Lieberman Threatens To Vote Against Cloture On Final Passage

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Oct 27, 2009 at 14:15


He's with us on everything except the war:

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) said Tuesday that he'd back a GOP filibuster of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's health care reform bill.(...)

Lieberman did say he's "strongly inclined" to vote to proceed to the debate, but that he'll ultimately vote to block a floor vote on the bill if it isn't changed first.

"I've told Sen. Reid that if the bill stays as it is now I will vote against cloture," he said.

"I can't see a way in which I could vote for cloture on any bill that contained a creation of a government-operated-run insurance company," Lieberman added. "It's just asking for trouble - in the end, the taxpayers are going to pay and probably all people will have health insurance are going to see their premiums go up because there's going to be cost shifting as there has been for Medicare and Medicaid."

One of the main criticisms progressives had of Lieberman leading up to the 2006 primary was that he often joined with Republicans on prominent issues (Clinton impeachment, Iraq war) in order to garner huge media attention for himself. Again, that pattern holds.

Lieberman works to undermine Democrats on major issues in order to increase his personal media profile.  It is a good thing we did whatever it takes to keep someone like that in the Democratic caucus.

Update: I completely agree with the commenters who say that Reid should call this bluff. Let's see Lieberman actually casts a vote against sending this bill to conference committee, or against final passage afterward. And then, if he does, let's see what happens back in Connecticut.

Update 2: To clarify, it appears Lieberman is threatening to vote for cloture on the motion to proceed with the floor debate, but against the vote for cloture on final passage. TPMDC:

"I told Senator Reid that I'm strongly inclined--i haven't totally decided, but I'm strongly inclined--to vote to proceed to the health care debate, even though I don't support the bill that he's bringing together because it's important that we start the debate on health care reform because I want to vote for health care reform this year. But I also told him that if the bill remains what it is now, I will not be able to support a cloture motion before final passage. Therefore I will try to stop the passage of the bill."

Looks like Lieberman is making one final push to become President.

Update 3: Lieberman pledged support for universal health care back in 2006 debate:


Liar.
Chris Bowers :: Lieberman Threatens To Vote Against Cloture On Final Passage

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Lieberman Threatens To Vote Against Cloture On Final Passage | 82 comments
Chris (0.00 / 0)
I thought you said that it was Lincoln and Nelson left?

Also: what about his chairmanship? Is this for real or just a last ditch effort for attention.

That is what I had heard (4.00 / 3)
Lieberman was supposed to be solid. Looks like he is just fucking everyone for revenge.
[ Parent ]
revenge for what? Lamont? (0.00 / 0)
He's gotten everything he's ever wanted other than that.
[ Parent ]
Revenge against us (4.00 / 1)
Not revenge against the party, but revenge against the netroots.

Or just general asshattery. Either way.

[ Parent ]
Revenge For Not Making Him President (4.00 / 5)
He attacked Clinton when he was down, and in a failed attempt to assuage Versailles, Gore picked him as VP.  So in 2004, Lieberman figured it was his right to be President.  Only the party voters didn't think so.  And the then the party voters in CT didn't even think he should be a senator anymore.  So basically, he wants revenge on everyone who was ever fool enough to support him in the past.

He is the very model of a modern malignant narcissist.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
A real slap to Harry Reid..?. (4.00 / 2)
Harry threw the party over the side to bring Joe in after Joe created havoc to the party.
Obama sided with Joe too.

Will Reid dump Joe now??  Of course not.
Will Obama shoot a low ball to Joe's groin?  Of course not.

They've both empowered the little fucker.

If I were stranded on desert isle with those three, I would instantly throw myself into the shredded and gaping maw of the first passing shark.


Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.

[ Parent ]
Screw it. (4.00 / 4)
Medicare +5% it is, and through reconciliation it will be.  

Or at least that would be my response if I were Reid, along with kicking HoJoe out of the caucus.

Probably doesn't work (4.00 / 2)
Medicare+5% doesn't have 50 votes in the Senate, and reconciliation comes at a price.

Still, I'm all for playing a game of chicken with Droopy Dog.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!

