the last word on Joe Lieberman (I promise)e

Here’s the thing about Joe Lieberman that I keep coming back to. Well, there are a few things about Joe Lieberman, and I will do my best to say them, be done, and never mention them again.

Joe Lieberman did not ‘earn’ the committee chair position he currently holds, he bargained for it. Joe Lieberman got primaried out in 2006 because he no longer represented his constituency. Joe Lieberman is no longer in the Democratic Party. Joe Lieberman was needed in the Democratic Party caucus from 2006 through 2008 in order to secure majority control of committees. The party with majority control gets more staff, more offices, and the ability to determine the course of the bills in the Senate: what they’re about and whether they ever move out of Committees to the floor for a vote at all. This was, obviously a valuable contribution that Joe Lieberman could make to the Democratic Party, this shift to majority control, and it is (1) why he was needed in the caucus and (2) why he was able to barter for an important committee chair position in return.

The democrats do not need Joe Lieberman anymore. They do not need him for majority control, as they have a clean majority without any independents caucusing with them, although I recommend they keep Bernie Saunders because he’s a respectable human being more in line with the party platform. I will not be the first to assert that the line about Joe being with the dems 90% of the time is just that, a line of bull, nor will I be the first to point out that the 10% divergence rather markedly coincides with the topic of the committee he currently chairs. Beyond pedantic arguments about which of his votes are or are not in line with the party, he actively campaigned against a fellow Democratic senator as the candidate for President chosen by the party he caucuses with. It seems like the most basic function of a Democrat (even a self-described pale shadow of a former one like Joe Lieberman) would be to support the party’s candidates, if not in all state-level and national races, at the very least in the instance of the presidency.

Which brings me to the summation: (1) Joe Lieberman is no longer needed in the caucus, (2) his chair position was payment for keeping him in the caucus when he was needed, and (3) he is totally off the ranch and is no longer a Democrat in either form or substance. Which means his committee chair position can be given to someone else, he can stay or go, and we can close this sorry chapter in American political life. Frankly, I don’t really get what the problem is. Are the Democrats afraid to acknowledge that they bartered with Joe to gain control of Congress? Do they think their voters will shun them for demonstrating a pragmatic grasp of the workings of government and accurately assessing the cost of the greater of two evils — continued control of the Senate by Republicans with a Republican president — and choosing the lesser? I don’t think so. I think that the country has pretty much agreed they’d rather have the Democrats running things, and they accept the reality of what has been done. Up until now. Now, they are looking to see that the Democrats are not, for lack of a less sexist term, wusses. They want to see that the Democrats are able to make a second, arguably more important, pragmatic choice and take away the chair position from Joe Lieberman now that they no longer need him. It is not the responsibility of the Senate Democrats to prolong Joe Lieberman’s political career for as long as humanly possible while he does his best to tank it.

Everyone except Joe Lieberman seems to understand that the Democrats no longer need him, which makes his positioning a bluff, a situation which I am again not the first person to characterize in this manner. It is in Joe’s best interest to remain in the caucus, and he will likely not walk away from it. Which doesn’t matter and solely affects him and his own career because (I can’t emphasize this enough) the Democrats no longer need him. Offer him another less important chair position, one where he maybe, I don’t know, actually holds Democratic Party opinions with regard to the topic area. If he doesn’t take it, he doesn’t take it. Oh well.

I hear that other old increasingly out of touch Senators feel for Joe and fear that his fate will be theirs, too. Maybe. Probably it won’t help their cause to take Joe’s side on this, though. If they are looking for a way to show their goodwill toward fellow long-term Senators outside their party, I recommend lobbying for Dick Lugar to get a cabinet position. Joe is a sinking ship, my friends. Reassign his chair position, give him his choice about remaining in the caucus, and let him be the architect of his own fate. Seriously, this is way past overdone and requires some actual senate leadership, Mr. Reid. Get it done, and deal with your personal feelings on your own time.

the last word on Joe Lieberman (I promise)e

presidential debate two, live!

Obama’s shot over the stern: fire those execs!

John’s plan: I would completely cripple the government’s ability to do anything by not collecting any taxes!

No, actually, I don’t think there are a lot of Americans qualified to be the Secretary of the Treasury. Really, I don’t. And that’s okay, let’s just be honest about specialized skill sets and all.

