McCain / Lieberman?

Reading this item at TPM via Roll Call, Senator Lieberman looks to be doing two things: He is burning his bridges with the Democrat Party; and he is already acting like a VP candidate - playing the attack dog.

Yesterday, the news was McCain wants to go after former Hillary supporters. Can you think of a better way to do that, while also completely stealing Obama's change / healing / uniter thunderstorm than by selecting a recent but now former Democrat to accomplish all that?

They don't call him a maverick for nothing, after all. And while it wouldn't help him with conservatives, if he is intent on winning from the center, it's hard to conceive of a better choice. Well, I suppose he could pick Hillary, but I suspect she has plans for 2012, if not before.

Furthermore, during a Senate vote Wednesday, Obama dragged Lieberman by the hand to a far corner of the Senate chamber and engaged in what appeared to reporters in the gallery as an intense, three-minute conversation.
While it was unclear what the two were discussing, the body language suggested that Obama was trying to convince Lieberman of something and his stance appeared slightly intimidating.

Using forceful, but not angry, hand gestures, Obama literally backed up Lieberman against the wall, leaned in very close at times, and appeared to be trying to dominate the conversation, as the two talked over each other in a few instances.

Still, Obama and Lieberman seemed to be trying to keep the back-and-forth congenial as they both patted each other on the back during and after the exchange.

Afterwards, Obama smiled and pointed up at reporters peering over the edge of the press gallery for a better glimpse of their interaction.

Obama loyalists were quick to express their frustration with Lieberman's decision and warned that if he continues to take a lead role in attacking Obama it could complicate his professional relationship with the Caucus.

Comments

[SacTownMan]

"Obama loyalists were quick to express their frustration with Lieberman's decision and warned that if he continues to take a lead role in attacking Obama it could complicate his professional relationship with the Caucus."

Taken to mean,

We tried to screw you before by driving you out of the party for you pro-war stance. Then you go muck-up the works and get elected anyway as an independant. Now we've been nice to you because you held a critical tie breaking vote in the Senate but once we regain the majority we are ready to throw you under the bus along with Barry's Pastor, Church, Grandmther and all of those racist's out there.

The democrats completely screwed this guy and now they expect him to tow the line. Who do they think he is? ... Barry!

[jharp]

McCain / Lieberman?

Might as well go for it.

The GOP running a liberal for President and a democrat for Vice President and they think this gives them the best chance to win.

Just makes my day, my month, my year and thrills me to no end.

Conservatism is dead.

[seekeronos]

"--- Conservatism is dead. ---"

No, it isn't. Conservatives who are disillusioned (or more accurately, awoken to) the GOP's dramatic leftward swing are defecting in droves to the Constitutionalists and other right-leaning third parties.

The _GOP_ is nearly dead, because it is courting leftists like McCain and Lieberman to win the "moderate" wing of the Democraticic Party.

[Fred Beloit]

Harpo, we understand Bush has arranged for terrible storms to rake your house. Keep your helmet on at all times, please. BTW conservatism ain't dead, Harpo. Like you it is just hunkering down until the storm of BS and BDS blows over.

[jharp]

Fred,

I agree that I misoverestimated that conservatism is dead.

How about it's become such a minority view that it is politically irrelevant?

Sure, there will be some pandering to sucker some voters in, just as there has been for the past 7 years.

But conservative policy is on life support just waiting for President Obama to pull the plus.

Some storms here lately. Rain like a mofo. Tornadoes. 100 mph straight line winds. Really something else.

[Fred Beloit]

Harpo, here is Matt Yglesias spinning part of a CBS poll:

"Here's CBS's poll on how long Americans would like to see our troops stay in Iraq. John McCain's supporters can try to spin his 100 years remark any way they'd like, but it's clear enough that McCain's one of the thirty percent who think longer than two years is acceptable."

Here are the poll's results as HE reports them:
Would like to see troops stay in Iraq
Less than 1 yr = 42%
1 to 2 yrs = 21%
2 to 5 yrs = 9%
5 to 1o years = 1%
As long as
it takes = 20%

But Yyglesias is a propagandist hack for the left. Here is what the poll really says:
51 % of Americans would like our troops to stay in Iraq from up to 1 or 2 years to as long as it takes.

