« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Moderation and Bipartisanship, Democrat-Style

You Will No Longer Be Necessary

One of the convenient campaign-season fictions of the Democrats, especially the Obama camp, is that somehow “change” and “new politics” will lead us to an era of post-partisan sensible centrism. Here’s another little glimpse of the reality: John McCain and Joe Lieberman have a lot in common. Both have been party-line voters for some parts of their party’s agenda, but both have also frequently been a public thorn in the side of their party for their deviations on issues as well as their willingness to open fire on their own side. How are they being treated?

On the Republican side, we’re running McCain for President.

On the Democrat side, having already had a primary campaign to eject Lieberman from the party in 2006, Harry Reid is now moving to strip him of a chairmanship, but wants to keep him around in the caucus just for his vote:

Lieberman, a former Democrat who supports Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for president, is likely to lose his gavel on the Homeland Security Committee he has chaired since January 2007, say the sources who see him being replaced by Sen. Daniel Akaka (Hawaii), the committee’s third-ranking Democrat…

One Democratic source said Lieberman is not likely to lose his position in the Democratic caucus, even if the party picks up several seats in next week’s election. While Democrats could approach or exceed the filibuster-proof threshold of 60 votes, they may still need Lieberman’s vote often.

“There’s no sense in cutting off our nose to spite our face,” one source said.

Way to reassure moderate swing voters 6 days before the election what bipartisanship will look like under Obama, guys.

COMMENTS

  • crossbuck

    Frankly, I think an ad pointing out that what Obama is saying now doesn’t square with his voting record.

    Obama voted to raise taxes on people making $42K.

    Obama voted to deny gun rights.

    Obama voted to deny medical care to infants that survive abortion.

    Etc. “Lying to you about his record” would hit harder than “Not ready to lead”.

  • crossbuck

    Frankly, I think an ad pointing out that what Obama is saying now doesn’t square with his voting record would have more impact.

    Obama voted to raise taxes on people making $42K.

    Obama voted to deny gun rights.

    Obama voted to deny medical care to infants that survive abortion.

    Etc. “Lying to you about his record” would hit harder than “Not ready to lead”.

  • socallib

    what this has to bipartisanship. Distribution of chairmanships is always a partisan matter – whoever’s in the majority gets to decide them. By his own account he’s not a Democrat, so he has no right to a chairmanship and, for better or worse, Reid has no incentive to allow Lieberman to keep his prerogatives after what was seen as a betrayal of his former party. What do you think the GOP leadership would have done if Jeffords had tried to slink back to the GOP after his apostasy – and had actively campaigned for John Kerry?

    • wt259

      why not strip him of the chairmanship when he didn’t follow party rules and fall over and die when the dems ran another empty suit against him? Because the dems didn’t want to get one more vote further away from 60? Or, did Reid base his decision on principle, that Joe was the Chair, so I’ll let him continue to be the chair? Sorry, laughing so hard at that thought I can’t see the screen. Reid? principles? It is too laugh….out loud and hard.