[ Parent ]
Make Him Do It (4.00 / 16)
Personally, I don't believe him.  But I'd love for the Democrats to turn on him completely, so if he is going to do it, make him do it for real, then kick him out of the caucus.

This is the only reason he is allowed to caucus with the Democrats.  If he can't allow Obama's #1 priority an up or down vote he serves no Democratic purpose whatsoever.

Same for all of them (4.00 / 1)
Same holds for all Democrats who actually filibuster the seminal domestic legislation of our generation. Out of the caucus and no more institutional party support.

"Don't take much, does it, elected Democrats, to get your balls tucked up." Cf.
[ Parent ]
Actually, I kinda like that he's making an ass of himself (4.00 / 1)
I'm sure it's killing his approval ratings, it reinforces the liberal case against him and it'll make beating him in 2012 all that much easier (assuming he even runs again).

Of course, if he ends up being the one responsible for the end of the PO that's a different story.

[ Parent ]
I have to think this isn't a surprise to Schumer... (0.00 / 0)
Rockefeller and Reid, and have a budget reconciliation plan B,.... right?


John McCain won't insure children
"The War On Democrats" That Is (0.00 / 0)
Don't forget how he did his damnedest to damage Bill Clinton when he was down.  Holy Joe could give lessons to Benedict Arnold.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3
Here's what I don't get (0.00 / 0)
he claims that he's talked to Reid about this in the politico article linked.  Yet, if that is the case, why the hell did Reid go and make an ass of himself saying he had the votes when he doesn't, apparently.  

Blindsiding leadership like this is pretty inexcusable.

To smoke them out (0.00 / 0)
The public is going to have a much clearer picture of where everyone stands now.  
[ Parent ]
so Reid can claim that he did everything he could (4.00 / 2)
for the PO and that it's not his fault that it will have be removed from the bill.
[ Parent ]
Reid didn't make an ass of himself... (4.00 / 4)
Rather, it's Loserman doing that to himself! Last week I spoke with Reid's Las Vegas office, and they said he was still planning the path to passage... And suggesting that he's open to reconciliation. I just hope Reid calls Holy Joe's bluff and makes him filibuster and open up the reconciliation can of worms.

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.
[ Parent ]
When did he tell Reid (4.00 / 3)
It's possible that Lieberman didn't tell Reid until 15 minutes before Lieberman started strutting in front of the press.
[ Parent ]
Reid never said he had the votes (0.00 / 0)
I remember all the news accounts saying that he pointedly declined to say how many votes he had.

IMO, I think Harry Reid deserves quite a bit of credit on this.  Maybe it's because our expectations for him have sunk so low, but he's really surpassed them.

[ Parent ]
i love how he is threatening to single-handedly (4.00 / 9)
defeat the single biggest piece of domestic legislation in a generation on a procedural vote.  let's all take a moment to let that sink in.
the Democrats and Obama had their chance (4.00 / 6)
to discipline Lieberman early on, especially after he campaigned for McCain.

Now baby's all grown up, it's a bit late in the day to teach him manners.

He has his committee chairs, and I don't think he's under any illusions that he'll be reelected in 2012. So he might as well have fun while he waits for that cushy lobbyist job to be prepared for him.

Punishing Lieberman would have made us feel better (0.00 / 0)
about ourselves, but it wouldn't be helping pass healthcare as we'd still be chasing his vote regardless on what side of the aisle he's on.

In fact, it would probably make Democrats look even worse because he were are begging for the vote of someone we kicked out of the caucus.  

[ Parent ]
Whereas now (4.00 / 3)
the Dems are begging for the vote of someone who kicked them in the teeth.

6 o' one, half dozen o' the other.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
It's obnoxous to presume that (0.00 / 0)
the people you disagree with are driven by emotion rather than a different view of strategy. If you are under the impression that sanctions never work - that's an odd position to take. But the rest of us are not under that impression. It works routinely in the US Senate when employed by Republicans.

If Democrats used sanctions against their own members who undermined the caucus in important moments, it would happen less - not just by the sanctioned individual, but also by others that might consider it (Joe isn't the only one who does).

