux Democrat BS.

Thank you,
The true Democratic Party faithful

Amen!

It should be evident. Lieberman is a really, really cheap blackmailer. Get rid of this individual. And yes. I am aware of the possible consequences of such an action. And I don’t give a rats behind.

This is about Reid and all not Joe. He just plays them.

What does Joe have on them anyway?

BTW The Lake is so addictive that my ceramics keeps getting on my keyboard. I cant stay away very long, but I am getting stuff done.

Since a majority of Democratic voters did not select the putz to be the nominee then Reid isn’t going to hurt the party in Connecticut if he dumps Joe.

Jane!

There will be a certain pleasure in watching Lieberman squirm over the next 5.5 years, esp. after the 2008 elections.

Have they ever had it that the house was in one party and the senate the other? What happened then? It seems like the dems are starting like repubs anyways.

Lieberman keeps threatening this and that. Well Joe… just do it. Get the hell outta here.

Prosecutors: Up to 3 years for Libby

WASHINGTON – Former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby has shown no remorse for corrupting the legal system and deserves to spend 2 1/2 to 3 years in prison for obstructing the CIA leak investigation, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald said Friday.

Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney and an assistant to President Bush, is the highest-ranking White House official convicted since the Iran-Contra affair two decades ago.

In court documents, Fitzgerald rejected criticism from Libby’s supporters who said the leak investigation had spun out of control. Fitzgerald denied the prosecution was politically motivated and said Libby brought his fate upon himself.

“The judicial system has not corruptly mistreated Mr. Libby,” Fitzgerald wrote. “Mr. Libby has been found by a jury of his peers to have corrupted the judicial system.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..leak_trial

Got that right.
-

Bye Joe. And don’t let the door hit ya in the a** when ya (officially) leave the Democratic party.

Too bad you don’t even have the level of integrity of a Jim Jeffords or even a Richard Shelby. So you and McCain or whomever can team up as the “Unity08″ ticket and Broder can give himself hand-jobs while you play in your circle jerk with each other.

Amen!!

(My, but the sister can preach.)

Thanks Jane – I had completely forgotten that Harry Reid could strip JoeWhore of his committee power. Let’s get busy nationwide demanding no less from hapless Harry. After all Reid’s Give ‘Em Hell Harry web site is a good start for firepups to give him marching orders this Memorial Day weekend and keep it going as long as it takes.

OK kiddo @ 11

You forgot about not letting the door hit him … well, maybe it should. Hard.

(The poll on Reid at DKos is reflecting nicely on yesterday’s vote. So is the poll at CNN.com, which is asking if people approve of it. Right now, 59% NO.)

I am wondering (& hoping) that they are waiting for the Senator (forget his name–Roberts?) to get back to work before Reid cuts Joe down to size.

But beyond that, I would really love to understand his long-term goals with all this. I agree that there is no way he will run again in 2012. And he has got to realize that there is very little chance that they Rethugs will take the Senate back in ‘08, or that there will be a Rethug in the WH? The more I think about it, the more it doesn’t make sense for someone as ambitious as Joe to be bhaving as he does.

Unless, it is all about covering the back of the Likud Party in the Senate for as long as he can. It’s the only possible explanation that does make sense, and on that issue, he and Cheney see eye to eye. There is nothing Joe would like better than for the US to attack Iran on the paranoid right in Israel’s behalf.

“a bag of weak tea”?

How’s about ten pounds of shit in a five pound bag?

I blame Connecticut.
-

I’m still trying to understand yesterday’s vote. The bill was not in danger of being defeated, so even senators who believed in the bill could do themselves a favor by siding with the American People and voting against this unpopular president and his unpopular war. But they didn’t avail themselves of this free opportunity. Why???

Obviously, they are afraid of something and it’s not the voters. And I believe that even the press would have treated them kindly. So, what is it? What force has sufficient clout to make 40 Democratic senators snivel and vote against the expressed will of their constituents? Whom do they serve?

Wigwam @ 20

I’m still trying to understand yesterday’s vote. The bill was not in danger of being defeated, so even senators who believed in the bill could do themselves a favor by siding with the American People and voting against this unpopular president and his unpopular war. But they didn’t avail themselves of this free opportunity. Why???

Obviously, they are afraid of something and it’s not the voters. And I believe that even the press would have treated them kindly. So, what is it? What force has sufficient clout to make 40 Democratic senators snivel and vote against the expressed will of their constituents? Whom do they serve?

Sadly some credible folks continue to postulate the Rethugs have blackmail goods on too many congresscritters.

I think NoMoJo, the Ho’, is positioning himself for a run–with McCain, if Ghouliani wins the GOPuke nomination (as i think likely), or with Ghouliani, if McCain wins–on the Unity ‘08 party…
.

Wigwam @ 20

I’m still trying to understand yesterday’s vote. The bill was not in danger of being defeated, so even senators who believed in the bill could do themselves a favor by siding with the American People and voting against this unpopular president and his unpopular war. But they didn’t avail themselves of this free opportunity. Why???

Obviously, they are afraid of something and it’s not the voters. And I believe that even the press would have treated them kindly. So, what is it? What force has sufficient clout to make 40 Democratic senators snivel and vote against the expressed will of their constituents? Whom do they serve?

When the fascists are in control and can get all info on all people you know they must being using that knowledge for blackmail. The is no such thing as a private life any longer.

Think about this: we wake up Sunday morning and shuffle out to get our paper. And there it is. Splashed across the front page. ‘Gore Will Run’.

McCain and HoJo are deeeluuutional.

QuentinCompson @ 12

Prosecutors: Up to 3 years for Libby

WASHINGTON – Former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby has shown no remorse for corrupting the legal system and deserves to spend 2 1/2 to 3 years in prison for obstructing the CIA leak investigation, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald said Friday.

Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney and an assistant to President Bush, is the highest-ranking White House official convicted since the Iran-Contra affair two decades ago.

In court documents, Fitzgerald rejected criticism from Libby’s supporters who said the leak investigation had spun out of control. Fitzgerald denied the prosecution was politically motivated and said Libby brought his fate upon himself.

“The judicial system has not corruptly mistreated Mr. Libby,” Fitzgerald wrote. “Mr. Libby has been found by a jury of his peers to have corrupted the judicial system.”

yahoo link

Got that right.
-

Fitzgerald should be allowed to ask for extra time based on the
public statements of Libby’s supporters. Talk about lack of remorse.

brendancalling @ 18

“a bag of weak tea”?

How’s about ten pounds of shit in a five pound bag?

LOL!! gotta love Brendan!

If there’s no real benefit to him staying a Dem, do we have to wait for him to leave. How often are we going to have to put up with these little threats of his. Can’t he be given the boot. Make him go crawling to the other side.

I am wondering (& hoping) that they are waiting for the Senator (forget his name–Roberts?) to get back to work before Reid cuts Joe down to size.

But beyond that, I would really love to understand his long-term goals with all this. I agree that there is no way he will run again in 2012. And he has got to realize that there is very little chance that they Rethugs will take the Senate back in ‘08, or that there will be a Rethug in the WH? The more I think about it, the more it doesn’t make sense for someone as ambitious as Joe to be bhaving as he does.

Unless, it is all about covering the back of the Lik*d Party in the Senate for as long as he can. It’s the only possible explanation that does make sense, and on that issue, he and Cheney see eye to eye. There is nothing Joe would like better than for the US to attack Iran on the paranoid right in Israel’s behalf. wgg: tokin liberal @ 22

I think NoMoJo, the Ho’, is positioning himself for a run–with McCain, if Ghouliani wins the GOPuke nomination (as i think likely), or with Ghouliani, if McCain wins–on the Unity ‘08 party…
.

Either way–if that is the case–it is a deluded long shot. And both the kinds of scenarios which would give Karl Rove nightmares for the rest of his life. If Ghouliani were to win the nomination, Joe comes from a place that is considered NYC-lite by most of the country. Wouldn’t do well in the heartland. McCain & LIeberman? About as unsexy as it gets. Lee Atwater would not approve.

amen!

Harry Reid should ” talk “to Holy Joe’s ten biggest campaign contributors and tell THEM to control their weasel dog or else EVERYTHING they WANT from Congress for the next 2 years gets put on the backburner. Then if Democrats get a veto proof majority the PAIN REALLY BEGINS. Can you tell I’ve had it with playing nice?

