When Joe Lieberman left the Senate earlier this year, he
probably muttered a final, "You won't have me to kick around
anymore, you rotten hippies" under his breath. After all, there was
no member of the Senate with a more openly hostile relationship
with his own party than Lieberman. There are conservative Democrats
who buck the party line as often, but all of them come from
conservative states and tack right to maintain their electoral
viability. Not Lieberman—he represented one of the most
liberal states in the country. Lieberman did it for spite.
So it wasn't too much of a surprise to
learn today that Lieberman will be joining the American
Enterprise Institute, where he'll chat by the copy machine with the
likes of John Bolton, Lynn Cheney, Charles Murray, Richard Perle,
and Paul Wolfowitz. Perhaps Lieberman deserves some credit for not
cashing in and becoming a lobbyist like everyone else who leaves
Congress, but it's hard to believe he didn't take the job feeling
pleasure in the knowledge it was just one more thing that would
make liberals dislike him, after he spent the last decade doing
whatever he could to arouse their ire. There was the Iraq War, of
course, which really started it all; Lieberman's enthusiastic
support for the war led to a successful primary challenge in 2006.
(After losing Connecticut's Democratic primary, he won election as
an independent but continued to caucus with Democrats). But
Lieberman's fight with the left reached its apex during the debate
over health-care reform, when he announced that he would join a
Republican filibuster of the bill if it contained a public option,
then when that was dropped, announced he'd join a filibuster if it
contained a Medicare buy-in for people over 55, which he himself
had previously supported. Why? As The New York Timeswrote
at the time, Lieberman decided that a buy-in was
abhorrent "because it was enthusiastically embraced by supporters
of a government-run health system." Or, more succinctly: Screw
you, hippies.
In those last few years, that seemed his animating purpose, to
stick it to the liberals who primaried him and said mean things
about him. It was an ignoble end to a career that otherwise had a
good deal to commend it. So it seems only right that Lieberman ends
up at a place like AEI, where the occasional mild strategic
disagreement notwithstanding, they can all agree on one thing:
hating liberals. (From the American
Prospect)
Yes, you read that right. In an interview with conservative
magazine NewsMax1, Lieberman said, "Now, all of a
sudden, the momentum is with the Republicans. And that's —
thank God — that's the way people have spoken, you know?
That's our democracy." He also praised former Alaska Gov.
Sarah Palin, claiming, "I don't know what her future is,
but I'm just saying everybody should listen."
Not surprisingly, Lieberman wants to extend the
Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. (7/28/2010)
Lieberman enabled our current financial collapse by voting for
the repeal of
Glass-Steagle, the law that separated taxpayer insured deposits
from wild speculation.
"The power of our private managers over our public
servants was exemplified by the ability of business lobbyists to
persuade Congress to nullify the 1993 attempt by the
Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) to require stock
options to be expensed in corporate earnings statements. In June
1993, Senator Joseph Lieberman
introduced a bill condemning the FASB’s attempt, which
passed the Senate overwhelmingly. He later introduced a side bill
that would have put the FASB out of business if it implemented its
option-expensing initiative. The FASB had little choice but to
retreat, a sad example of legislation interfering in accounting
decisions." John C. Bogle in The Battle for the Soul of Capitalism
pg 39
Lieberman: United States Must Pre-Emptively Act In
Yemen 27 Dec 2009 Sen. Joseph
Lieberman, (I-Israel) a renowned hawk and one of the foremost
champions of the invasion of Iraq, warned on Sunday that the United
States faced "danger" unless it pre-emptively acts to curb the rise
of terrorism in Yemen. "Somebody in our government said to me in
Sana'a, the capital of Yemen, Iraq was yesterday's war. Afghanistan
is today's war. If we don't act preemptively, Yemen will be
tomorrow's war. That's the danger we face," LIEberman said during
an appearance on "Fox News Sunday." (From CLG
news)
In an interview with Harper's Magazine, Jane Mayer discusses
the
International Committee of the Red Cross report on torture, and
commented:
The reaction of top Bush Administration officials to
the ICRC report, from what I can gather, has been defensive and
dismissive. They reject the ICRC’s legal analysis as
incorrect. Yet my reporting shows that inside the White House there
has been growing fear of criminal prosecution, particularly after
the Supreme Court ruled in the Hamdan case
that the Geneva Conventions applied to the treatment of the
detainees. This nervousness resulted in the successful effort to
add retroactive immunity to the Military Commission Act. Cheney
personally spearheaded this effort. Fear of the consequences of
exposure also weighed heavily in discussions about whether to shut
the CIA program down. In White House meetings, Cheney warned that
if they transferred the CIA’s prisoners to Guantanamo,
“people will want to know where they have been—and what
we’ve been doing with them.” Alberto Gonzales, a source
said, “scared” everyone about the possibility of war
crimes prosecutions. It was on their minds. Six Questions
for
Jane Mayer, Author of
The Dark Side
"President [sic] Bush, happy Habeas Corpus Day. First thing
this
morning, the president signed into law the Military
Commissions Act of 2006, which does away with
habeas corpus, the right of suspected terrorists or anybody
else to know why they have been imprisoned, provided the president
does not think it should apply to you and declares you an enemy
combatant... Does that not basically mean that if Mr. Bush or
Mr. Rumsfeld say so, anybody in this country, citizen or not,
innocent or not, can end up being an unlawful enemy combatant?
Jonathan Turley, George Washington University Constitutional Law
Professor: It certainly does. In fact, later on, it says that if
you even give material support to an organization that the
president deems connected to one of these groups, you too can be an
enemy combatant. And the fact that he appoints this tribunal is
meaningless. You know, standing behind him at the signing
ceremony was his attorney general, who signed a memo that said that
you could torture people, that you could do harm to them to the
point of organ failure or death. So if he appoints someone like
that to be attorney general, you can imagine who he’s going
be putting on this board."
"Even after supporting John McCain,
Lieberman still holds a top rank within the Senate Democratic Caucus as chairman of the
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The Senate
Democratic Steering Committee needs to know just how much of a
conflict of interest this is. That's why Lieberman Must Go. Sign
the petition at http://BoldProgressives.org/majorityvote"
On Elections
Vote counting cannot be privatized to
hard-right partisans if we are to have real elections. Partisans
have installed machines that are blatantly hackable,
and unauditable. Election rigging is now mostly computer
crime, although there are many imaginative other techniques
frequently used in U.S. elections. Lieberman
was one of the leaders on the HAVA (Help
America Vote Act which perpetuated the problem.)
See the Voting Machine and
the Elections pages.
Senator Lieberman was instrumental in approving Michael Brown to head FEMA with the
explanation that Bush should have any appointee that he wants. No.
He shouldn't. He put cronies, Enron refugees, Iran-Contra felons,
corporate lobbyists, ideologues, religious zealots, and other party hacks and unqualified
operatives
in to public positions and the predictable results were seen
in the aftermath of Katrina, the Iraq War, and the massive debt
run-up. It is profitable though. Naomi Klein in her insightful book
"The Shock Doctrine" describes disaster capitalism as a new
paradigm.
Senator Joe
Lieberman echoed a GOP talking point by promising
that the new president will be welcomed by a terror attack in
2009,
continuing a disturbing trend of talking heads anxiously
relishing
a catastrophic pretext to reinvigorate the Neo-Con agenda.