Nothing makes the Democrats look worse than when they act weak and unprincipled. They are pushing popular programs to deal with a goal shared by most Americans. They shouldn't be begging for anything. No one fears that seeking to water down HCR will lead to sanctions (except possibly from the netroots.) If they did, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Support a Pennsylvania Progressive for Governor - Joe Hoeffel

[ Parent ]
No? (0.00 / 0)
In the past whenever sanctions were put on Democrats in Congress, they became Republicans.

So let's not sit here and pretend that somehow punishing Democrats will get them on our side. I didn't work for LBJ, he had to water down his legislations to get Republicans to vote for them, and it won't work now.  

[ Parent ]
Is it possible, given all the anonymous sourcing (4.00 / 3)
that Obama favors triggers, that Lieberman is acting at the behest of the WH and not in defiance of the WH?

John McCain won't insure children
It would make sense if Lieberman were demanding triggers (0.00 / 0)
instead, he's demanding that the public option be stripped.  
[ Parent ]
but consider--the WH can't openly demand (4.00 / 4)
that the PO be stripped, not even in private. Word would surely get out and cause a revolt.

As long as Obama merely has "concerns" about the form of the PO (i.e., triggers) the base can still believe he supports it. If he were to openly push for killing it altogether--that would shatter the illusion.

But Lieberman has nothing to lose by being so frank. Moreover, he's one of Obama's Senate mentors, and the administration is apparently working through him on DADT, or so they claim.

I find the thesis that the administration is using Lieberman for cover highly believable.

[ Parent ]
Doesn't make sense (4.00 / 2)
The White House cares only about 60 votes, they don't care about the content of the bill.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!
[ Parent ]
riiiight (4.00 / 3)
All Rahm and Orszag care about is sixty votes. They clearly have no opinion whatsoever on the public option.

I guess that's why they continued watering it down to get one vote from Olympia Snowe, instead of pressuring Democratic moderates whom they had a reasonable chance of flipping.

And I guess it's sheer coincidence that Lieberman, who was Obama's Senate mentor, whose committee chairmanships Obama helped save, to whom the administration has delegated DADT, just happens to announce his filibuster to the bill one day after Reid says he has the votes.

"Please folks, no matter what you do, do not put two and two together to get four! There's nothing to see here! Where there is smoke, there need not actually be fire of any kind!"

[ Parent ]
Occhams Razor (0.00 / 0)
Which is the simpler explanation?

1) The White House only cares about 60 votes and will take the past of least resistance to get there, preferably with an extra vote or two in case somebody gets cold feet. And Joe Lieberman is grandstanding as usual.

2) Obama secretly hates the public option, so will secretly try to undermine it while publicly advocating for it for no apparent reason. Irritated that the health care bill he desperately wants to pass is actually making progress in the Senate, he sends out Joe Lieberman to try to tank it.

Please. Take off the tinfoil hat, nobody's after your brains.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!

[ Parent ]
couldn't have said it better myself! (4.00 / 2)
Obama secretly hates the public option, so will secretly try to undermine it while publicly advocating for it for no apparent reason. Irritated that the health care bill he desperately wants to pass is actually making progress in the Senate, he sends out Joe Lieberman to try to tank it.

I do have one important correction: there is an obvious reason he's publicly advocating for the public option--he wants to save face with the base. That's why he is hoping that the bill will be killed without his having to intervene.

He thought it would already be dead by now. But thanks to people calling their representatives in Congress--i.e. democracy in action--it isn't, so he's having to take a more blatant tack.

At this point, even Max Baucus is starting to see the value of being on board with a public option. Public opinion is overwhelmingly for it. The teabaggers are no longer in the picture. Reid and Pelosi have both said they have the votes. How much more favorable conditions does Obama want?

If he really supports the public option, there's no reason for the White House to not fight harder and see this through. What are they doing instead?

"I have not heard of any specific calls that the President has made, and obviously Senator Reid is working this through the caucus.  But I'm sure we'll get involved in due time," Gibbs told reporters today.

Funny kind of support!

Strange that 11-dimensional chess theories are only deemed plausible when they're favorable to Obama, and dismissed as paranoid ravings when not.

And there's not even that many dimensions to my theory.

