The problem is that Joe’s vote will actually become more important the more that Democratic majorities expand. More precisely, the closer that the Dems get to the magic number (60), the more vital Joe becomes. Ironically enough, I think Lieberman is more important in a 59-41 Senate than in a 53-47 one.
I understand the sentiment and the logic behind this rationalization but I think Publius is over-thinking this. From a purely objective mathematical standpoint Joe Lieberman is less important to Democrats if we have 57 or 58 seats than he is now. That's just cold hard mathematical reality.
Publius' argument gets, I think, a little lost in the weeds. There's a very simple, clear reason why Lieberman should get the boot - he chairs a very important committee (Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs) and has not conducted any oversight of the Bush administrations war conduct whatsoever.
He's been very, very bad at his job and he should be removed for that reason alone. There's no reason for a party with a significant majority to be held hostage by a guy who's not interested in doing his job.
1 comment:
good points, SPO. Publius also mistakenly assumes that Lieberman can be trusted to honor such an arrangment. Joe's proven history of treachery not just to his party, but to international law and human rights, suggests the contrary. It would be an unforgivable mistake to believe his vote "85 or 90 percent of the time, except when it comes to Iraq and some national security issues" is worth compromising what little integrity the democrats have left after the past seven and a half years.
Lieberman needs to be kneecapped at first opportunity. I picture his kness when swinging at softball pitches.
Post a Comment