Aren’t the Committee Chairs specified by name in this Senate’s organizing resolution, or operating agreement? This was the reason why the Democrats got a “no-redo” clause if the majority changed.

Which means that even if Senate Dems throw RGJoe outta their caucus he remains chairman of his tea-party. That alternate Dem/GOP seating rearrangement is the absolutely perfect metaphor for the banality of Lieberman’s evil.

oh, and A-fuckin-MEN!!

If LieberDog bolts, do the committee chairs also remain as is? If so, WHO NEEDS HIM? Show him the door!

I don’t get it. Didn’t Harry used to be a boxer once? Hell, he’d make a crappy p*ker player. Guys like Chris “Jesus” Ferguson must wish Harry’d come to the casi*o and play with them, he’s such an easy mark.

Harry Reid “Gave ‘em HECK!” Or maybe gave ‘em heaven. I don’t know. Something like that. Throw him on the trash heap along with Lieberman.

From me to Joe:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..mp;search=

The weakness of the democratic party as shown in yesterdays vote is disgusting and Joe Lieberman is a pathetic excuse of a human being. Let him go down in history as the ass he really is.

when Lie-berman won election in Ct, i said then that the Dems (Sen Reid, i mean you, you gutless, feckless punk) should have stripped NoMoHoJo of all his committee assignments.
As of the moment he declared his own victory, he NO LONGER HAD A FREAKIN MINUTE OF SENIORITY.
they should have stripped him of every vestige of his Dem cred: given him one secretary, a dial-phone, and a desk in the stair-well to the farking parking lot…
that they did NOT, to me, spoke more abo ut the politics of the Dumbocraps than any legislative action they might ever undertake…
.

Bye, Joe.

SnarKassandra @ 10

Have they ever had it that the house was in one party and the senate the other? What happened then? It seems like the dems are starting like repubs anyways.

2002 for example. The Republicans had the House and the Democrats had the Senate with the help of Jim Jeffords(?) who was a Republican but saw how bad Shrub was for the country and turned Independent and caucused with the Dems.

BTW the AUMF (Authorization to Use Military Force) was forced through the Democratic Senate by the Democratic leadership because they thought they could triangulate the debate in 2004 to the economy which didn’t work so much (kinda, sorta like the vote yesterday)

not exactly 50-50, though, with Cheney as the tie-breaker, and one Democrat still out of commission…

Harry Reid must really love having RGJoe to hide behind. We see you peekin’ out behind those skirts, Harry! Enjoy your majority, and the leader’s perks, while you can. My Senators will be urged to seek new leadership when it’s time to organize in 09.

Not proud to think like this, but is there any conceivable single vote worth waiting for where it would pay to threaten Drive-by Joe with the loss his chair in exchange for his one time cooperation versus, say, the benefit of just kicking him out, just because, and be done with it?

RGJoe is doing exactly what his late primary nite caller asked of him: “Run as an Indie, Joe, and you’ll have all the help and money you could wish for from the White House!!” While we were celebrating Ned’s victory from coast to coast, the Rove fix was put in.

newspaperbrat @ 21

Wigwam @ 20

I’m still trying to understand yesterday’s vote. The bill was not in danger of being defeated, so even senators who believed in the bill could do themselves a favor by siding with the American People and voting against this unpopular president and his unpopular war. But they didn’t avail themselves of this free opportunity. Why???

Obviously, they are afraid of something and it’s not the voters. And I believe that even the press would have treated them kindly. So, what is it? What force has sufficient clout to make 40 Democratic senators snivel and vote against the expressed will of their constituents? Whom do they serve?

Sadly some credible folks continue to postulate the Rethugs have blackmail goods on too many congresscritters.

I think it may have been threat enough if these Dems thought they were going to be heckled or protested against at Memorial Day ceremonies. They know they wouldn’t be given the few minutes on the six o’clock news, or local Sunday morning talk shows, that it would take to educate your average dimwit constituent — even if they are a minority. It could be like a fear of yappy little dogs.

wrt to iraq occupation supplemental funding yesterday -

on the house rule that david sirota has commented on – i got an explanation from the press secretary for my rep, jim mcgovern, who is vice chair of the rules committee.

he doesn’t spin it as a “victory”, but still… not entirely reassuring (although i confess to being somewhat sympathetic).

if you want to take a look and come to your own judgements, i left it in epu land a couple of threads back… won’t repost it here since it’s not on lieberman or the senate… but thought some of you might be interested in seeing it.

Perhaps Reid will get enough “surprise” blow back from this vote that he will finally understand that someone in the senate, besides the judiciary committee, needs to get work done. Get rid of Joe. Why in the world is he keeping him? I don’t get it.

I just watched Tucker Carlson discussing the Senate intelligence report. The gist of the discussion is this:

Bush made that very strong statement yesterday about leaving Iraq if the Iraqis say to leave.

The Repub pundit said that he guarantees it is a set up for the September strategy (which explains why the Dems went along with the bill).

[Mod: Peter Fenn, Dem. strategist. Correction proposed by LS]

The wording is in the bill that the US will leave if the Iraqis ask them to.

Bush saves face, and Pelosi and Reid get what they want, and the Repubs will have an easier 08 election.

We’ll have to see how this plays out.

Holy Joe has a Submarine base in his state if he switches parties the base gets closed to pay for HIS War. No forget that if Holy Joe wants to keep his sub base he better start remebering Congress controls the purse strings for his base. I’m sure his local voters and even more important local business and politicans can pressure Holy Joe into acting like a Democrat. I mean shouldn’t he be investigating something or was he elected on a promise to betray those who elected him and a promise NOT TO SERVE.

Isn’t it reasonable to expect, after the 2008 elections, that if/when the Democratic majority increases and Lieberman is no longer in a position of blackmail that he’ll be stripped of his committees anyway? He’s a bad-faith ex-Democrat and I will not be amused if he’s still chairing all of his moribund committees when the Senate has more Democratic Senators.

My point being he’s not helping the party (or the country) now, and if he’s going to be stripped of his blackmail-earned power anyway why not just get it over with so the peoples’ business can move ahead somewhat. Hell, for all we know if Lieberman gets tossed aside maybe his ego will be so bruised he’ll resign his seat early. Wouldn’t that be nice?

selise @ 46 – Thank you for reposting that. I think I get the jist.

RGJoe is serving, very well, those who enabled his re-election.

In the immortal words of P.T. Sailorman, “Eye yam disgustipated.”

Re: my post at 48, should read Peter Fenn (Dem strategist).

1,526 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..

Citizen Hamsher and the Firepup Patriots:

Yesterday’s performance puts Reid’s unwillingness ta strip Lik*derman in a brighter light…he (Reid) must do somethin’ ta build some credibility in his leadership, indeed in the integrity of his entire caucus. The only way I see for Horshit Harry Reid ta gain any standin’ as majority leader is to strip ol’ Joe of his seniority and drag ‘im kickin and screamin down the aisles as an example to other fascist fellow travelers.

After yesters=day, I’m puttin’ my party on notice…not one more dime and I’m not workin’ for any Democrat at any level who won’t go out front against the war and against this existin’ leadership. Indeed, I will work against the Blue Dog critter (Ron Kind) in my District even if it means votin’ for a Green.

KEEP THE FAITH, WE’RE FINDIN’ OUT JEST WHO THE ENEMY IS AND IT AIN’T US!!!

Pete Bogs @ 41

not exactly 50-50, though, with Cheney as the tie-breaker, and one Democrat still out of commission…

Which votes have been close enough for that to be a factor? Maybe one in the past five months? Getting rid of the cancer within the Democratic caucus seems far more productive than holding onto unreliable Lieberman for the slim chance he’ll actually vote with the caucus when it matters.

Hi Jane – YGM

to wigwam at 20:

i Am thinking, who or what could It be that has enough Pull to get our representatives to serve them And not the people of this Country?

Woodhall Hollow @ 17

I am wondering (& hoping) that they are waiting for the Senator (forget his name–Roberts?) to get back to work before Reid cuts Joe down to size.

But beyond that, I would really love to understand his long-term goals with all this. I agree that there is no way he will run again in 2012. And he has got to realize that there is very little chance that they Rethugs will take the Senate back in ‘08, or that there will be a Rethug in the WH? The more I think about it, the more it doesn’t make sense for someone as ambitious as Joe to be bhaving as he does.

Unless, it is all about covering the back of the Lik*d Party in the Senate for as long as he can. It’s the only possible explanation that does make sense, and on that issue, he and Cheney see eye to eye. There is nothing Joe would like better than for the US to attack Iran on the paranoid right in Israel’s behalf.

