Thursday, November 13, 2008

The Filibuster-Proof Fantasy, and Why Joe Must Go!

Three words: BLUE. DOG. DEMOCRATS. Look it up. There are 44 of these Conservative Democrats who vote more often with Republicans - and against Democrats - on important issues. Blue Dogs sided with George W. Bush almost as often as John McCain.

Let that sink in.

Now, can we all just stop going on and on about the myth of the filibuster-proof majority?

Certainly, there are some moderate Republicans who vote with Democrats, but there are not that many of them. Also, having a strong majority of Democrats in Congress is a good thing, no matter how you slice it. The more the better. But filibuster-proof majority? Not even close. So just stop it.

Please, Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann, and all other bone-headed pundits who should know better. Stop it.

Now that we're past that, I say it is time to bury Joe Lieberman. He offers nothing to Progressives beyond being a massive thorn in our collective ass. This isn't about payback. We're tough enough to withstand a traitor hurling scurrilous lies our way and still kick ass, so I don't really care about what the Connecticut Turncoat said on the campaign trail. This is about the powerful positions Lieberman still holds, positions where he can actually be more damaging to Democrats if he is allowed to stay on. These committees:

  • Committee on Environment and Public Works
  • Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship
  • Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
  • Committee on Armed Services

Evin Bayh fears that if Lieberman gets the bitchslap he deserves, that he might just take his toys and run home crying, leaving open the opportunity the Republiscum governor would appoint a fellow Republiscum to take Joe's place. That's fine. One more Republiscum isn't going to make a heckuva lot of difference in the Senate thanks to the Blue Dogs. But more importantly, and at the heart of my argument, is the point that the incoming Republiscum won't be heading up any of those vaunted committees that Lieberman will leave vacant. Those can go to responsible senior Democrats, while Lieberman's replacement will start out by wiping Mitch McConnell's ass.

Given this, can anyone offer me any logical reason that Lieberman should stay with the Democrats? I can't think of any beyond that old tradition of crooked politicians scratching each other's backs.

blog comments powered by Disqus