How do you like that Lefty liar Ygesias, Harpo?

[Hope Muntz]

Lost in the VP verbiage is the reality of this confrontation. It's starting to become evident that Mr Honest Tea is actually, in addition to being an oldfashioned South Side Chicago sexist, a physical bully. Bear in mind that Lieberman is 25 years his senior and a much smaller man. This is what we have to look forward to for the next 4 years--a dumber but softer-spoken hard-left black Bill Clinton.

Or not. There's still another lever to pull.

For a few more months anyway.

[Fred Beloit]

At Huffpo the Leftist anti-semite commenters are at it again over the man they failed to defeat, Lieberman.

From LGF"
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/30196_Antisemitism_and_Joe_Lieberman_at_HuffPo#rss

[jharp]

How do you like that Lefty liar Yglesias, Harpo?

I don't care for him and don't consider him much of a lefty.

"it's clear enough that McCain's one of the thirty percent who think longer than two years is acceptable."

What is inaccurate about his statement? 30% think longer than 2 years is acceptable according to the poll.

"51 % of Americans would like our troops to stay in Iraq from up to 1 or 2 years to as long as it takes."

Also true. The problem with your ciphering, Jethro, is you include the 21% that feel 1-2 years is acceptable. Yglesis doesn't and his conclusion is quite clear that he is referring to the 2 years plus crowd. Of which McCain is clearly a member of.

[chris]

If McLame picks that lazy old coot Fred Thompson they could claim to have 138 years of experience!

[seekeronos]

"--- I agree that I misoverestimated that conservatism is dead.

How about it's become such a minority view that it is politically irrelevant?

Sure, there will be some pandering to sucker some voters in, just as there has been for the past 7 years. ---"

Except for the coasts, I hardly think that conservatism is a "minority view".

But it is not conservatism that has failed; it is the party that has allowed conservatism to be hi-jacked in the name of big-government statists looking to create an American Empire.

The GOP itself has slid over to the left trying to play from the (supposed) centre, going for the "Big Tent", which has had the effect of alienating and angering conservatives, especially the silent majority of conservatives who do not necessarily tow the line on the neocon agenda.

The GOP plan may have a chance of success given its pandering to the "centre" -- but then again, this is the party that left the (paleo)conservatives behind a few decades ago.

A microcosm of this can be seen at the RedState.com blog; while "party unity" has its place, a party unity built around the mere continued existence of that party and principles rejected for the price of "victory" is but an echo chamber on a ship without a compass.

A funny thing they have going on over there; a few months ago it was a bloodbath over Romney v. Thompson v. Giuliani v. McCain v. Brownback v. Tancredo v. Hunter... now, if you aren't lining up to be thankful for the curbstomping to be given by McCain to the conservative electorate, you're considered a rangy yellow whip-tailed cur in need of a beat-down.

Heaven forbid you mention Austrian economics, sound money, military non-interventionism, or worst of all, "the Hon. Dr. Ron Paul". They've got tar and feathers to spare.

With the GOP showing _true_ conservatives the door (not the perverted post-Trotskyites who call themselves "neocons") ... it is not surprising to see that the GOP will be hoist on its own petard come November.

"--- Some storms here lately. Rain like a mofo. Tornadoes. 100 mph straight line winds. Really something else. ---"

I'll keep y'all in prayer.

[seekeronos]

"--- If McLame picks that lazy old coot Fred Thompson ---"

My gut feeling is that McCain will pick Bobby Jindal of Louisiana.

He's almost the perfect "anti-Obama":

- Young
- Talented
- Has "Diversity" (He is of Asian Indian heritage)
- Can help carry the South
- Has been a governor (which is lacking in both McCain and Obama's campaigns thus far)

Jindal's weakness can come from his relative youth and being a neophyte governor.

[Rein]

Lieberman adds little if anything to McCain. He simply redoubles him: another jowelly, iconoclastic graybeard crank. The ideal VP for McCain is a younger, managerially minded, conservative minority figure.