I really think he’s deluded enuf to dream of an independent candidacy in 08.

LS @ 48

I just watched Tucker Carlson discussing the Senate intelligence report. The gist of the discussion is this:

Bush made that very strong statement yesterday about leaving Iraq if the Iraqis say to leave.

The Repub pundit said that he guarantees it is a set up for the September strategy (which explains why the Dems went along with the bill).

The wording is in the bill that the US will leave if the Iraqis ask them to.

Bush saves face, and Pelosi and Reid get what they want, and the Repubs will have an easier 08 election.

We’ll have to see how this plays out.

At the very least, then, the dems should have made the same deal with a July date for starting withdrawl. Not really interested in Bush saving face. Would rather have Dems look strong. Not to mention, it would have been 2 months closer to bringing troops home. Why go out of your way to tick-off your base and give the repubs an easier time?

For my family and progressive friends lurking in the Lone Star State. You know who you are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..4&NR=1

If Harry Reid can’t handle Joe then we need a new Senate Majority Leader!

Woodhall Hollow @ 17

I am wondering (& hoping) that they are waiting for the Senator (forget his name–Roberts?) to get back to work before Reid cuts Joe down to size.

But beyond that, I would really love to understand his long-term goals with all this. I agree that there is no way he will run again in 2012. And he has got to realize that there is very little chance that they Rethugs will take the Senate back in ‘08, or that there will be a Rethug in the WH? The more I think about it, the more it doesn’t make sense for someone as ambitious as Joe to be bhaving as he does.

Unless, it is all about covering the back of the Lik*d Party in the Senate for as long as he can. It’s the only possible explanation that does make sense, and on that issue, he and Cheney see eye to eye. There is nothing Joe would like better than for the US to attack Iran on the paranoid right in Israel’s behalf.

I’m glad someone’s willing to attribute this stupefyingly obvious personal motivation to Lieberman, especially as he’s stated he’s in favor of “regime change” in Iran. Scooter Libby was a true believer in the war, willing to go to jail to protect the enterprise. Nothing about Lieberman’s actions and words indicate he’s not, too.

Solai @ 60

LS @ 48

I just watched Tucker Carlson discussing the Senate intelligence report. The gist of the discussion is this:

Bush made that very strong statement yesterday about leaving Iraq if the Iraqis say to leave.

The Repub pundit said that he guarantees it is a set up for the September strategy (which explains why the Dems went along with the bill).

The wording is in the bill that the US will leave if the Iraqis ask them to.

Bush saves face, and Pelosi and Reid get what they want, and the Repubs will have an easier 08 election.

We’ll have to see how this plays out.

At the very least, then, the dems should have made the same deal with a July date for starting withdrawl. Not really interested in Bush saving face. Would rather have Dems look strong. Not to mention, it would have been 2 months closer to bringing troops home. Why go out of your way to tick-off your base and give the repubs an easier time?

I entirely agree with you.

TeddySanFran @ 52

RGJoe is serving, very well, those who enabled his re-election.

So true and so depressing.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 61

For my family and progressive friends lurking in the Lone Star State. You know who you are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..4&NR=1

Thanks OK!!

LS – have you seen text of the bill that discusses leaving if asked? genuine question since I’ve been working my way through the text to see what they really voted on …would love a cite.

thanks!

Solai @ 60: Why go out of your way to tick-off your base and give the repubs an easier time?

they dance the tune their corpoRat masters call, dahlin…

allemand RIGHT!
.

Oops posted on wrong thread. More on topic here.

It’s probably been remarked on already but there is a new Times/CBS poll out.

61% say we should have stayed out of Iraq.
76% say that the surge is having no effect or making things worse
72% say the country is seriously offtrack
69% support funding but with conditions
63% support withdrawal in 2008
23% approve of Bush’s handling of the war

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05…..5view.html

Woodhall @ 17: I believe you’re thinking of Tim Johnson of South Dakota.

I doubt Reid will ever strip Lieberman of his chairmanships. The time to have done that should have been, preemptively, the day Joe refused to acknowledge the will of the CT Democratic primary voters and chose instead to run on the Me for Myself (and, yes, L*k*d) ticket. Reid showed the same disdain for those voters at that crucial moment as did RGJoe.

LS @ 48

I just watched Tucker Carlson discussing the Senate intelligence report. The gist of the discussion is this:

…

The wording is in the bill that the US will leave if the Iraqis ask them to.

Bush saves face, and Pelosi and Reid get what they want, and the Repubs will have an easier 08 election.

We’ll have to see how this plays out.

I don’t see how this gives the Repubs an easier ‘08. The Democrats can point out that you can’t have it both ways: you can’t say that the U.S. needs to remain in Iraq because it is vital to our national security, and also say that we’ll leave Iraq if the government asks us to leave. That’s a blatant contradiction. And the Dems need to hammer Bush on that right away.

brendan @ 63

Woodhall Hollow @ 17

I am wondering (& hoping) that they are waiting for the Senator (forget his name–Roberts?) to get back to work before Reid cuts Joe down to size.

But beyond that, I would really love to understand his long-term goals with all this. I agree that there is no way he will run again in 2012. And he has got to realize that there is very little chance that they Rethugs will take the Senate back in ‘08, or that there will be a Rethug in the WH? The more I think about it, the more it doesn’t make sense for someone as ambitious as Joe to be bhaving as he does.

Unless, it is all about covering the back of the Lik*d Party in the Senate for as long as he can. It’s the only possible explanation that does make sense, and on that issue, he and Cheney see eye to eye. There is nothing Joe would like better than for the US to attack Iran on the paranoid right in Israel’s behalf.

I’m glad someone’s willing to attribute this stupefyingly obvious personal motivation to Lieberman, especially as he’s stated he’s in favor of “regime change” in Iran. Scooter Libby was a true believer in the war, willing to go to jail to protect the enterprise. Nothing about Lieberman’s actions and words indicate he’s not, too.

I have a sister-in-law who lives in Stratford CT, and I have tried to talk to her about Lieberman. She is not particularly religious, but she does teach music in several orthodox yeshivas in CT. It always comes down to a one word explanation for her–and those she knows (who would otherwise be Dems, politically).

Israel. It’s a tough one, because so many of these people come from families who were personally affected by the holocaust–and they are convinced that w/out Joe, the US will abandon Israel to the new “hitler” Ahmadinajad. It’s hugely emotional and I never have the heart to really try to push the conversation or the logic. And I think that on this one issue–as smarmy and hypocritical as Joe is–he might be a genuinely true believer. Or perhaps it is Hadad, who is…

TeddySanFran @ 32

Aren’t the Committee Chairs specified by name in this Senate’s organizing resolution, or operating agreement? This was the reason why the Democrats got a “no-redo” clause if the majority changed.

Which means that even if Senate Dems throw RGJoe outta their caucus he remains chairman of his tea-party. That alternate Dem/GOP seating rearrangement is the absolutely perfect metaphor for the banality of Lieberman’s evil.

oh, and A-fuckin-MEN!!

Yes, the Senate organizing resolution names the committee chairs and would have to be re-done.

(BTW lots of good discussion on the organizing resolution at this dkos diary from earlier in the year.)

Trying to pass a new organizing resolution to strip Lieberman of his seat would lack the votes needed to pass it, as he’d surely vote against it, and Cheney would break the tie. (If Johnson even managed to make it in to the vote.)

Of course, on the optimistic side, maybe McCain would miss the roll call…

1. LiarMan is a neocon. Go to fightingterror dot org and see. Click the members list.

2. The only thing I can figure is, maybe back in the Fall, 2006 Harry and Joe made a deal. “Joe, if you win in November, and promise to caucus with the Democrats, I’ll leave you alone.” It was a handshake deal….nothing in writing. Who knows.

Ghostman

Bravo!!! Hunter

This says it for me. Thanks Hunter.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…..163659/008

jim oconnor @ 58

to wigwam at 20:

i Am thinking, who or what could It be that has enough Pull to get our representatives to serve them And not the people of this Country?

Very perceptive. We have our winner!

Wigwam @ 75

jim oconnor @ 58

to wigwam at 20:

i Am thinking, who or what could It be that has enough Pull to get our representatives to serve them And not the people of this Country?

Very perceptive. We have our winner!