[ Parent ]
Haha (0.00 / 0)
You're actually beyond parody. I reject all 11-dimensional chess theories, but yours is extra special.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!
[ Parent ]
Since this has now made the front page, (4.00 / 5)
let me repeat what I said on supag32's Quick Hit:

The Obama/Emanuel/Lieberman axis of evil

If you don't smell a rat here, you've got no nose. The White House to Reid: Well, we warned you that the fix was in, but you, smartass, had to go off and play to the DFH grandstand. Serves you right.

I suppose that there might be other explanations, such as Paul's malignant narcissism, but given the available evidence, this one strikes me as being as plausible as any. Disclaimer: I have absolutely no idea what's going on, but neither do I believe that anyone outside the inner circle knows any more than I do. Whatever actually is going on, I defy anyone to tell me that it's on the up-and-up. Chris? Mike?

[ Parent ]
whatever (0.00 / 0)
Let me get this straight, Obama is unable to influence Reid or Pelosi but he controls Joe Lieberman? I don't see how anyone finds this compelling.

Maybe you can explain your theory.  



New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

[ Parent ]
It's not that he controls Lieberman (4.00 / 3)
but shares his legislative goals and is using the conservative Senator to achieve them.  
[ Parent ]
This is just as silly... (4.00 / 1)
As those that think that Obama is a "secret liberal" and is playing 30-dimensional chess.
[ Parent ]
There's far more evidence (4.00 / 2)
that suggests Obama shares Lieberman's DLC perspective than that of a real liberal reformer.  

If your confusing what I say with some half-baked conspiracy theory, please don't - what I'm talking about happens all the time in tight legislative situations.  

[ Parent ]
And the original point about Obama and Joe (4.00 / 2)
was speculative - but there's as much or more evidence to support it as anything else.  
[ Parent ]
His mentor, remember? (4.00 / 3)
No, you wouldn't remember that, would you? It's one of those inconvenient truths.
[ Parent ]
One indent too many (0.00 / 0)
The above meant as a reply to Hopeful in NJ, not to you, wobbly.
[ Parent ]
Well, (4.00 / 1)
now we find out if all that talk of "Lieberman is Obama's bitch now" that we heard back when Obama went to bat for him was true. We'll see who fixes whom a sandwich, and what's on it.

Montani semper liberi
[ Parent ]
Maybe he's just better at negotiating that Democrats (0.00 / 0)
Ask for the limited PO to be stripped and compromise on either a trigger or opt-in.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
No (4.00 / 1)
He said he's opposed to both the opt-out and triggers. He'd only be happy if the PO is stripped entire.

The White House doesn't really prefer triggers, they just prefer 60 votes (however they come) over a good bill.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!

[ Parent ]
Ah (4.00 / 1)
After reading your second update, it now makes more sense.  While I found it very easy to believe he was just being evil, from a practical standpoint he is leveraging against Pelosi.  He is making it very hard for her to make the bill even more liberal after merger.

That's still evil, but Lawful Evil, not Chaotic Evil like I originally thought.

Why? ... (0.00 / 0)
I didn't read that as HoJo was going to support a filibuster .. only that he was going to join his DLC pals Nelson and Lincoln in voting against the final bill .. as long as we break the filibuster .. who f-ckin' cares how HoJo votes on the final bill?
[ Parent ]
read it again (0.00 / 0)
"I can't see a way in which I could vote for cloture on any bill that contained a creation of a government-operated-run insurance company," Lieberman added.

[ Parent ]
I always have felt (0.00 / 0)
that LE was was way more insidious.  CE is much harder to disguise, and lacks the ability to use the system against itself.

Also, I needed a good laugh, thanks.  It's depressing as hell.

Tim Wolfe

[ Parent ]
So reconciliation is completely off the table? (4.00 / 3)
If it's really up to Congress, as the Obama administration insists, then Reid should be pragmatic about this and explore all of the options at his disposal.  

Of course, it's quite likely that the virtue of Congressional autonomy in the Obama administration's reckoning depends entirely upon maintaining an artificial sixty vote threshold.  

In any event, we need to call Lieberman's bluff on this.  We've watered down "reform" to a piddling "public option" that isn't an option for the vast majority of the American public.  If we can't demand that the party implement this watered-down (but still meaningful) conservative compromise, what can we do?