[Fred Beloit]

"But Yyglesias is a propagandist hack for the left. Here is what the poll really says:
51 % of Americans would like our troops to stay in Iraq from up to 1 or 2 years to as long as it takes."

Yes, my statement above was inexact. It requires the word "for" between "Iraq" and "from".

"But Yglesias is a propagandist hack for the left. Here is what the poll really says:
51% of Americans would like our troops to stay in Iraq for from up to 1 or 2 years to as long as it takes."

Now it is perfrectly correct based on Yglaesias"s nums. Agreed?

[Fred Beloit]

Meanwhile, nature has a way of showing up scientists who forgot their Francis Bacon and instead become politicos. Nature also shows up the the useful idiots who follow them.

http://iselive.uvic.ca/Library/SLT/ideas/bacon.html

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/06/03/uah-global-temperature-dives-in-may/

In short what climate change, warmer or colder. Oh, I see both. I thought you moonbats favored change.

[Fred Beloit]

Pajamas Media asks whether all our forces should be withdrawn from Wash, DC. It may be a quagmire or a civil war.

http://www.examiner.com/a-1423820~Lanier_plans_to_seal_off_rough__hoods_in_latest_effort_to_stop_wave_of_violence.html

[edward cropper]

Joe Lieberman is a dry, dull, uninspiring LIBERAL.His only redeeming characteristic is his strong support of the war. This is more concern for Israel than political ideology.
He is closer to Ted Kennedy than John McCain. We don't need a Ted Kennedy one heart beat from the Presidency.
Check out this web site and see what Joe really thinks.
www.ontheissues.org/Joseph_Lieberman.htm

[Steve White]

Senator McCain could get almost as much by making clear upfront that Senator Lieberman would be Secretary of State in his administration. He could keep most conservatives happy (well, not unhappy) by picking Sarah Palin as VP. State publicly that Robert Gates would remain at Defense, and you've got an inner brain trust that's miles ahead of just about anything Senator Obama can do.

[Twok]

This ideological map tells us where McCain, Obama, HRC, and GWB reside relative to the center of gravity of the electorate, as well as the academic 'center'.

http://futurist.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/05/us-ideological.html

Lieberman is the ONLY white male who should be considered for VP. Any other candidate should not be a white male.

[Clint]

I really hope Senator McCain is smarter than this, or at least getting better advice!

If you think Lieberman would bring to McCain a single vote from the Democratic side of the aisle, you haven't been talking to many Democrats in the last four years.

Governor Jindal and Governor Palin would both be interesting picks. If Obama picks a VP who has more experience than he does (as he almost certainly will, as it would be hard to find someone with less), the comparison between the two tickets might be interesting, and turn McCain's age into a plus.

I just hope McCain doesn't pick Huckabee or Romney -- both of whom, I believe, were getting substantial "anyone-but-McCain" votes in the primary, making them poor choices to shore up his support in the party. I like Fred Thompson -- but picking another "old white male" would be a tactical mistake. It's a shame that it's too soon to tap someone like General Petraeus. Does anyone know Lt. General Honore's political persuasion? (Remember him from Katrina?)

[Tood]

Of course, Obama could also appoint Lieberman.....

[David Rogers]

Lieberman is interesting, no doubt, and would be a historic (!) choice. He would be the only man selected as a vice-presidential candidate by two different major parties, and he would be the first AND second Jewish vice-presidential nominee. Of course, he would not be welcomed by pro-life GOP activists, since Lieberman has a long pro-choice record.

There is another Connecticut politician who might be helpful to McCain, though.

I did a fifty-state survey of governors, looking for Republicans who could add to McCain's appeal to cross-over voters and disaffected HIllary-crats.

I chose governors because I believe McCain (and, for that matter, any other Senator) need someone with executive experience to balance the ticket.

My criteria:
1) experienced (in contrast w/ Obama)
2) don't spit in eye of GOP base
3) might bring in a normally non-GOP state
4) Complement McCain's strengths

Only Connecticut Governor Jodi Rell meets all these criteria.