1) Burnt (blackmail)
2) Bought (bribed)
3) Broken (extortion, threats of violence. actual violence)
4) Co-opted (Rahm/ Steny/ K Street)

AFAIK, there is no way that Lieberman can be relieved of this chairmanship, since those chairmanships are written into a Senate Resolution 27: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/…..10hgZBFa::

S. Res. 27

Resolved, That the following shall constitute the majority party’s membership on the following committees for the One Hundred Tenth Congress, or until their successors are chosen:
…

There is that bit about “successors”, but wouldn’t that require an ammendment to the Organizing Resolution (SR27)? I thought that this is why Lieberman is so brazen.

From me to the DLC, to Joe, to the GOP.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..mp;search=

Just spoke with a staffer in Jim Webb’s DC office. He was rather useless. First he said Webb is again deadlines for withdrawal, then that Webb voted for the funding because they didn’t have the votes to defeat it. He said that Webb wants diplomatic solutions to Iraq (which is what he said during the campaign), but couldn’t tell me how Webb believes Congress can make that happen.

Finally, he said Webb is going to introduce an amendment next week to some other military bill, but the text hasn’t been released yet.

JohnH 71,

If the war is the same or worse at election time, many Repubs will face almost impossible reelection, and the possibility of a Repub president unlikely (unless there is more voter fraud). If the war is or has scaled down by then, the Repubs will claim that as their doing. That is how they always operate.

The Dems will have to fight them really hard to reverse whatever message the Repub spinners put out there. The damage that has been done to this party this week is substantial I’m afraid, because the Repubs have had tons of publicity to point out that the Dems caved and are weak compared to them (and they aren’t even in the majority). It is sickening.

Ghostman 2. The only thing I can figure is, maybe back in the Fall, 2006 Harry and Joe made a deal. “Joe, if you win in November, and promise to caucus with the Democrats, I’ll leave you alone.” It was a handshake deal….nothing in writing. Who knows.

if the gutless, feckless, ass-licking sycophants in the Dumbo party had actually bestirred themselves to OUST the smirking, smarmy shirtwhistle, instead of the winkin’, stinkin’ behavior–if the likes of obama and hilary, and that dim-witted focknozzle Salazar had NOT meekly fallen into line to support NoMoHoJo, this mightn’t have been such a problem now…
imho

When Lieberman announced that he might switch to the republican party, I took that as his way of telling the administration that he is open to a new position if one was offered, such as AG or World Bank pres.

Any chance the White House announces Albertoe’s resignation in the next ten minutes?

Go, Joe, so we can have clean hands once again…

Siun @ 67

LS – have you seen text of the bill that discusses leaving if asked? genuine question since I’ve been working my way through the text to see what they really voted on …would love a cite.

thanks!

Siun, I have not seen the text, but I have seen reports that it is in there. Someone cited a yahoo news report the other day that it is in there. Maybe it isn’t. Maybe the wording is ambiguous.

Elliott @ 84

Any chance the White House announces Albertoe’s resignation in the next ten minutes?

Why the next 10 minutes?

LS @ 87

Elliott @ 84

Any chance the White House announces Albertoe’s resignation in the next ten minutes?

Why the next 10 minutes?

To make way for a recess appointment this weekend

wgg: tokin liberal @ 82

Ghostman 2. The only thing I can figure is, maybe back in the Fall, 2006 Harry and Joe made a deal. “Joe, if you win in November, and promise to caucus with the Democrats, I’ll leave you alone.” It was a handshake deal….nothing in writing. Who knows.

if the gutless, feckless, ass-licking sycophants in the Dumbo party had actually bestirred themselves to OUST the smirking, smarmy shirtwhistle, instead of the winkin’, stinkin’ behavior–if the likes of obama and hilary, and that dim-witted focknozzle Salazar had NOT meekly fallen into line to support NoMoHoJo, this mightn’t have been such a problem now…
imho

Very likely scenario imo. But to play Devil’s advocate for a minute, the race to win the Senate was EXTREMELY tight, and Reid knew it would be a touch and go proposition. If, for instance, Allen had managed to hold on to his seat, then Lieberman’s “promise” would’ve been all that much more important in terms of a completely split Senate–esp if LIeberman had won in spite of intense Dem campaigning in CT (which of course there wasn’t). It is also possible that although it is hard to believe that Reid didn’t know that Lieberman was a snake in the grass, it might’ve been hard to imagine the strength of his poison. Hopefully, memories will be long and lessons will be learned.

I don’t sleep … I don’t want to dream

“You know, I think I thought, or…you would think, that each time you lose someone in combat it would be easier, but it’s not. It’s not.” He shook his head and looked away from Maj. Johns and down at the floor. “It’s not,” he repeated as he stared at the floor. He looked back up at me nervously, still shaking his head. When he finally stopped shaking his head, his body erupted into a tiny tremor as he tried to keep still. He pressed and rubbed his palms against his knees as he sat, presumably to try and stop his hands from shaking. “Every time someone dies, I relive all of the other deaths. Over and over.” He shook his head and looked back down at the floor and the tremor began again. …

LS @ 87

Elliott @ 84

Any chance the White House announces Albertoe’s resignation in the next ten minutes?

Why the next 10 minutes?

It’s five o’clock on Friday! I thought he might be the Friday afternoon dump, with an easy pass bypass of the Senate confirmation

Gnome de Plume @ 88

LS @ 87

Why the next 10 minutes?

Make way for a recess appointment

Right. I just thought maybe Elliot heard something was going to happen time wise.

EPUd but important about our Christy in Howard Kurtz’s column!

Sally @ 235

Christy, apologies if someone has already posted this.

“At Firedoglake, Christy Hardin Smith finds Goodling not very believable:

‘After sitting through the hours of ‘if I broke the law, I didn’t mean to’ from Monica Goodling, there are a whole lot of questions that I want answered . . . still.

“Such as: how can someone who worked in a building full of experienced prosecutors possibly think that is remotely credible? My ignorance of the law made me politicize the hiring of multiple career justice employees? Puh-leese. (Any cops in the audience want to tell me how well that works in the real world? ‘I’m sorry officer, I didn’t know the speed limit was 65 here.’ Um . . . yeah.)

“Or this gem — the whole ‘I was student council president in college, so I’m highly qualified to judge career professionals who have dedicated their lives to the Constitution and the rule of law and fire their asses if they aren’t Republican enough.’ “

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..id=topnews

jim oconnor @ 58

to wigwam at 20:

i Am thinking, who or what could It be that has enough Pull to get our representatives to serve them And not the people of this Country? [emphasis added]

you know if you all remember, as soon as he cast the first vote against the democrat’s new majority I said it and I said it loud and clear;

we should cast this judas sheep OUT of the party, take away his toy, take away his power

ralphbon @ 70

I doubt Reid will ever strip Lieberman of his chairmanships.

Actually, I believe Lieberman *will* be stripped of his chairmanship and seniority.

Unfortunately, it won’t happen until January 2009.

But, on the safe assumption that Joe will continue his recalcitrant behavior and Republican support – both financially and rhetorically, I suspect the Democrats will be more than eager to toss Lieberman overboard once they have a strong majority.

However, I agree that’s not soon enough.

jim oconnor @ 58

to wigwam at 20:

i Am thinking, who or what could It be that has enough Pull to get our representatives to serve them And not the people of this Country?

Well, you could research the two organizations that were exempted, by name, from the ethics bill passed at the beginning of this session.

LS @ 92

Gnome de Plume @ 88

Make way for a recess appointment

Right. I just thought maybe Elliot heard something was going to happen time wise.

nah, just wondering.

wgg: tokin liberal @ 22

I think NoMoJo, the Ho’, is positioning himself for a run–with McCain, if Ghouliani wins the GOPuke nomination (as i think likely), or with Ghouliani, if McCain wins–on the Unity ‘08 party…
.

Let’s hope. It would split the Repug vote and give us a shoo-in.

woodhollow @72: Sounds so much like the mindset of fundamentalists Christians. I guess that’s something the two groups have in common and why you absolutely, positively cannot tell them anything that contradicts what they want to believe. Don’t knock yourself out. It’s pointless.

Gnome de Plume @ 88

LS @ 87

Why the next 10 minutes?

To make way for a recess appointment this weekend

That flat out scares me.