John: please tell me you aren’t reminding us that you suspended your campaign like that was a good thing.

There can be only one (letter).

This is really not all that interesting without crowd reactions.

Does John really believe this ‘I’ve been a reformer’ nonsense or is he just a totally craven power-hungry loon? Also, how does ‘taking on the leaders of your party’ become a metric for being a good lawmaker? If the leaders of your party are not insane and promote a set of ideas and proposals that are good for the general public, why do you need to take them on? Yeesh.

My friends! I was wrong, I thought they’d focus-grouped that phrase out of his lexicon.

Since when have the Republicans’ good friends the Saudis been ‘terrorist organizations’? Bizarre.

And I get to use my graph again:

Ye olde Visual Aid.

Dude, WTF? ‘Eliminate agencies,’ that’s your sacrificing? We’ll just have to git along without that thar Department of Education, that’s what! Or maybe Health and Human Services? How about the FDA? I notice that The War Of A Hundred Years is not on that elimination list.

That’s right, Person With Health Insurance, I’m not going to tell you that you have to wait: you’re going to have to start paying taxes on that benefit now!

Mr. Obama: I refer you to my Visual Aid. But, you know, thanks for pointing out that it’s conceivable we could conserve energy in our own homes. Also, I do like your service corps idea, probably because it was my idea years ago (not that you took it, I’m just saying that a civil service of infrastructure laborers has long been a pet fantasy of mine, except that mine includes mandatory not voluntary service).

Herbert Hoover? That’s all you got? Oh no, you also have small business scare tactics. (My friends! Point 2!) Oh and: I am not in favor of tax cuts for the wealthy, I am in favor of permanently extending the tax cuts for the wealthy that I have already voted for in the past. Wha?

I am enjoying this little ‘words mean things’ and ‘parts go into a whole’ breakdown by Obama on the tax plan debate.

Wow, am I the only one who finds his ‘look, my friends’ and ‘it’s not hard to fix social security’ schtick annoying and condescending? Also, whoa with the ‘great Ronald Reagan!’ nonsense. (My friends!)

You must be desperate indeed to be name dropping the Lieb into this mess. Let’s go nuclear! Also, you know, safety — something like that *hand wave* Um, that was kind of crazy looking, John, rein it in!

Dude, nothing is sponsored by ‘Bush and Cheney,’ they’re the Executive Branch. Also, please to be referring back to the Visual Aid above with regard to offshore drilling!

I love the ‘generally pretty supportive of Republicans’ about the US Chamber of Commerce: that may be the understatement of this Q&A session.

Note: efficient. Not effective. Not comprehensive. Not fair. That is the telling point. Also, there are lots of things we don’t go across state lines for in many places. Raw milk. Wine. Et cetera. And, I think we all know by now that the 5k is not for you, it’s for the health insurance companies.

No cheap shots at the Joe, John! It’s hardly in your best interest to start either a physical ability or a vanity mud-slinging fest.

Another relatively obscure legal question sees the light in these debates, that of the lax incorporation laws that lead to all the banks being headquartered in Delaware. Also, way to drop the deregulation hammer on the old dude, Barack!

‘The greatest force for good in the world’? Arrogant much? (My friend.)

The whole bit about the US spending billions per month in Iraq while ‘the Iraqis’ have 79 billion in reserve must be playing well with the audience insta-dials, because he keeps using it.

Steady hand is what you’re looking for, and it’s hard to argue a policy that’s based on assessing the ability to ‘beneficially affect the situation’ right after you’ve talked about not giving up on a war without end unless you can WIN.

First Reagan is your hero, then Teddy Roosevelt? Who’s next, Rambo?

Ok, there is just too much one thing right after another here with the foreign policy stuff, I am falling off my chair with the laughing which makes typing hard. ‘The same strategy except different but basically the same which was successful which was getting the people on our side.’ Um, the Iraqi people are on the side of the occupation now? When were we greeted as liberators that I somehow missed?

‘I know how to get him!’ Well, for the love of the baby Jesus, John, tell someone else so that he can be gotten!

‘Hey, veteran friend, I got a good one for ya: let’s start another war! Ha ha ha ha ha!’ I swear, this man sounds certifiable when he talks about this stuff. When did that happen? I don’t remember him sounding this weird in the past.