Palin and Jindal fail test #1.
Romney fails test #3 (unless you credit him with Michigan, which seems dubious IMHO). (some say he fails test #2)
Tim Pawlenty fits the four criteria, but doesn't appeal to cross-overs or Hillary-crats.

The only other person who comes close is Hawai'i Governor Linda Lingle, but despite her success as governor of this heavily-Democratic state since 2002, I doubt she could put her state in play against Hawai'i native Obama, though she would force him to expend some effort there. However, as a Jewish woman, Lingle might offer some help in other states and some media excitement that Rell would not offer.

Both Rell and Lingle have solid reform credentials, and a well-deserved reputation as pragmatists. Also, Rell, in combination with Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, could put the normally solidly Democratic state of Connecticut in play, and could help in New Jersey and New Hampshire, and conceivably in Maine. Hawai'i, of course, has no neighboring states.

Also, though Lingle is twice-married, she is also twice-divorced and childless, and Hawai'i Democrats engaged in a whispering campaign suggesting she is a lesbian.

Vice-presidents, it has been widely observed, can only hurt the ticket (e.g., Quayle). But I would argue that some have helped (e.g., Lieberman, Cheney, Gore, H.W. Bush, Mondale in '76). I think, at the least, that Rell does not hurt the GOP, and I believe she could add as much as the four examples above. Decisive? In an election this close, maybe.)

[chris]

George Allen is available. The GOP base LOVES racists. Give Macaca a call!

[jharp]

Fred,

"But Yglesias is a propagandist hack for the left. Here is what the poll really says:
51% of Americans would like our troops to stay in Iraq for from up to 1 or 2 years to as long as it takes."

"Now it is perfrectly correct based on Yglaesias"s nums. Agreed?"

Your math is correct but that wasn't Yglesias point.

The point he was trying to make was 30% think 2 or more years is fine. And McCain is one of them.

And I can't see what the problem with that is.

[SleeperG]

While there is much to admire about Senator Lieberman, where does that put the party in four years? Many have been encouraging McCain to take a one-term pledge. Would you want the incumbent vice-president and presumptive front runner to a be a foreign policy hawk/domestic liberal? I think not.

It really doesn't matter if McCain/Lieberman lose though, because 2012 will be wide open.

[Tom]

"George Allen is available. The GOP base LOVES racists. Give Macaca a call!"

It is a well-known fact that Homocrats are more racist than Republicans.

1) A KKK Kleagle is the Democrat's most senior Senator, even to this day.
2) Hillary and Biden said much worse things about Indians than George Allen ever did.
3) Condi, Colin Powell, and Clarence Thomas got to higher positions in the GOP than blacks have gotten in the Democrats.
4) George Wallace was a Democrat.
5) Strom Thurmond was a Democrat when he ran on a segregationist platform.

Get a clue, you left-wing racist.

[Clint]

David Rogers-

Excellent point -- I can't believe I never thought of Governor Rell. I like everything I've heard about her...

[Paddy]

First, Lieberman should resign his committee chairmanship, declare himself to be a Republican and start caucusing with them, and tell us that he has changed some of his critically important liberal views. We can watch his performance in the Senate for some time to see if he is genuine. If he passes the vet, offer him the VP position.

Unless, I am mistaken, a Lieberman switch would deadlock the Senate, require joint committee balance and leadership, and let the VP serve as tiebreaker. This would let Republicans prove that they have reformed.

If Lieberman refuses to switch parties now, forget him.

[tally]

i like lieberman but i doubt mccain will pick him. after the way the hard right continues to treat them, i admit it would be fun to watch the fireworks. won't happen and probably shouldn't.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- It is a well-known fact that Homocrats are more racist than Republicans. --"

Wow. That's logic you can hardly argue with. The homocrat party is full of bigots. Because we all know gays hate colored people.

He winds up. Swings! Oh shit, looks like he dislocated a rotator cuff. Better put some ice on that before it swells up and looks all embarrassing.