From me to Lakota. I know you’re lookin’ on my laptop.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..mp;search=

ThinkProgress: Bush Ignored Senate’s Pre-War Intelligence Warning of Post-War Fiasco

Link to Senate’s Select Committee’s Intelligence Report: http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/prewar.pdf

(229 page .pdf file)

Zee @ 101

Gnome de Plume @ 88

To make way for a recess appointment this weekend

That flat out scares me.

congress should make it crystal clear;

ANY “recess appointment” gets an IMMEDIATE impeachment

I BET the republicans will get on board that train

OT

National average for regular gasoline today:
$3.225.

The price yesterday: $3.227

This is the first decline since the most recent spike. Inventories are up, political pressure and consumer anger is up, and markets are marking time going into a holiday weekend. There may also be a pause just as we start the official beginning of the summer driving season. Shorter: Gas prices will be high all summer and have the potential to go higher.

perris @ 104

Zee @ 101

That flat out scares me.

congress should make it crystal clear;

ANY “recess appointment” gets an IMMEDIATE impeachment

I BET the republicans will get on board that train

of course I mean an impeachment of that particular office

I sincerely doubt even the republicans want to allow the president to usurp their power in these appointments

I’m with @83 – Joe for AG. Safe pick for Bush as Senate would let him thru and then Joe will not investigate

JohnH @ 71

You can’t say that the U.S. needs to remain in Iraq because it is vital to our national security, and also say that we’ll leave Iraq if the government asks us to leave. That’s a blatant contradiction. And the Dems need to hammer Bush on that right away.

Yep.

Bush is saying, “We’ll leave the decision of how best to deploy our armed forces and defend our national security not to the generals, but to the Iraqi government.”

Definitely sounds like something to hammer them with.

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 103

ThinkProgress: Bush Ignored Senate’s Pre-War Intelligence Warning of Post-War Fiasco

Link to Senate’s Select Committee’s Intelligence Report: http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/prewar.pdf

(229 page .pdf file)

So, Bush deliberately put the troops into a situation in which he was told his decisions would create enormous danger to this country, the citizens of this country, and the men and women who follow his orders. Hmmmm, sounds criminal to me.

Y’know, all this talk about September, and I had completely forgotten — do you really think any GOPers will join the Democrats to defund the occupation the same month Dear Leader parades around to celebrate St Rudy’s Day on the Eleventh????

Amen.

Joe is too weak and calculating to actually jump. Thanks for pushing Harry to call the boy who cried wolf on his whining.

I hope you are walking and drinking your water.

Miss you

TeddySanFran @ 110

Y’know, all this talk about September, and I had completely forgotten — do you really think any GOPers will join the Democrats to defund the occupation the same month Dear Leader parades around to celebrate St Rudy’s Day on the Eleventh????

Could be, and with all this Al-Qaeda/Bin Laden talk, I wouldn’t be surprised to see him pull Osama out of his ass then too.

slighly o/t, but not too,
and epu’d from prior libby thread:

i am uploading key parts,
in easily searchable, plain text, of
patrick fitzgerald’s sentencing
memorandum, in u.s. v. libby
right now, at the above link. . .

one juicy bit:

“. . .the law is entitled to every man’s
evidence. Inherent in this principle is the
obligation of a witness to tell the truth,
particularly under oath. . .“

i’ll be adding more of the 21 pages,
some partially redacted, as the afternoon
wears on. . .

keep it spinnin’ in good karma!

.oddmommy @ 80

Just spoke with a staffer in Jim Webb’s DC office. He was rather useless. First he said Webb is again deadlines for withdrawal, then that Webb voted for the funding because they didn’t have the votes to defeat it.

Webb voted for that piece of crap bill?

That’s disappointing. I really thought he’d be one of the holdouts. Damn.

Eg

to answer your question from the thread below, it’s not just the immigration judges.Federal Disrict Court judges were chosen in the same way that US attonernyes were chosen (you know back in the good old days)–by recommendation from their home state senators, they were prominent members of the bar in the district where they were to be appointed and they almost always had significant trial experience.

They were very carefully screened and usually represented the real cream of the crop among lawyers.

Back in the good old days.

On the other hand there is now.

Keep diggin’ EG we are making lots of progress.
More stuff to come out of the woodwork (I hope)

perris @ 106

perris @ 104

congress should make it crystal clear;

ANY “recess appointment” gets an IMMEDIATE impeachment

I BET the republicans will get on board that train

of course I mean an impeachment of that particular office

I sincerely doubt even the republicans want to allow the president to usurp their power in these appointments

You’re being far too generous towards the Republicans.

They’ll simply say “Clinton did it.”

Via Froomkin, apparently David Gregory’s children weren’t the only ones threatened at Bush’s presser yesterday.

“‘It’s a danger to your children, Jim,’ Bush informed the New York Times’ Jim Rutenberg.

“This last warning was perplexing, because Rutenberg has no children, only a brown chow chow named Little Bear. It was unclear whether Bush was referring to a specific and credible threat to Little Bear or merely indicating there was increased ‘chatter in the system’ about chow chows in general.”

Scottfree @ 107

I’m with @83 – Joe for AG. Safe pick for Bush as Senate would let him thru and then Joe will not investigate

hmmm

whoever first came up with that idea pick is in my opinion, prescient

TeddySanFran @ 110

Y’know, all this talk about September, and I had completely forgotten — do you really think any GOPers will join the Democrats to defund the occupation the same month Dear Leader parades around to celebrate St Rudy’s Day on the Eleventh????

I don’t even think the Democrats will defund the same month blah blah blah… or any other time, for that matter.

They didn’t this time, why on earth would I believe they will “next time”?

emptywheel has landed.

The trouble starts now….

The Senate voted for this bill in greater numbers — and with more Democratic support — than the AUMF in 2002. Bush will use this datapoint. To bomb Iran, to Surge2.0, to prevent them from doubling back in September.

“Now that Gen. Petraeus has reported progress, how can the Congress turn their backs on the Iraqi people and our brave troops?” == GWB, 9/11/07

We got played.

nolo @ 113

slighly o/t, but not too,
and epu’d from prior libby thread:

i am uploading key parts,
in easily searchable, plain text, of
patrick fitzgerald’s sentencing
memorandum, in u.s. v. libby
right now, at the above link. . .

one juicy bit:

“. . .the law is entitled to every man’s
evidence. Inherent in this principle is the
obligation of a witness to tell the truth,
particularly under oath. . .“

i’ll be adding more of the 21 pages,
some partially redacted, as the afternoon
wears on. . .

keep it spinnin’ in good karma!

Something else I took off the Thisnk Prohess link

it is important that this court impose a sentence that accurately reflects the value the judicial system places on truth-telling in criminal investigations,” Fitzgerald wrote in court documents

The value the judical system places on truth telling Was this a little hint to Congress to show the “value Congress places on truth telling in COngressional investigations?”

I would be very interseted in knowing how much value Congress places on truth telling by witnesses before COngress. Enough value to meet out some harsh sentences of it’s own?

Just wonderin’s all.

Jane Hamsher @ 120

emptywheel has landed.

The trouble starts now….

PIE !!

JGabriel @ 108

JohnH @ 71

You can’t say that the U.S. needs to remain in Iraq because it is vital to our national security, and also say that we’ll leave Iraq if the government asks us to leave. That’s a blatant contradiction. And the Dems need to hammer Bush on that right away.

Yep.

Bush is saying, “We’ll leave the decision of how best to deploy our armed forces and defend our national security not to the generals, but to the Iraqi government.”

Definitely sounds like something to hammer them with.

Dear god, there are so many things they could hammer the guy with 24/7 and yet they don’t!!

Why??!!

perris @ 118

Scottfree @ 107

I’m with @83 – Joe for AG. Safe pick for Bush as Senate would let him thru and then Joe will not investigate

hmmm

whoever first came up with that idea pick is in my opinion, prescient

Is Joe even a lawyer? And. I would bet there is a very good possibility that Leahy would give him hell in committee. Could (and would be supported by his VT constituency for doing so–where Lieberman is well known and deeply hated) block such a nomination there. Leahy, because he has such an impeccable reputation for honesty and is well loved in VT, has the capacity to do things a Senator from a more “complicated” state (like NY) might not. I don’t think Schumer is crazy about him either, but will keep his mouth shut due to the local political situation in NY.

Hugh @ 117

Via Froomkin, apparently David Gregory’s children weren’t the only ones threatened at Bush’s presser yesterday.

“‘It’s a danger to your children, Jim,’ Bush informed the New York Times’ Jim Rutenberg.