Better no reform at all than a party-killing bill containing mandates without cost control.  

fuck the filibuster (4.00 / 3)
it's time to go nuclear
I don't buy it. (4.00 / 1)
I really don't think he'll kill the legislation, he's left himself enough room to get a single concession and argue that he's been appeased. He's trying to be the star- after all the Snowelympics that have transpired our little mousing independent wants more media play. ugh.

the funk can move and the funk can remove- dig?
what concession? (4.00 / 2)
He's claiming to be categorically opposed to any PO.  I can't think of any concession, health care-related or not, that would mollify him, other than maybe nuking Iran.
[ Parent ]
I doubt he's interest in the public option (4.00 / 1)
He is interested in the power of the Lieberman/Snow/Nelson/... block. If you need 60 votes he's a major player. If you need 50, he isn't.


New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.
[ Parent ]
If that were the case (0.00 / 0)
he could've easily just said he was for triggers, like Snowe is.  That would've been the easier and safer way to be a jackass.

IDK how to read this.  It could very well be possible, given that Lieberman has went out on an extreme limb here, that he's actually being a principled jackass.  After all, he's always been an anti-government Democrat (making the "he's good on all the issues besides the war!" argument of 2006 bullshit then and bullshit now).

[ Parent ]
Why should anyone believe what LIEberman says? (0.00 / 0)
That "categorical opposition" could evaporate in a second.  

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
Sure (0.00 / 0)
and it may very well do so.  But he'd lose all credibility, the same way the liberals lose all credibility when they fold (as they have in the past).  He'd spend the remaining three years and two months of his term as the jackass who says stuff but can't be taken seriously.

Maybe he'd be okay with that.  But considering his boundless ego, does that seem likely?

[ Parent ]
Yes (0.00 / 0)
IMO he's either playing for attention or aiming to get some kind of concession.

If its all about his ego, then getting a few interviews and some press coverage will be enough.

If he wants a concession, he'll concede to a some form of modified PO; a trigger or something like that.

People have short memories. If his past actions, like campaigning for McCain and voting with the GOP on the wars didn't cause him to lose credibility, why should this?


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
so what do we do now? (0.00 / 0)

Laugh at the clown. (0.00 / 0)
That's what he's there for.

If you don't fight, you can't win.
Never give up. Never Surrender.
[ Parent ]
Reid's not worried (4.00 / 1)
According to TPM.

He's bluffing and just wants attention.

quote from reid (4.00 / 1)
"Joe Lieberman is the least of Harry Reid's problems."

I don't think this means that Reid isn't worried.

[ Parent ]
He just wants attention (4.00 / 4)
He misses the attention he had when he was the 50th vote, now he wants to be the critical 60th vote. He saw how many goodies Snowe and Collins and Nelson had on the stimulus bill, so he wants some of that glory.

I don't think he would be the one to filibuster it. If he did, well, let's just say that would be a failure of Obama's vote-whipping skills and would be good reason to kick Joe out of the caucus once and for all.

Obama's vote-whipping skills? (0.00 / 0)
Obama warned there weren't 60 votes for the public option, remember, probably because he doesn't trust Lieberman. It would be a failure of REID's vote-whipping skills.  
[ Parent ]
With Snowe, Lieberman, and Collins (4.00 / 1)
I'm starting to wish the Hartford Convention had really gotten off the ground. Massachusetts and Vermont would have been a small price to pay.
There's a good lesson in the Hartford Convention (4.00 / 1)
about party elites who try to divert the desire for popular reform into conservative channels - it might not work and destroy the party in the process.  
[ Parent ]
Out of the caucus, out of the party (4.00 / 3)
Any Democratic senator that filibusters a 50+ person majority of their own party on this health care bill should be kicked out of the caucus and lose all institutional support from the party.

It's really that simple. How, in good conscience, can you welcome them back into your caucus after that?

"Don't take much, does it, elected Democrats, to get your balls tucked up." Cf.

Said everyone when... (4.00 / 2)
He actively campaigned against the party's nominee for President.

You forget that this is the Democratic party we're talking about.

