Reply With QuoteLieberman fits best there anyway. While he supported McCain, he really is a liberal in every way except when it comes to war in the Middle East.
High Level of Addiction
Obama walks post-partisan talk
As much as I disagree with it, I'm also kind of impressed - word is that Obama is telling Reid & other Senate colleagues to keep Lieberman in the Dem caucus.
You would think he'd be the most interested in seeing Lieberman dangle & twist in the wind. It's a good sign that he's practical, and not vindictive. "No drama Obama," as they say...
New Nicotine Free Version
JPP Staff
Lieberman fits best there anyway. While he supported McCain, he really is a liberal in every way except when it comes to war in the Middle East.
Excellence is an art won by training and habituation. We do not act rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but rather we have those because we have acted rightly. We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.
- -- Aristotle
Believe nothing on the faith of traditions, even though they have been held in honor for many generations and in diverse places. Do not believe a thing because many people speak of it. Do not believe on the faith of the sages of the past. Do not believe what you yourself have imagined, persuading yourself that a God inspires you. Believe nothing on the sole authority of your masters and priests. After examination, believe what you yourself have tested and found to be reasonable, and conform your conduct thereto.
- -- The Buddha
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
- -- Aristotle
The Almighty
Not to mention that Obama understands that he is close to 60 in the Senate... so why piss off someone that could help him out on most issues. That said, I do agree that he could easily have gone the other way and been vindictive. So plus one for Obama.
Quote from Cypress:
"Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.
They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "
Insane Level of Addiction
I don't mean to be cynical but besides revenge what good would it do the Democrats to push a guy towards the Republican cacus who essentially votes with them (the Dems) on most issues?
Verified User
Absolutely right, and so Obama can look magnanamous while remaining merely pragmatic.Originally Posted by cawacko
Banned
i disagree with this decision, if he is going to be allowed to keep powerful committee chairmanships. and the reason why is; he would be benefitting greatly from a democratic majority which he actively worked against. he didn't just campaign for mccain, and against obama ( in the most despicable way), but he also campaigned against democrats gaining senate seats. so he is to be rewarded for the work of others???
the work of people like, say, Hillary Clinton?? How many dems has hillary worked to gain seats for?? and what is she getting?? she did more than any man ever, has ever done, for their opponent, once they lost. and what is she getting???
it's bullshit.
Villified User
Yes it is BS Darla, but that is politics.
Politics is a parasite living off of our government.
High Level of Addiction
Unless I heard wrong, he's still going to lose the chairmanship. Obama is saying he should still be able to caucus w/ the Dems.
Insane Level of Addiction
JPP Contributor
It represents a change no matter the motivation. Bush would have seen to it the guy was twisting in the wind.
4,487
18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
44 U.S.C. 2202 - The United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records; and such records shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
LOCK HIM UP!
Insane Level of Addiction
Really? Was he ever put in that situation? I don't think he was.
Somehow when this decision was being made I doubt "change" was the driving force behind it.
High Level of Addiction
C'mon - it represents a completely different tone, if that's how he's going to run things.
Bush/Rove was all about "you're either with us or against us." Loyalty was rewarded, dissent was basically treated as betrayal. Clinton was basically the same way.
Seriously - in the past, a guy like Lieberman would be a total exile. I understand the practical reasons for Obama's stance, but it's still a surprise.
Insane Level of Addiction
Fair enough. I see the difference.
Abreast of the situations
Lieberman is to important for obama. He has A LOT of connections.
Q: Senator Obama, would you take the same pledge? No tax increases on people under $250,000?
OBAMA: I not only have pledged not to raise their taxes, I've been the first candidate in this race to specifically say I would cut their taxes.
High Level of Addiction
I wouldn't stretch it. He's pretty damaged goods in the Senate right now.
He's a vote; that's about it, but with the Dems flirting w/ a 60-seat majority still, that's important.
Banned
if he loses the chairmanship, then that's fine. but i don't think so onceler, because he has said he won't "tolerate" that. that means if the dems want him to caucus with them, they'll have to let him keep it.
Posting Rules
Bookmarks