[Tom]

"Wow. That's logic you can hardly argue with. "

But I see you totally dodged by 5 indisputable points. Thus, you have tacitly admitted that they are correct, and that Homocrats are racists.

Defeating a Homocrat in a debate is so easy that it is not even an exercise anymore.

tee hee...

[Kevin Murphy]

Hmmm ... I think this kind of thing happened before, but with a sitting VP. John C Calhoun served John Quincy Adams as VP (via a Senate election), then became VP under Adams' enemy, Jackson. Calhoun resigned as VP to take a Senate seat...

[Batman]

Leiberman will get Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense in a McCain administration.

[Batman]

Leiberman will get Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense in a McCain administration.

[Prof Ludvig Von Drake]

VP Wisdom for McCain.
Disqualified: Romney, Rice & Lieberman (because of character, past, and no charisma in that order).
Good choice: Chuck Hagel, Carly Fiorina, Sarah Palin.
Figure it out.

[James]

McCain already has the pro-war Democratic vote locked up, so what does this get him?

And Lieberman is not a centrist. Dorgan is a centrist, Lieberman is a lefty.

[mike]

Yeah Lieberman should tell Osama to simply F--- off. Hitch his cart to McCain's horse and present a ticket that actually IS different, actually DOES represent bi-partisanship, and actually HAS the gravitas to be electable.

I am sick and tired of the Obamadites acting like this should be a coronation and getting snippy whenever someone has the temerity to point out uncomfortable facts or ask uncomfortable questions.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- But I see you totally dodged by 5 indisputable points. Thus, you have tacitly admitted that they are correct, and that Homocrats are racists. --"

Heh. I'll concede that a Homocrat is a racist when you figure out exactly what a Homocrat is. Was Bill Clinton a Homocrat when he signed off on DOMA in '96? Is Barack Obama a Homocrat because of his progressive tax policy? How about Mormon senator from Nevada Harry Reid? Log Cabin Republicans? Are they Homocrats?

I mean, what exactly are you trying to express with your epithet other than your hatred of gays and your hatred of politicians outside the Republican Party?

As for the rest of the bullshit - the 5 indisputable facts? They don't really reflect in the voting records of the Democratic Party. Or the composition of either party, for that matter. Yes, Condi and Colin and Clarence all obtained positions of power under Republican Administrations. But if you look to the Senate or the House you couldn't say the same thing. Republican pols can appoint all the black people they want, but Republican voters don't turn out to support black Republican candidates.

The fact that you've got to stretch back before 1960 to find a viable racist Dixiecrat, when Lyndon Johnson was signing the Civil Rights Act and RFK was running on one of the most progressive platforms in history, seems to your own ignorance in the limelight. And I'm sure you'll use the fact that black people vote Democrat 9 times out of 10 as proof that black people are stupid or confused or victims of some horrible left-wing conspiracy. But for all that talk, it seems Republicans can't stop hanging nooses in their office rooms or turning blind eyes to suffering Katrina refugees or just pulling an O'Reily or a Limbaugh and spouting some of the most racially charged verbal garbage imaginable.

But yes, go back to your fantasy world where John Conyers and Maxine Waters and Barack Obama are all conspiring with 90-year-old Robert Byrd to stick burning crosses in someone's back yard.

Yikes, what a hill-billy.

[James]

"[Lieberman] is closer to Ted Kennedy than John McCain. We don't need a Ted Kennedy one heart beat from the Presidency."

If the last several years are anything to go by, McCain is at least as close to Ted Kennedy as Lieberman is.

[James]

"The fact that you've got to stretch back before 1960 to find a viable racist Dixiecrat"

I can find plenty of viable racist Democrats today. Starting with Sharpton, Jackson, Wright, and Obama. You'd be hard pressed to find a black Democrat anywhere who is not a racist.

[James]

"turning blind eyes to suffering Katrina refugees"

You do know that the people "turning a blind eye" to them were the Democratic governor and the black Democratic mayor, right?

Well, I'm sure those awkward little details won't knock you off your stride. The narrative is more important than the pesky facts.