[ Parent ]
Except... (4.00 / 1)
...this action would be putting their own future and viability at risk. A lot of these pompous asses only care about themselves. A Democratic filibuster of a Democratic senators -- that's a shiv being stuck in their own backs.

"Don't take much, does it, elected Democrats, to get your balls tucked up." Cf.
[ Parent ]
Barbara Boxer for majority leader (0.00 / 0)
sersiously, Reid does not even try.
The D Senators voted unanimously for Reid -- (0.00 / 0)
-- even though they knew him (and his positions and record) well.
[ Parent ]
let him filibuster (0.00 / 0)
let's see him put his money where his mouth is. let's prove that he's never told the truth to the few democrats who still try and stand up for him. let him prove that he's a liar.

and then let's pass this thing through reconciliation.

Right now would be a great time for a primary challenger to announce (4.00 / 2)
and let Lieberman get the Joe Sestak treatment.

That is, assuming Lieberman's even interested in another term.

Even if he were interested in another term... (0.00 / 0)
He has two more years to be an asshat before he has to start worrying about lying his ass off again to voters.  People have short memories and someone announcing a primary challenge 4 years in advance will not change a damn thing.
[ Parent ]
re: 4 years (0.00 / 0)
that's 3
[ Parent ]
Yes, my bad... (0.00 / 0)
I guess my head was still in 2008. =)
[ Parent ]
What? (4.00 / 1)
A primary to deny him the "Lieberman for Connecticut" nomination?

Come to think of it, that would be pretty funny.  Pointless, but funny.

Tim Wolfe

[ Parent ]
There's been a lot of speculation (4.00 / 1)
that if Lieberman were to run again he'd try first as a Democrat.

Btw, it's not "Lieberman for Connecticut", it's even worse - "Connecticut for Lieberman".  Because the way Lieberman sees it, the state serves him, not the other way around.

And that party, incidentally, has been taken over by anti-Lieberman activists, so yes, he would probably lose a primary in his own self-serving party.  That would not only be funny, but it'd be useful - it'd force him to find another vehicle to get on to the ballot.  Maybe he'll get the name right this time.

[ Parent ]
This is on Rahm and Obama (4.00 / 9)
They could not have sent clearer signals to the Conservadems that there will be no WH repercussions for obstructing. I almost think Rahm prefers sticking the shiv in Reid's (and the progressive's) back more than getting a health care bill. It is now abundantly clear that they do not care about Reid's reelection.

"Don't take much, does it, elected Democrats, to get your balls tucked up." Cf.
Yeah whatever (4.00 / 2)
[ Parent ]
This is sarcasm, right? (0.00 / 0)
"Looks like Lieberman is making one final push to become President."

On the other hand, this joker may be serious. To be honest, I don't blame Lieberman for what he thinks he can get away with, but I do blame Connecticut citizens for not being able to see through him. You don't have to be a genius to call out Lieberman.

RECONCILIATION HERE WE COME (4.00 / 2)
And that is not bad news. The end of the Senate pretending it is the only legislature in the country. One asshat will NEVER conmtrol congress ever again.

This if we press hard enough will end the sixty vote procedure for the Senate, and if we push hard enough, it will mean an EVEN BETTER Health Reform Bill.

As mcjoan points out:

In my interview with Sen. Schumer today, I also asked him if reconciliation was still on the table for healthcare reform. He talked about how it wasn't the preferred way to go because of the complications and limitations, but didn't say it wasn't the route anyone wanted to take. Now that Joe Lieberman has pulled another Lieberman, that needs to be revisited.

It is time to return democracy to the Senate, and not just use reconciliation to push a Bill through, but to end the filibuster forever, FOREVER. Its time that elections meant something.  Its time that elections meant something.

Lieberman is a herald for democracy, though he never ever meant to be.

50% + 1 is democracy, it is time to govern!

IT IS TIME TO GOVERN.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

Like no one saw this coming… (4.00 / 1)
...it's, like, 'Whatever, dude.' We need to figure out just what Joe Lieberman's hold on the state of Connecticut really is, and set about ridding ourselves of him.

"This ain't for the underground. This here is for the sun." -Saul Williams
Lieberman Threatens To Vote Against Cloture On Final Passage | 82 comments
Donate to Open Left







QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox