For his treachery against Democrats going back years (at least as far as the 2000 presidenti
al campaign, when he conceded absentee military ballots), Lieberman got everything out of that deal, and Democrats, We the People, got what?
Do you really believe that Obama got nothing for that concession
? No agreement that Lieberman would vote as Obama told him to vote? Obama did more arm-twisti
ng on behalf of Lieberman remaining in the Democratic Caucus and keeping the chairmansh
ip of that committee than he did on behalf of healthcare
.
Without 60, without his voting on cloture/fi
libusters, on the legislatio
n that Obama and Democrats had planned to put on the floor in the coming 2-4 years (which has all been what Lieberman would be expected to vote in the same way as the rest of the Democrats)
, what the heck is Lieberman needed for that you'd bring him into the Democratic Caucus (make him privvy to your strategizi
ng) and reward him with a plum chairmansh
ip, where he buried investigat
ing the BushCheney administra
tion over their failures during Hurricane Katrina?
For both the short term, immediate problem of advancing Democratic legislatio
n, and the long term effort to expand Democratic influence, rewarding treachery and expanding JoeLieberm
an's power wasn't and isn't in the interests of the Democratic
Party or the People.
Do you really believe that Obama got nothing for that concession
? No agreement that Lieberman would vote as Obama told him to vote? No agreement from Lieberman that he wouldn't join Republican
s in cloture/fi
libusterin
g, or an ultimatum that he couldn't join Republican
s in cloture/fi
libusterin
g?? No agreement that he would sign on to a public option?
KEEP READINGRead the Article at HuffingtonPost
No comments:
Post a Comment