[edsel mccain]

McCain wants this as bad as the Clinton's, which makes him as dangerous as they are. He was a 96 on the conservative union scale back in the nineties, when he went national against Bush, he decided the only way to the White House was to suck the wad of the NYTimes and the WashPost and he's done it with unusual skill.
Just like the media buried the bitch, they're gonna bury this gullible fool.. the worthless bastard should pick Hillary, 2 desperate peas in a pod, she'll even add some integrity.

[Tom]

"Yikes, what a hill-billy."

er... I'm Asian. Now go ahead and launch your left-wing racism against me on account of that. Come on, you and I both know you want to.

The fact is, Democrats have a far greater history of racism than the GOP, whether you take the last 150 years, or just the last 10 years. My 5 points are just a small subset of examples. Go educate yourself about history, you uneducated girlie-man.

**Girlie-man is a term used by Gov. Schwarzenegger of CA to describe leftists. Since it can accurately be used to describe both male ('girlie' being the insult) AND female ('man' being the insult) Democrats, it is hence a superb term with great philosophical depth.

tee hee....

[jharp]

"The fact is, Democrats have a far greater history of racism than the GOP"

Actually, I believe you are correct.

However, conservatives are the kings of racism.

The old racist conservative dixiecrats of the south migrated to the GOP after the civil rights act of 65.

Liberals are not racist. Lets' be clear on that.

[jharp]

Oh, and Tom I don't believe you are Asian.

I know many, many, many, many, Asians and have worked with them for 25 years.

They are way too educated and smart to buy into the bullshit you spout.

And what's with the Homocrat? If you are Asian you are an Asian bigot.

[Tom]

"Liberals are not racist. Lets' be clear on that. "

True, but Leftists call themselves 'liberals' and 'progressives'. Liberals may not be racist, but Leftists certainly are, and the commenters here are Leftists.

[Tom]

"They are way too educated and smart to buy into the bullshit you spout."

Oh I see. An Asian who is not a leftist is not really an Asian, just like Condi Rice or Clarence Thomas is not an 'authentic' black. Bobby Jindal is not really an Indian, either, apparently.

You have just exhibited the rampant left-wing racism that greatly exceeds any GOP racism, whether in the 1860s, 1960s, or 2000s.

Anyway, I did outsmart you (easily) by providing 5 points that leave you stumped, girlie-man**

**Girlie-man is a term used by Gov. Schwarzenegger of CA to describe leftists. Since it can accurately be used to describe both male ('girlie' being the insult) AND female ('man' being the insult) Democrats, it is hence a superb term with great philosophical depth.

tee hee....

[Daniel]

I like Lieberman a good deal and share his background, but I think he would be a disaster of a VP pick for McCain. He unfortunately brings little charisma to the job of getting elected. If he is supposed to help in Florida -- well, he could not even convincingly carry Florida for Gore in 2000!
One would also think it better to have someone more youthful and with proven executive experience for balance. While Giuliani might well be controversial among some or many consersatives, it makes more sense than Lieberman.

[Worst President Ever]

There's been something like 90 African Americans elected to the House or Senate since 1920. A grand total of three of those were Republicans. All the rest were Democrats. It's nice George Bush appointed Colin and Condie but it doesn't wash away Republican's Southern Strategy. As for Thomas's appointment, that seat was pretty much sure to be filled by an African American after Marshall's death.

Yes, Southern Democrats were racists. But Truman integrated the Armed Services, Kennedy fought for Civil Rights and Johnson strong-armed the Civil Rights bill through. The Democratic Party post-1960 was a force for integration with many of the former Jim Crow Democrats finding a new home in the Republican Party. At the same time, Republicans increasingly turned to racial politics, particularly in the South, to win elections.

In 2005, Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman even recognized how Republicans had used racial divisions as a political strategy and apologized for Republican's Southern Strategy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/13/AR2005071302342.html

[jharp]

"They are way too educated and smart to buy into the bullshit you spout."

Let me be clear, Tom.

The bullshit you spout is what I rendered my judgment from.

Not whether or not you are a leftist or a liberal.