I admit that I was live-chatting with an old college buddy just now, but it seemed like McCain did not make a single lick of sense in that whole rambling bit there about Russia and no new cold wars and moral support and victory and honor. What did I miss? (That Putin name drop was for you, btw, Ms. Wolf-Shooter!)

Obviously, after Iraq, the US will wait for no nation when it comes to military aggression.’ Oh good lord are we back on the negotiating-without-precondition crap again? No one likes that approach, John, pay attention when your staff brief you on the insta-dial readings. Oh, ugh, again with the second Holocaust schtick. A war does not become a Holocaust just because the people in the country at war are Jews (or any other ethnicity). Unless we are arguing that invasions and wars equal genocides, in which case we’re perpetrating an enormous one in Iraq. Crazy illogic logic, you make my brain hurt. Feh.

Nice shout out to the wife there.

Nice dodge and redirect of the question by both candidates, and nice attempt to horn in on the single-mom sympathy train there, John. (But good job getting the ‘steady hand on the tiller’ corrected there.)

And there you have it, folks, live on Tuesday night. Good night, and good luck.

presidential debate two, live!

vice presidential debate, live!

Nicetameetcha! Here we go.

Stop voting with your party! Support a platform that goes against your principles and the people that you represent!

Did she just say ‘Joe Six-Pack’? And the ubiquitous ‘band together,’ gah, she sounds like one of my students. [Not that there’s anything wrong with them, they’re just, you know, in college. Not governors.]

‘Why yes, I would like to change the subject…’ *nose wrinkle*

‘No, actually, I would not like to stick to the subject!’ Drop the hammer, Joe!

‘Where we come from, where Todd and I have been, patriotic is wanting to form your own country: Alaska!

I like the ‘take that, you!’ glare Joe handed over right there.

‘I had to tell those energy companies, go ahead! Sell our natural resources to Japan!’

Dude: you do understand the concepts of ‘running mate’ and a ‘party platform’ don’t you? Just because you promised nothing doesn’t mean that you’re not a Republican on the hook for McCain’s wack ideas.

Oh yay! I get to use my graph again!

Again with the Visual Aid.

‘We in Alaska feel pain more than anyone! All you East Coasters whose shorelines are rising, do you have, um, polar bears?’

‘OK, pay attention, now the cheer goes like this…’

Ironic that the Governor of the state most economically and environmentally impacted by the Exxon disaster is talking about the safety and environmental friendliness of offshore drilling. Yes, I know it was a tanker crash, but oil in the water from an accident is the link.

‘Nooooo, not if it means keeping church and state separate, no, I can’t say I’m for that, nope.’ So, traditional view of marriage. Golly. Hmm. Huh.

Zero-sum. That’s what the Republicans offer. Same old thinking, same old line drawing, same old whipping it out and measuring it as some kind of test of leadership.

Whoa, so Al Queda and Petraeus and Iraq and terrorism…ugh, oh nevermind.

The Castro Brothers! Cuba rocks the name drop tonight! (Sorry, Chavez, you’re just not scary enough for tonight’s debate.)

Again with the Spain slam! Nice one, Joe.

Joe: it’s boring when you talk all smart and knowledgeable like that.

We here in the USA are inherently more trustworthy with our nuclear weapons, being the only nation in history ever to use them not just in war but on civilian populations. It’s obvious, right?

Senator Lugar name drop FTW! I really need to email him a copy of the email he sent me in response to starting the war in Iraq, wherein he very seriously and thoughtfully and considerately impressed upon me that it was critical to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in order to keep the whole region safe. I’m sorry these goons in your party made an ass of you and lots of other well-meaning and sincere people, Mr. Lugar, I really am. I hope you’re as angry as I am about all this mess.

Whoa with the condescension there, lady! ‘It’s so obvious that I don’t have a flipping clue about anything except what they fed me while I was locked in my compound all month!’

Yowzah, we all broke for more alcohol at the same time. There’s only so much aw-shucksing — and omigawd ‘a team of mavericks!’ — that one can take sober.

So, I fear for the Library of Congress if we get a little more Main-Street-Wasilla up in here.

‘I’m sure that Main Street America understands that bridges, roads, schools, hospitals, farms and trains are free and cares more about their paycheck than silly things like infrastructure!’

Dude: the AFT would beg to differ about where and when schoolteachers should get their reward.