“This last warning was perplexing, because Rutenberg has no children, only a brown chow chow named Little Bear. It was unclear whether Bush was referring to a specific and credible threat to Little Bear or merely indicating there was increased ‘chatter in the system’ about chow chows in general.”

Froomkin’s mocking, disrespectful attitude towards
the Office of the Presidency is simply scandalous.

Just in time for Deb to have something to write about
in next Sunday’s ombudsman’s column.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003301.php
Looks like Fitz has spoken

Woodhall Hollow @ 125

Is Joe even a lawyer?

he was ct ag

If Joe flips, the MSM will stop paying attention to him. He’s threatened to leave on many occasions, and hasn’t yet. I don’t believe he will, because in order to serve his master Bush well, he has to be a “Democrat”, so he can undermnine the party at will. If he becomes a Republican, it will look like he’s just spewing GOP talking points. It’s more effective for Bush and company to have Joey spew the GOP talking points as a Democrat.

Reid should call him on his bluff. But considering Reid just bent over again for the GOP on Iraq, that probably won’t happen.

Libby sentancing guideline
per TPM
Looks like Fitz has spoken

RGJoe was CT AG before he was elected to the Senate. Can’t see the Senate blocking another Senator, and if his nomination got outta JComm, the GOP — plus Landrieu, the Nelsons, Pryor and Lincoln — would confirm him easily.

JGabriel @ 114

.

Webb voted for that piece of crap bill?

That’s disappointing. I really thought he’d be one of the holdouts. Damn.

webb’s one of those ‘technical’ opponents: never opposed the war, per se, just the way it was conducted…

such legal niceties as ‘pre-emption/prevention’ never creased his smoooth, farking LIFER brows…

have I mentioned how much I loathe and despise ‘lifers’?

Thank you, egregious. Wanted Christy to know Senor Kurtz reads her blogs.

Woodhall Hollow @ 125

I don’t think Schumer is crazy about him either, but will keep his mouth shut due to the local political situation in NY.

“The local political situation in NY,” that’s a euphemism I haven’t heard before.

Woodhall Hollow @ 125

perris @ 118

hmmm

whoever first came up with that idea pick is in my opinion, prescient

Is Joe even a lawyer? And. I would bet there is a very good possibility that Leahy would give him hell in committee. Could (and would be supported by his VT constituency for doing so–where Lieberman is well known and deeply hated) block such a nomination there. Leahy, because he has such an impeccable reputation for honesty and is well loved in VT, has the capacity to do things a Senator from a more “complicated” state (like NY) might not. I don’t think Schumer is crazy about him either, but will keep his mouth shut due to the local political situation in NY.

IIRC, Joe was CT AG before winning the Senate seat from Weicker.

BTW: The temp here in the High ChiHuaHuan has dropped 20 degrees in 20 minutes…

weather folks reporting funnel clouds on the magdelena flats…

unsettled weather…

Alan @ 126, that quote is from Dana Milbank. Very funny.

Hugh @ 134

Woodhall Hollow @ 125

I don’t think Schumer is crazy about him either, but will keep his mouth shut due to the local political situation in NY.

“The local political situation in NY,” that’s a euphemism I haven’t heard before.

Trying to be delicate without being objectionable. But, there are certain unique factors on the ground here.

OfT:
Pam has John Edwards’ questionnaire from the Human Rights Campaign up with some great discussion as well.

If you read the history of his campaigns, lieberman has been the beneficiary of a LOT of ‘lapses’ in the Conn. GOP…

i have thought ever since he turned on the Clenis in ‘98 that he was really a stealth GOPuke operative–and not just a GOP mole, but a BUSH mole–in the highest councils of the Dumbo party…

given that the bush family political patrimony arises from the nazi-sympathizer, prescott bush’s tenure as CT Senator, i am surprised that nobody ever grilled him on it…
./

You know what? Lieberman doesn’t really bother me all that much anymore. Every time he threatens to leave the party, the Democratic spokesperson should just say, “That would be a huge blow to the Connecticut for Lieberman party.” We got the committee chairmanships and the subpoena power. Yes, he used us, but we’ve used him right back. And as soon as we don’t need him anymore, Harry can move all of the Connecticut for Lieberman desks up into the Senate gallery.

wgg: tokin liberal @ 132

JGabriel @ 114

.

Webb voted for that piece of crap bill?

That’s disappointing. I really thought he’d be one of the holdouts. Damn.

webb’s one of those ‘technical’ opponents: never opposed the war, per se, just the way it was conducted…

such legal niceties as ‘pre-emption/prevention’ never creased his smoooth, farking LIFER brows…

have I mentioned how much I loathe and despise ‘lifers’?

that’s not true, sir. He opposed the war before it started.
What’s a ‘lifer?

perris @ 128

Woodhall Hollow @ 125

Is Joe even a lawyer?

he was ct ag

TY – I kinda remembered that.
The possibility of Joe AG has been bothering me for a few weeks. The points about Leahy are good but maybe Senate decorum would get Joe thru

Wow, per Froomkin’s report of the NYT/CBS poll, Cheney is at THIRTEEN percent approval.

THIRTEEN

TeddySanFran @ 144

Wow, per Froomkin’s report of the NYT/CBS poll, Cheney is at THIRTEEN percent approval.

THIRTEEN

Unlucky number…

a ‘lifer’ is a term of opprobrium and obloquy by which the one-hitch soldier–such as i, proudly, was– describes the folks who re-up and re-up for the Corps…spend their lives in the military…

if webb had been an opponent of the war before he bdcame a suppoter of it, i’d be happy to change my opinion of him, to some degree…is there a site/link?

Scottfree @ 143

perris @ 128

he was ct ag

TY – I kinda remembered that.
The possibility of Joe AG has been bothering me for a few weeks. The points about Leahy are good but maybe Senate decorum would get Joe thru

My gut feeling is that Leahy would make a confirmation process as uncomfortable as possible for Joe. The guy is not grandstanding when he gets pissed (I have met him on a number of occasions and you couldn’t know a guy with a more moderate temperament). And he is serious about cleaning up the DOJ. There is no way he would let a slime bucket like Holy Joe go up there to obstruct that process.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 36

From me to Joe:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..mp;search=

Thanks for that link.

Guess this song is appropriate again….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..mp;search=

TeddySanFran @ 144

Wow, per Froomkin’s report of the NYT/CBS poll, Cheney is at THIRTEEN percent approval.

THIRTEEN

Must be his lucky number
who are those thirteen people?

TeddySanFran @ 144

Wow, per Froomkin’s report of the NYT/CBS poll, Cheney is at THIRTEEN percent approval.

THIRTEEN

That high? Amazing.

Hugh @ 151

That high? Amazing.

I’m not sure it’s all that astounding. Figure that by the time you get down to 13 percent, you’re probably getting into a hardcore base that includes malignant narcissists and people with railroad spikes lodged in their skulls.

I simply do not understand what prevents the House Dems from getting onboard with Kucinich’s impeachment motion for Cheney, and quickly executing it. Let the Senate (only good nowadays for stopping good bills) take its time with several article of impeachment of Darth.

Then, when they’ve disposed of that issue, send them articles on Gonzo.

Democrats. Let me know when you’re ready to “Rumble”. I’ll be around.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUHz0i8_ziA

Hugh @ 151

TeddySanFran @ 144

Wow, per Froomkin’s report of the NYT/CBS poll, Cheney is at THIRTEEN percent approval.

THIRTEEN

That high? Amazing.

Harry Whittington must be part of the 13. Maybe the others are afraid the veep will shoot them too.

Hugh @ 151

TeddySanFran @ 144

Wow, per Froomkin’s report of the NYT/CBS poll, Cheney is at THIRTEEN percent approval.

THIRTEEN

That high? Amazing.

All I can do is think of how John Stewart does that Cheney grimace & grunt and think, well yeah!

EvilDrPuma @ 152

Hugh @ 151

That high? Amazing.

I’m not sure it’s all that astounding. Figure that by the time you get down to 13 percent, you’re probably getting into a hardcore base that includes malignant narcissists and people with railroad spikes lodged in their skulls.

Cheney supporter

looseheadprop @ 122

nolo @ 113

slighly o/t, but not too,
and epu’d from prior libby thread:

i am uploading key parts,
in easily searchable, plain text, of
patrick fitzgerald’s sentencing
memorandum, in u.s. v. libby
right now, at the above link. . .

one juicy bit:

“. . .the law is entitled to every man’s
evidence. Inherent in this principle is the
obligation of a witness to tell the truth,
particularly under oath. . .“

i’ll be adding more of the 21 pages,
some partially redacted, as the afternoon
wears on. . .

keep it spinnin’ in good karma!

