Posted on 11/10/2006 10:41:25 AM PST by truthandlife
Sen. Joe Lieberman, who won re-election as an independent, has a message for his Senate colleagues in the next Congress: Call me a Democrat.
The three-term Connecticut lawmaker defied party leaders when he launched his independent bid after losing to Democrat Ned Lamont in the August primary. During the campaign, he vowed to be an "independent-minded Democrat" if he were re-elected. In Tuesday's election, Lieberman won strong GOP support and given the closely divided Senate, Republicans are expected to court him.
So will he count as a Democrat or an independent who caucuses with the majority Democrats? In an e-mail message late Thursday, Lieberman spokesman Dan Gerstein said the senator will begin his new term as a Democrat.
With the Democratic takeover of the Senate, Lieberman is in line to become chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
In a post-election news conference, Lieberman said he was reassured by Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid that he would retain his seniority when the new Senate convenes.
I gave NO money to Lieberman, btw...
But don't think he is not ticked off at the lack of Democrat support for his reelection campaign.
He will do what others have done in the past. He will vote with the Democrats in every case where they do not need his vote to prevail. He will mostly vote against them when they do need his vote.
He will have a high liberal rating from ACLU but he will not be their for the Democrats when they really need him.
Right now he wants the chairmanship of a senate committee. He is very pro Democrat. Once the session starts his voting record will show how he is teaching the Democrats a lesson for not supporting him when he needed their support.
Actually I would have felt better.
Karl Rove had a number of prominent Bush fundraisers, like Tony Kuhn, raise insane amounts of money on behalf of Lieberman. Take a minute and imagine what could have happened if they had been raising money for Talent, Allen or Burns --- or even Lincoln Chafee.
Let me clarify.
I was thinking that supporting Lieberman might not
have helped at all.
Lieberman isn't ticked off at anyone, except maybe at Democrat idiot primary voters. The Democrat Party supported Lamont because it is virtually impossible NOT to support the guy who wins your primary and still have a political career. But there was no there there. The Democrat leaders -- with the exception of Hojo Dean -- were all rooting for Lieberman, and none lifted a finger to help Lamont.
Whatever. In a perfect world, that would work out very nicely. I vote GOP 99% of the time. This was one of those very rare exceptions. We couldn't take the chance of splitting the vote in a risky three-way race, and ending up with Lamont.
Other than Lieberman in this election, I voted straight Republican.
Empowering the likes of Red Ned Lamont would do far more damage to this country - especially in a time of war - than a Senator Lieberman would, IMHO.
As MadIvan has pointed out... Leiberman may be a liberal but he is not a traitor.
rather have hawkish dems like Lieberman, than rino's like Chaffee.....
wouldn't you?
he probably wants to run for President again as a Dem, and he will use his victory as proof he can reach the moderates that would never go for Hillary
I told you I disagree with any money Rove may have sent to the 'RATs. I wish they HAD put more $$ into our GOP races (Talent, Allen, Steele Burns, Chafee, etc.). I have no argument with that.
I'm not "happy" - but I am relieved - that Lieberman won the race over Lamont.
I really hope Alan Schlesinger considers a run against Chris Dodd. If it's the typical Democrat vs GOP candidate race, I'll definitely vote for the GOP candidate, as I usually do.
Exactly. And MadIvan is one of the wisest FReepers I know. I really mean that. :o)
If Lieberman had won the primary, who would those folks have supported? The GOP candidate?
I realize I didn't answer your question properly in my previous post to you.
If Lieberman had won the primary, he probably would have had Jesse Jackson's support... possibly Al Sharpton's. But Soros, Moveon.org, Code Pink, Daily Kos, DU, Cindy Sheehan...? No way... they would've protested Joe big time (because of his "pro-war" stance), and probably just moved on to another state to support their far-far-left anti-war, Bush-hating candidate...
Actually I would have felt better.
You would feel better today - in this time of war - with George Soros' bought-and-paid-for candidate Ned Lamont as our United States Senator for Connecticut. Unbelievable.
Well said, the talking head "Conservatives" in this state are saying Republicans gave the senate to the Dems by voting for Joe, that's simply ridiculous. The choice was simple, vote for Schlesinger and Lamoonbat wins.
I was never under any illusions Lieberman was a liberal Dem but he's strong on defense. Lamoonbat would put our troops in jeopardy.
Well, given that Al Gore's running mate Joe Loserman and Red Ned Demented AGREE on roughly 95% of the issues, it's hard to see why you Loserman apologists seem to think Loserman is "five times better" because of ONE vote he cast on Iraq. What exactly has Loserman done "five times betteR"? Even his "pro-WOT" record has been wimpy.
You guys can continue to swoon about how great it is that Conn. has a Senator who is "only" 90% liberal instead of 95% liberal, but the rest of us don't give a RATs ass that Loserman is the "better Democrat" since the only thing he "delivered" is Rummy's resignation and Majority Leader Reid.
If Republicans had ABANDONED Loserman and INSTEAD worked their butts off to elect JIM TALENT, CONRAD BURNS, GEORGE ALLEN, and MICHAEL STEELE, I'd feel pretty damn good about a 53-47 Senate with Senators Talent, Burns, Allen, Steele, and yes, Senator Lamont. Those races were won or lost with 1% of the vote, votes that could have easily been gained if the GOP had not wasted so much time and effort to prop up Loserman.
Well, YOU feel better with Al Gore's bought-and-paid-for-running-mate Joe Loserman -- the man who argued shamelessly to throw out thousands of overseas millitary votes -- as our "ally" on the WOT. The voters elected a 49DEM-49REP Senate, it is YOUR alledged "Indepenedant" candidate who is breaking that tie and DELIVERING the Senate to Reid. And you feel better about that. If you hadn't loyally kissed the @$$ of Gore's running mate and INSTEAD volunteered for someone like Talent, Burns, Allen, or Steele, we'd have a majority now, but instead, your guy is going put people like Ted Kennedy in charge, and YOU feel better about that.
Unbelieveable.
Republicans are always happy to bend over for a Dem. It "proves" that they aren't "partisan" or "extremists." And of course the Dems are always happy to go right ahead . . . um . . . "servicing" them by continuing with the same old "partisan" and "extremist" smears and refusing to compromise on their own agenda.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.