‘Silly goose! They told me at the compound last week that we have a thing called a constitution that defines the role of the vice-president and it involves the Senate!’ Aaand the audience revolts in laughter!

Nice one, Joe! Go Cheney yourself and your trashing of our country, Dick!

‘Don’t you tell me about hardship, chippie, I defined hardship when you were in grade school!’

He is no maverick! Go, Joe!

Joe’s closing line: I am a good man, I respect people, and I can learn when I’m called out.

Palin’s closing line: my actions speak for themselves and I support wack policies.

Oops that wasn’t the actual closing. Here they are, then.

Palin: Those mean journalists make me look dumb but even here without the filter I can accomplish it all by my big-girl self, and I’m so glad I got to reprise my AIP convention speech!

Joe: Republicans have f-ed us to hell and we are going to get that dealt with!

And now, back to Enchanted: who will she pick, Prince or McDreamy?

vice presidential debate, live!

debate number one, live!

Dude: use The Google! Senator Kennedy was home by the time the pre-game chatter ended.

Dude: your running mate suspended them NEVER! I wonder if Obama has been told by his handlers (1) do not mention the hockey mom and (2) do not call McCain on outright lies.

Jim: I hope you are not personally responsible for the talk amongst yourselves thing you’ve got going here. Because I don’t like it. If I had a cell phone I’d text you to that effect.

Whoah there cowboy: taxing health care benefits? What? That must be true because you didn’t deny it.

First blood: ‘That’s just not true.’ I fear to make a drinking game out of how many times that phrase comes up because I’m just not that young anymore.

Dude: um, now you’re against ethanol? I’m sure it’s not because you’re overly concerned about the supply of organic-corn-fed sliced chicken. You do realize that the popularity of ehtanol has contributed to a major global corn shortage?

Dude: a spending freeze on everything except for defense? You sound an awful lot like Mister I-would-eliminate-the-IRS-and-the-Department-of-Education there.

And by ‘hard to swallow’ I mean ‘a steaming pile of poo.’

Whoah, dude: did you really just introduce Ms. Kookalooka into this debate yourself?

See, oversee, the verb of sight is see.

You forgot the one about being there a hundred years. Also, dude: didn’t locals ratting out their neighbors as a military strategy go out with the USSR?

You’re right, it’s only good to call your wife a c–t out loud, not say things like you’re going to engage a foreign country on the topic of their behavior with regard to terrorists hiding within their borders.

Second blood: Reagan name drop! Loss of limb: ‘I’ve got a bracelet, too!’

Um, isn’t Petreaus out now? Also, since when has a General ever said, ‘we’re gonna lose, but keep sending me your kids!’ Or maybe I was laughing too much about the bracelet still to have heard that right.

Whoah, dude, wtf? Holocaust whut? Yup, my concern with Iran is that if they get a nuclear weapon they’re going to start firing up the ovens? Not the same thing as starting a war with a sovereign nation, which we all agree might happen there.

Uh-oh, Russia not a democracy? I’m not sure we can all agree on that, shady elections and all.

I love it when they demonize Chavez! Darn you for nationalizing something valuable in your country, we are so jealous, you commie!

Dude, Kissinger is advising you? How retro is that!

Nice Spain shot!

Russia: democracy or no? Oh wait, that’s not the question. Aaand we get the Lugar shoutout! That one’s for you, Indiana peeps. Putin is getting confident and rearing his head over Alaska…oh sorry, wrong debate.

One: saying you voted for alternative energy is just a bald-faced lie.

Two (thanks, Mike B.!):

This is what we former teachers call A Visual Aid.

Dude: blood and treasure? Talk Like A Pirate Day was last week, my friend.

P-PPPP-OW! I guess I have to drink those 10 shots after all.

debate number one, live!

may you live in interesting (financial) times

Here’s what I’m thinking: let’s sort out the questions of who defrauded whom of what before we start buying up worthless stocks willy nilly, shall we? The administration surely couldn’t want us to approve this enormous allocation of funds for liars and crooks. As several Senators posited yesterday, it’s not like the entire $700 billion-with-a-B is going to be spent in the next three months, right?

Unless folks are simply trying to enact a major public money grab ahead of official findings in criminal investigations and a handover of control of the government. That would be beyond the pale, though. You’d have to be a real crackhead to suspect something like that might be going on.

may you live in interesting (financial) times