Heard this on The Young Turks yesterday.
Senators Supporting Lieberman: “Moderates” PanicBy: Jane Hamsher Thursday November 13, 2008 9:34 am
<snip>
...
...
Evan Bayh was on Rachel Maddow last night, making the completely incoherent argument that the Democratic Caucus had the power to control Lieberman and the Homeland Security Committee:
MADDOW: Joe Lieberman didn't investigate the government's response to Katrina or the Blackwater shootings in Iraq or anything like that. Are there going to be real interparty divisions on security issues, or do you see a united front going forward?
BAYH: Well, I would hope we would have a united front. And you know, if the caucus and the committee feels that there are areas worthy of investigation -- and you mentioned two that I think would warrant investigation -- then there should -- one would need to go forward, regardless of what the chairman happen to think. And we have the power to demand that sort of thing.
Really? So if Bayh thinks that Lieberman should've investigated Katrina after having promised to do so (a promise he abandoned immediately after the GOP helped him retain his Senate seat), why didn't they do something before? They're going to take action and make him do it now?
I'm supposed to believe this?
This isn't about "getting stuff done" or "putting partisan politics behind us" as Bayh claims --
this is about conservative Senators who are concerned that "the base" can do to them what they did to Lieberman. It's about Obama making them comfortable that we can't organize against the war, or FISA, or any of their pet projects in a way that could be threatening to them.I spoke with a source knowledgeable about Reid's reasoning on the Lieberman matter early on in the process, who said that Reid believed taking Lieberman's Homeland Security gavel away from him was more likely to keep him in line with the Democrats -- not less. Knowing that Lieberman can't get elected in Connecticut in 2012 as a Republican and that the Democrats were ready to crack the whip, it was not unreasonable to make an inference that that Lieberman would stop making so much trouble.
Any action on the part of the Senate Democrats will be unlikely to change the nature of Lieberman's voting, which will continue to be petty and vindictive no matter what the Democrats do.
But the fact remains that over the past 7-10 days all the lobbying has been done by the proLiebermann forces. "We don't have a spokesperson with the courage to speak up and say 'he should not be able to get away with what he's done to our caucus,'" said the source.
It's interesting that they sent Bayh as the messenger on to the Maddow show, despite the fact that someone like Dodd would undoubtedly be more well-received. After Steve Clemons of the Washington Note published that Bayh was at the top of the VP list, vociferous opposition among the netroots dashed any chance of success.It's also noteworthy that people now think, much like Obama did when he made a GOTV appearance before the election, that the Maddow show is the way to plead their case before the base. (They're right, BTW.)
But Bayh's appearance was for Bayh. His concern -- like that of Salazar and Pryor and other Democrats whose voting records are probably often to the right of Lieberman's -- is for himself. It isn't about putting partisanship behind us.It's about political payback, and it's just as partisan as it can be.
Call Democratic Senators and tell them -- Just Say No to Joe.
<snip>
Link:
http://firedoglake.com/2008/11/13/senators-supporting-lieberman-moderates-panic/ On Cenk's show, she said that Moderate Dem Senators weren't too worried about being attacked by the Republicans... they expect that and are ready for it. But they ABSOLUTELY FEAR being attacked from the left and being "Lamonted".
:shrug: