November 13, 2008
The “Tool Watch” continues. In the days after the historic 2008 Presidential election, intrigue abounds as to the future political career of Joe “The Tool” Lieberman. Lieberman was re-elected to the Senate in 2006 as an Independent candidate (after having lost the Democratic primary to Ned Lamot). The Tool realized that his betrayal of the Democrats could result in the loss of his many important appointments, should Obama get elected. Joe had already “sold his soul” to Bush, Cheney and Rove in his quest for re-election. At that point, he had no choice but to “go for broke” by endorsing John McCain. However, The Tool went beyond that. He spoke ill of Obama at the Republican Convention. He followed McCain around throughout the Presidential campaign, giving rally speeches himself, in addition to serving as McCain’s “nodder” when McCain would question Obama’s patriotism. The Tool questioned Obama’s patriotism with his own allegations that Obama placed allegiance to the Democratic Party ahead of his allegiance to the country. The Tool evoked further outrage from Democrats by campaigning for “down ticket” Republicans, while stumping around the country for McCain and Palin. Now that Obama has been elected President, many Democrats are hungry to avenge The Tool’s malicious acts by stripping him of the appointments earned while in good standing as a member of the Democratic Party. The most notable of these is his chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. President-elect Obama has expressed his desire to see Lieberman remain in the Senate Democratic Caucus. Obama has said nothing about The Tool’s numerous committee and subcommittee memberships or chairmanships. In keeping with his “No Drama Obama” image, the President-elect appears to have distanced himself from any “blood feuds” involving Lieberman.
My animosity toward The Tool is based on the fact that he is a pathetic ass-kisser. He knew that his committee appointments would be in jeopardy in the event of an Obama victory. Accordingly, he didn’t simply endorse John McCain. He followed McCain around as a stray dog, looking for a new home. Those of us with the experience of having worked with such people, know that these individuals don’t deserve much in the way of respect. One of the reasons we enjoy watching “action movies” is because the “ass-kisser” is usually the first person to get killed (by either the hero or the villain). It seems as though justice and karma are well-served in these movies, when such cretins get their due.
Many people who consider themselves “liberal Democrats” seem anxious to make The Tool an example for future, would-be defectors. On November 12, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow expressed her concern that the Lieberman case could set a precedent, regardless of what action the Senate Democrats might take in light of The Tool’s transgressions. Her November 10 program included an interview with Steve Clemons of The Washington Note website. Mr. Clemons suggested removing Lieberman from his chairmanship of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs because of the The Tool’s fear mongering on the subject of homeland security throughout the 2008 campaign. Clemons emphasized the proposition that Lieberman should not be able to use homeland security or national security as a foundation to batter Democrats who want a smarter national security policy.
Rachel Maddow discussed this subject again on November 12, with Indiana Senator Evan Bayh. Senator Bayh discussed the possibility that Lieberman might be unwilling to suffer the indignity of being stripped of his appointments and thus relegated to the status of backbencher. Bayh worried that under such circumstances, The Tool might self-destruct: resign from the Senate and allow Connecticut’s Republican Governor (Jodi Rell) to appoint a “pure Republican” to replace Lieberman. To Bayh, this would be a more undesirable alternative than putting up with a traitor. His logic seems based on the rationale that because Lieberman is such a tool, the Democrats could make him their tool once again. Bayh suggested a two-part compromise. First, Lieberman should be allowed to retain his chairmanship of the Committee on Homeland Security with “oversight”. Bayh pointed out that a committee chairman could be replaced at any time. If those overseeing The Tool reached the conclusion that he should be ousted, it would only then become appropriate for such action. The second part of Bayh’s proposed compromise would involve an apology from Lieberman for his antics during the 2008 campaign. I would like to suggest another alternative. In the event Lieberman might be unwilling to make such an apology, the Senate Democrats should demand that The Tool have the word “Craftsman” tattooed on his forehead.
Barack Anxiety Builds On The Left
December 8, 2008
With each passing day, we see an increase of editorial essays with the same theme: After winning the election, will Barack Obama abandon the liberal or progressive base of the Democratic Party? Some of the more strident ideologues from the liberal side of the spectrum are becoming more vocal in expressing anxiety about where the Obama Administration might take us. This distress results from the President-elect’s recent naming of Cabinet and other high-level appointees.
For example, On December 1, Katrina vanden Heuvel posted an article on The Nation website, expressing dismay over Obama’s decision to allow Robert Gates to continue serving as Secretary of Defense under the new administration. The criticism she voiced about the new foreign policy / national security team exemplifies the perspective of many writers concerning the entire list of appointments disclosed by Obama so far:
Commentator David Sirota has been quite vocal in articulating his disappointment over Obama’s cabinet picks. Back on November 19, he had this to say on the Campaign for America’s Future website:
Robert Scheer voiced similar uncertainty about Obama’s appointments in a December 2 posting on the Truthdig website:
The analyses of Obama’s loyalty to the progressive base of the Democratic Party were not restricted to the liberal-oriented blogs. John Harwood’s article in the December 6 New York Times provided us with a more optimistic view of what we might expect from the Obama Administration:
Robert Creamer demonstrated a similarly positive outlook in his November 24 posting on the Campaign for America’s Future website:
As we approach the initial days of the Obama Administration, it seems amusing to observe more squeamishness about our next President, coming from those on the political left than from those on the right. The McCain campaign’s old theme: “Who is Barack Obama?” seems to be lingering in the minds of many Obama supporters. Saturday Night Live taught a lesson to all of the worriers, with the sketch: “Obama Plays It Cool” . Fear not, ye of leftist leanings! Just stay cool.