October 28, 2009

10/28: Holy Joe

It feels like the summer of '06 again in the blogosphere. The netroots are blasting Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) following his announcement that he would join a GOP filibuster of Senate Maj. Leader Harry Reid's health care bill. Several lefty bloggers are urging Pres. Obama to pressure Lieberman to vote for cloture, since "it was Obama who intervened to save Lieberman's position in the Democratic caucus last December." Others are urging Reid to give up on trying to get 60 votes and instead use the reconciliation procedure to pass a strong public option. The netroots are also urging Senate Dems to punish Lieberman by stripping him of his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee. Jane Hamsher explains: "[S]ince he's not going to vote with the Democrats on procedure anyway (and why should he -- they've coddled him all along, given him everything he wants, and gotten nothing for it) having him in the caucus is meaningless."

What else is happening in the blogosphere?

• Conservative bloggers (Malkin, Klein) continue to criticize ex-Speaker Newt Gingrich (R) for defending his endorsement of GOP candidate Dede Scozzafava in the NY-23 race. Other righty bloggers (Erickson, Morrissey) are promoting ex-Sen. Fred Thompson's (R-TN) new ad for Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman. Meanwhile, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) became the latest conservative GOPer to give an exclusive statement to RedState announcing his endorsement of Hoffman.
• Several conservative bloggers (Stevens, Riehl) are criticizing CA SEN candidate Carly Fiorina (R) after the Chuck DeVore camp released a video of Fiorina discussing regulation of the web at a recent conference. However, Townhall.com is defending Fiorina. In other SEN news, liberal bloggers (Bowers, Black) are accusing Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) of flip-flopping shamelessly on the Defense of Marriage Act.
• Conservative bloggers (Malkin, Lane, Jessup, Allahpundit) are criticizing Obama for praising Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) at a recent fundraiser.

LIEBERMAN: We Warned You, Dems

Liberal bloggers have never trusted Lieberman, but they're still disgusted by his behavior:

• digby: "I kept hearing in private conversations that everyone was sure that good old Lieb wouldn't join the filibuster. No way, no how. After all 'he's with us on everything but the war.' But it always seemed absurd to me to trust good old Lieb since he's become a bitter, angry, resentful, creepy, arch conservative, vengeful old fuck (which isn't all that different than he always was, but he used to be a little bit constricted by his religious image.)"
• Hamsher: "Joe Lieberman said he 'feared' the 60 vote Democratic majority shortly after the election. Well, sure is a good thing we gave him oversight over Homeland Security, allowed him to use it as a power base and let him have his gavel without any agreement whatsoever to support the caucus on procedural votes. [...] Nice going, Senate Majority Leader Reid. Well, you trusted him, you fought for him -- now you own him."
• Atrios: "He's With Us On Everything But The War. Reid said that to me personally. We tried to warn them..."
• Open Left's Chris Bowers: "One of the main criticisms progressives had of Lieberman leading up to the 2006 primary was that he often joined with Republicans on prominent issues ([Bill] Clinton impeachment, Iraq war) in order to garner huge media attention for himself. Again, that pattern holds."

The Washington Monthly's Steve Benen: "[I]t's worth appreciating how extreme Lieberman's position really is. For some reform advocates, the starting point was single-payer. Then there was a compromise to a robust public option. Then there was another compromise to a negotiated public option. Then there was yet another compromise to a negotiated public option with a state opt-out. Lieberman is saying these compromises aren't enough -- his opposition to competition and giving consumers a choice is so intense, he'd rather kill health care reform then let senators even vote on the bill. It will be a vote decades in the making, giving policymakers a once-in-a-generation opportunity. And as of today, Lieberman would rather let reform die than give some Americans in some states a choice between a public and a private insurance plan."

Daily Kos' Markos Moulitsas: "I live in mortal fear that Lieberman will retire before we get a chance to crush him in 2012."

LIEBERMAN II: Stop Making Sense

Many liberal bloggers are complaining that Lieberman's stated reasons for opposing the public option make no sense:

• The New Republic's Jonathan Chait: "[Lieberman's position] literally makes no sense whatsoever. A public plan does not provide a new entitlement. It just doesn't. It's a different form of providing an entitlement. Nor is it more expensive. In fact, the stronger versions of the public plan would cost less money. Lieberman is just babbling nonsense here."
• Think Progress' Matthew Yglesias: "It's...worth emphasizing that while only the House-style public option will save a lot of money, even the relatively weak public option from the Reid draft would save money relative to doing what Lieberman wants. He's talking about filibustering a deficit-reducing bill in order to try to remove a cost-reducing provision, and doing so on grounds of fiscal probity. It's ludicrous, and the political reporters covering him need to point this out."
• TAPPED's Tim Fernholz: "A public insurance option will make health-care reform cheaper. It is less expensive. It's not even a proper entitlement! The only people who stand to lose money on the proposition are insurance companies, who would lose their monopoly status and be forced into actual competition. That Lieberman would stand up and claim to be acting in a fiscally responsible manner is simply intellectually dishonest. Lieberman represents many insurance companies in Connecticut, who have funded him very well in the past. Hey, maybe he's not just schilling for the insurance industry, but the fact that he can't come up with a coherent reason for his opposition doesn't help him make the case that he has any principles whatsoever."
• MyDD's Charles Lemos: "Joe, you ignorant war-monger, you. Don't lie to us pretending that you care about the deficit when you support a war in Afghanistan that as of August was running a cool $4 billion a year and that's before we consider sending more troops."