Something else I took off the Thisnk Prohess link

it is important that this court impose a sentence that accurately reflects the value the judicial system places on truth-telling in criminal investigations,” Fitzgerald wrote in court documents

The value the judical system places on truth telling Was this a little hint to Congress to show the “value Congress places on truth telling in COngressional investigations?”

I would be very interseted in knowing how much value Congress places on truth telling by witnesses before COngress. Enough value to meet out some harsh sentences of it’s own?

Just wonderin’s all.

DING!

i am just now re-reading the fitz memo,
and pulling new quotes to re-set in a
post about the implied messages for
mr. gonzales, and mr. rove, about
the firings. . . i guess great minds
do run along the same lines. . .

wgg: tokin liberal @ 146

a ‘lifer’ is a term of opprobrium and obloquy by which the one-hitch soldier–such as i, proudly, was– describes the folks who re-up and re-up for the Corps…spend their lives in the military…

if webb had been an opponent of the war before he bdcame a suppoter of it, i’d be happy to change my opinion of him, to some degree…is there a site/link?

WaPo Sept. 4, 2002
http://www.jameswebb.com/artic…..rouble.htm

Pretty much describes my mood at my party.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..mp;search=

…..weeeelll, shrub could always make Joe AG :P He’s probably the only person in DC who isn’t presently in the administration or laboring under suspicion of committing felonies that’ll be as accommodating as Abu.

btw, anyone else think that shrub is going to try at lesat one non-recess “recess” appoint on Memorial Day?

(raising hand) I think so, Blub.

can we just let this guy go so we don’t have to talk about him anymore?

seriously? I mean, who gives a crap what a foul-tempered, childlish little man like Joe Lieberman thinks? If he hates Democrats so much LET HIM GO. Hell SHOW HIM THE DOOR. It’s fine.

Loved seeing all those “Bush wins on war funding” headlines today while walking downtown. Great job, Democrats! Now I remember why people think you all suck!

tokin liberal,

a ‘lifer’ is a term of opprobrium and obloquy by which the one-hitch soldier–such as i, proudly, was– describes the folks who re-up and re-up for the Corps…spend their lives in the military…

but why the opprobrium, etc? I’m far from a fan of the military but it does seem to me that there are some honorable ‘lifers,’ like Webb. I don’t know what the hell is up with his Iraq votes but everything I saw during the election made me confident of his integrity. Just wish I could get him on the phone instead of some half-witted staff kid.

“tokin.” Hmmmmm…….I JUST got that……duh…

Blub @ 161

btw, anyone else think that shrub is going to try at lesat one non-recess “recess” appoint on Memorial Day?

Does a fish shit in the water?

JGabriel @ 165

Does a fish shit in the water?

As surely as Bush shits on America.

Wow. Ole Howie is on a roll today. Not only did he include an excellent quote by Christy in his column today, he finished up with a funny one:

After all that? The New York Post says Paul Wolfowitz has lost his gal pal, Shaha Riza:

“Sources say Riza, a brilliant feminist with a promising diplomatic career, was upset by all the publicity and the implication that she was getting ahead with the help of a powerful man. ‘She was furious about the embarrassment,’ said one source.”

Women! He gets her the big raise, and then she dumps him.

As I responded to Kos’ post on Liebermonster:

Strip him of his committee seats IMMEDIATELY and get them out of Rove’s hands.

Rove funded Lieberman’s run against Lamont after the primary for several reasons.

One of them was the political calculus that the vote would be this tight and Joe could be the spoiler, caucusing with Repugs.

But one of the other key reasons was that Lieberman’s Chairmanship of the Senate equivalent of House Oversight Committee (the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee) would bottleneck investigations into Republican wrong-doing. And presto, we see Waxman on the House side going like a barn burner while useless, flaccid slacker Lieberman sits on his thumbs as he was paid to by Rove and the RNC.

Joe also serves on these:
– member, Environment and Public Works Committee
– chair, Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands and Private Property
– member, Senate Armed Services Committee,
– Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Air Land Forces
– member, Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities
– member, Small Business Committee.

You can imagine the damage he is doing to each one of these.

Joe is NOT a Democrat, violated Democratic Party principles and screwed with democratic (little d) processes when he rejected the will of the Democratic Party in CT. He is not owed those committee seats since he is not a Democratic Party member in good standing. I’d rather give them to Bernie Sanders if they were to be given to an independent since Sanders has a longer tenure as a representative of that party.

Quit f*cking around with this bonehead and put the screws to him. Yank the committee seats NOW.

Donita is spinning upstairs

Hey Firepups:

Check out Senator Dodd’s statement on the future of the Iraq debate. I think you’ll like it — it’s an informal video statement that he wanted to be sure the netroots saw today, when we’re all disappointed at the outcome of last nights vote.

Disclosure: I proudly work for Senator Chris Dodd’s presidential campaign.

Liberman gets a lot more attention and press than his stature deserves- a midget among men.

Got an email from Boxer’s server earlier today, “Why I voted No”. (because ending the war is so important). So, Ms. Boxer, let me explain to you the consequences of what you did in CT… and why I don’t trust you…

I like Dodd.

oddmommy @ 164 Re: Webb, from the WaPo article
“And it is crucial that our national leaders consider the impact of this proposed action on our long-term ability to deter aggression elsewhere.

that’s what i call a technical, tactical decision…general batiste on Amy now is saying “I’m not against war. I’m not with Move-On…” echoes this position…”

they don’t want the war to end, they want to win it!

as to the “lifer” label:
seen from the inside, from the position of a soldier who’s only gonna hang around long enough to get a good discharge, a ‘lifer’ is a fuukin tool, who’s in it for the bennies, the retirement, the inflexibility (never need to wonder what to wear to work, how to wear your hair, how to make your bunk)
.

I think cspan 2 is near the end of the Conyers Goodling hearings, which means the dems are coming up in 10 minutes, for 15. You won’t want to miss the last 5.

To strip LIEberman of his assignments would require someone with cajones. And Reid and the rest of the Dems just proved by caving in to George W(orse President Ever) Bush that they ain’t got none.

Judy Woodruff, using Chris Cilliza to review the two new books on Clinton. He goes immediately to the most salacious, she expresses surprise that it’s not more, and describes the authors as reputable reporters. These people may move me to support the woman as a victim. Oh, and AMEN.

Hey all, just catching up again. Funny this Lie-man post should appear right after listening to Gloria Gaynor “I will survive” at full blast.

“all right now, go, walk out the door. Just turn around now, cuz you’re not welcome anymore.”

“You’d think I’d crumble, you’d think I’d lay down and die?”

We will survive without HoJo.

Have a great Memorial Day weekend, firepups. Outta here.

Oh, PS. When I was lucky enough to find FDL I chose my FDL handle in honor of Joe-Lieman himself and the fickleness of politics. Cheers!

Now in the last 10 minutes of Goodling’s testimony as the Dems wrap up. Compelling.

wgg: tokin liberal @ 22

I think NoMoJo, the Ho’, is positioning himself for a run–with McCain, if Ghouliani wins the GOPuke nomination (as i think likely), or with Ghouliani, if McCain wins–on the Unity ‘08 party…
.

I don’t think any candidate would be dumb enough to pick Joe as a running mate. Too much disgust for him on both sides.

TeddySanFran @ 32

Aren’t the Committee Chairs specified by name in this Senate’s organizing resolution, or operating agreement? This was the reason why the Democrats got a “no-redo” clause if the majority changed.

That’s my memory, too. So I think we’re stuck with him. But that doesn’t mean that we need to pay attention to him.

Bob in HI

Which means that even if Senate Dems throw RGJoe outta their caucus he remains chairman of his tea-party. That alternate Dem/GOP seating rearrangement is the absolutely perfect metaphor for the banality of Lieberman’s evil.

oh, and A-fuckin-MEN!!

Things Come Undone @ 62

If Harry Reid can’t handle Joe then we need a new Senate Majority Leader!

I agree with you, however, I think we need a new leader for other reasons as well. Reid is weak and has buckled several times and does not appear to have enough sway with moderate DEMs. We need some muscle and some conviction. Reid does not appear to have either. I would love to see Feingold as leader. He has courageous convictions and is articulate, but there are others like Dorgen, Levin, Leahy, Boxer, that would also be better than Reid.

xargaw @ 183

Things Come Undone @ 62

If Harry Reid can’t handle Joe then we need a new Senate Majority Leader!