The Washington Post's Ezra Klein doesn't take Lieberman's filibuster threat too seriously because "[his] argument against the public option is simply false" and "Lieberman won't be able to hang onto this argument for very long, and then what?" In contrast, FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver takes Lieberman's threat very seriously "because the usual things that serve to motivate a Congressman don't seem to motivate Joe Lieberman."

LIEBERMAN III: Your Move, Obama

Several liberal bloggers are calling on Obama to pressure Lieberman:

• Hamsher: "Obama called [WV Sen.] Jay Rockefeller and twisted his arm to vote for the Finance Committee bill. So, a call to Lieberman really isn't too much to ask. And if the President lets Senate Democrats know he wants Lieberman's gavel to get yanked, they probably will go along at this point -- especially if the Majority Leader is calling for the same thing. I doubt many in the Senate will be happy about having him undermine the caucus like this. All of Lieberman's power in the Senate comes from his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee. Without it, he's nothing. And since he's not going to vote with the Democrats on procedure anyway (and why should he -- they've coddled him all along, given him everything he wants, and gotten nothing for it) having him in the caucus is meaningless. [...] If Obama truly does support the public option, he'll be twisting Joe's arm. Likewise, Harry Reid. If they don't, if Reid and Obama protect his chairmanship -- or water down the bill to get his 'support' -- we'll know it was all just a nice bit of theater."
• AMERICAblog's John Aravosis: "Two things here: (1.) Lieberman needs to be told that he's out of the caucus and loses his committee chair if he does this. (3.) President Obama can switch Lieberman's vote. It was Obama, after all, who campaigned for Lieberman when everyone else deserted him, and it was Obama who intervened to save Lieberman's position in the Democratic caucus last December. Lieberman owes Obama. Currently, Lieberman is making a mockery of Obama by letting Obama save him, and then knifing the president every step of the way. It's time for the President to call in his chits with Lieberman, or destroy Lieberman - Obama has the power to do both. And after all, the White House endorsed Reid's plan yesterday, and we take them at their word that they're on board. So this is a perfect opportunity for them to show how on board they are."

Other lefty bloggers are calling on Senate Dems to use reconciliation to pass a public option:

• Daily Kos' mcjoan: "Let's use reconciliation for the good parts of the bill, like a robust public option that [NY Sen. Chuck] Schumer says would be most effective, and use the regular legislative process for the insurance company refroms, etc. And, while the Senate is at it, they should be stripping Lieberman's chairmanship and removing him from the caucus."
• TalkLeft's Big Tent Democrat: "In a way, this is good news. [...] Since Lieberman is there, then [AR Sen. Blanche] Lincoln, [LA Sen. Mary] Landreiu and [NE Sen.] Ben Nelson will go there too. No health care reform through normal procedure. Notice especially Lieberman says he will filibuster even Snowe's Trigger (so much for Rahmbo's grand deal with the Princess from Maine.) Reconciliation it is. Oh by the way, that means we go back to the ROBUST public option with NO opt out. That's the good news."

Meanwhile, several liberal bloggers (BooMan, Cole, Bellows) are blasting Reid for his handling of the politics of health care reform.

LIEBERMAN IV: The GOP Loves Joe

Conservative bloggers were thrilled by Lieberman's announcement:

• Townhall's Meredith Jessup: "Go Joe!"
• NRO's Tevi Troy: "Go Joe! Kudos to Joe Lieberman for his announcement that he will oppose a Democratic health bill if it includes a public option."
• The Weekly Standard's Michael Goldfarb: "Joementum 2012? Is he the greatest senator ever? He fought for victory in Iraq, he's fighting for victory in Afghanistan, and he's fighting to save us all from Obamacare. Who needs Olympia Snowe when you've got Joementum?"

Several righty bloggers are suggesting that Dems can only blame themselves for Lieberman's behavior:

• RedState's Erick Erickson: "Thank you lefty bloggers so very much for primarying Joe Lieberman and helping him be bold enough to shaft you."
• NRO's Rich Lowry: "Maybe Democrats can try to purge Lieberman in a hateful campaign of vituperation. Oh yeah -- they already tried that."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Shifting CW On Afghanistan?

Mother Jones' Kevin Drum:

"Mainstream hawkish pundits rarely have a change of heart that leads them fully into the withdrawal camp. They'll often get to the point where they hem and haw a bit, explaining all the downsides of continued engagement and the longs odds against success, but then they'll conclude with either a reluctant insistence that we have to keep on fighting anyway, or else a murky affirmation that there's no good choice to be had, just a least bad one.

But Afghanistan is changing that. Tom Friedman has now joined George Will in flatly recommending that we leave. 'China, Russia and Al Qaeda all love the idea of America doing a long, slow bleed in Afghanistan,' he says today. 'I don't.' The conventional wisdom is slowly but surely shifting before our eyes. So who will be the next bigfoot pundit to jump ship?"

LEST WE FORGET: YouTube Comment Or e. e. cummings?

McSweeney's contributor Francois Vincent:

1. loog a his lirow nose
2. there is some shit I will not eat
3. LISN bud LISN
4. this i bad sorry to saY
5. leave her alone
she's not your gal
6. She is Lucifierian !
7. THuNdeRB
loSSo!M iN
8. aThe):l
9. stunned. i. am. stunned. every question speaks to us
10. What is nothing?

YouTube comment: 1, 4, 6, 9, 10

e. e. cummings: 2, 3, 5, 7, 8

Posted by Ian Faerstein at October 28, 2009 12:30 PM