I agree with you, however, I think we need a new leader for other reasons as well. Reid is weak and has buckled several times and does not appear to have enough sway with moderate DEMs. We need some muscle and some conviction. Reid does not appear to have either. I would love to see Feingold as leader. He has courageous convictions and is articulate, but there are others like Dorgen, Levin, Leahy, Boxer, that would also be better than Reid.

me too

xargaw @ 181

wgg: tokin liberal @ 22

I think NoMoJo, the Ho’, is positioning himself for a run–with McCain, if Ghouliani wins the GOPuke nomination (as i think likely), or with Ghouliani, if McCain wins–on the Unity ‘08 party…
.

I don’t think any candidate would be dumb enough to pick Joe as a running mate. Too much disgust for him on both sides.

Why, that sounds perfect for McCain!

Ghostman @ 74

2. The only thing I can figure is, maybe back in the Fall, 2006 Harry and Joe made a deal. “Joe, if you win in November, and promise to caucus with the Democrats, I’ll leave you alone.” It was a handshake deal….nothing in writing. Who knows.

This is what I was thinking.

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 103

ThinkProgress: Bush Ignored Senate’s Pre-War Intelligence Warning of Post-War Fiasco

Link to Senate’s Select Committee’s Intelligence Report: http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/prewar.pdf

(229 page .pdf file)

Thanks! There sure hasn’t been much news about this. And did they release it today for a reason? Is this just a rehash of stuff already known?

Bob in HI

Jane Hamsher @ 120

emptywheel has landed.

The trouble starts now….

GO EMPTYWHEEL GO!!! [big grin]

Bob in HI

Given the fortunate circumstance that he can’t flip control of the senate, and the fact that he votes Republican (or worse) on every bill anyway, the only effect of switching him switching parties would be to lose his committee chairmanship, which also doesn’t matter since he’s not doing anything he promised to do (like investigate Katrina) anyway.

Lieberman is an irrelevant lame duck blowhard no matter how you slice it.

I am so sick of Joe Limberdick and his threats that I really wish Harry Reid would show some real courage and simply strip this asho&$ of his committee assignments and let him suck up to his “buddies” the repugs. Maybe in 2012 the Good folks in Connecticut will see this jerk for what he is and send someone genuine to the Senate.

Valley Girl @ 172

Got an email from Boxer’s server earlier today, “Why I voted No”. (because ending the war is so important). So, Ms. Boxer, let me explain to you the consequences of what you did in CT… and why I don’t trust you…

Ding!

Wigwam @ 20

I’m still trying to understand yesterday’s vote. The bill was not in danger of being defeated, so even senators who believed in the bill could do themselves a favor by siding with the American People and voting against this unpopular president and his unpopular war. But they didn’t avail themselves of this free opportunity. Why???

Obviously, they are afraid of something and it’s not the voters. And I believe that even the press would have treated them kindly. So, what is it? What force has sufficient clout to make 40 Democratic senators snivel and vote against the expressed will of their constituents? Whom do they serve?

Wigwam – Excellent question. My suspicion (in line with Jim @ 58’s coded message) is growing that the A*P*C Likud Lobby is very much a force here. Lieberman’s not the only one in the Senate and House dancing to their tune.

Pelosi and Obey voted against the stay-in-Iraq bill, after apparently feeling forced to bring it to the floor. Reid and Levin and Durbin voted for it in the Senate. Levin had already been offering to capitulate to Bush by offering a bill with a voluntary drawdown timeline before the final negotiations and subsequent capitulation even took place. It seems pretty likely that the Senate leadership ended up calling most of the shots in conference.

The final conference report included Levin’s pal (and Armed Services colleague) John Warner’s “weak tea” amendment language, which almost makes me think that Warner was covering for Levin (and A*P*C), because Levin pulled his own voluntary timeline amendment the day the Warner amendment materialized.

I think it’s more than a happenstance that Jim Webb went out of his way to mention Lieberman by name in his statement, after making clear that Webb’s efforts to include binding language in the conference report were resisted and rejected by the “leadership.” Webb may be giving us a loud hint. [And if the Senate “leadership” can’t or won’t take seriously Jim Webb’s advice on a topic like this, something is very wrong in Denmark…]

If the leaders of the Senate are in fact following A*P*C’s orders, they’d far prefer that we think them cowards and fools (or that it’s all Lieberman’s fault), than that we recognize them for what they are actually effectively being: foreign agents acting against the best interests of the United States…

Here’s Carl Levin on the Senate floor yesterday (in part):

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I continue to believe that Congress must act to change course in Iraq because the Bush administration will not. Congress needs to force the Iraqi political leaders to accept responsibility for their country’s future. Four years of painful history have shown that the only way to accomplish that goal is to write into law a requirement that we reduce the number of U.S. troops in Iraq beginning in 120 days. That amount of time would give the Iraqi leaders the time to make the political settlements that are the only hope of ending the sectarian fighting.

Setting that beginning point would also force the Iraqi leaders to face the reality that we will not be their endless security blanket. That approach got 51 votes in the Senate on March 29. It was sent to the President. The President vetoed it. But pressure continues to build for a change in course, even in the President’s party.

We will renew the effort to force a change in course in June when we take up the Defense authorization bill currently scheduled for late June. The way we will do that is we will make and renew the effort to require the President to begin reducing American troops in Iraq within 120 days.

I voted against the authorization to attack Iraq 4 years ago, and I will continue to fight for a bill that forces the President to do the one thing which will successfully change course in Iraq. Reducing our presence starting in 120 days is a way of telling the Iraqi leaders that we cannot save them from themselves and that only they can make the decision as to whether they want an all-out civil war or they want a nation.

That’s the “explanation” for the quagmire in Iraq from the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. For a different perspective that makes Levin’s remarks look beyond foolish and misleading, I can’t recommend this article about Iraq enough:

http://www.alternet.org/story/52135/

P.S. Chuck Schumer was at his daughter’s college graduation, but he stated for the record that he too would have voted for the stay-in-Iraq bill if present.

Limpdick seems to have the same viral disease McCain does. I really wish the guy would just f*ching leave the party; he belongs in McCain’s camp along with the likes of Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rice, etc.

Don’t believe Joe

February 22, 2007
Lieberman Switch Wouldn’t Flip Senate
With Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) publicly stating he’d consider becoming a Republican if Democrats block new funding for the Iraq War, many Democrats worry that control of the Senate hangs in the balance. However, their fears are unfounded. Many think back to 2001 when former Sen. Jim Jeffords (I-VT) began caucusing with Democrats instead of Republicans, taking control of the Senate out of GOP hands. However, the two situations – though outwardly similar – contain one important difference.

If Lieberman were to caucus with the Republicans, they would still not take full control of the Senate, despite Vice President Dick Cheney’s ability to break 50-50 ties. This is because of a little-known Senate organizing resolution, passed in January, which gives Democrats control of the Senate and committee chairmanships until the beginning of the 111th Congress.

What’s the difference between now and 2001? A small but important distinction. When the 107th Congress was convened on January 3, 2001, Al Gore was still the Vice President and would be for another two-and-a-half weeks. Therefore, because of the Senate’s 50-50 tie, Democrats had nominal control of the chamber when the organizing resolution came to a vote. With Dick Cheney soon to come in, however, Democrats allowed Republicans to control the Senate in return for a provision on the organizing resolution that allowed for a reorganization of the chamber if any member should switch parties, which Jeffords did five months later. There was no such clause in the current Senate’s organizing resolution.

TeddySanFran @ 32

Aren’t the Committee Chairs specified by name in this Senate’s organizing resolution, or operating agreement? This was the reason why the Democrats got a “no-redo” clause if the majority changed.

Which means that even if Senate Dems throw RGJoe outta their caucus he remains chairman of his tea-party. That alternate Dem/GOP seating rearrangement is the absolutely perfect metaphor for the banality of Lieberman’s evil.

oh, and A-fuckin-MEN!!

I got EPU’d the other day when I tried to reply to your comment pointing out my ignorance of these Senate Rules. With all due respect to your superior knowledge, I think that if the laws of the United States aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on to these Rethugs and RGJoe, then why on earth would a Senate rule stand in their way? Who would prevent them from taking over the Senate? Abu? The Supreme Court? You see my point.