Friday, November 14, 2008

Hallelujah, at least one Dem stands up to his Senatorial responsibilities ...

Leahy Becomes First Senator To Demand Lieberman's Ouster From Homeland Security Committee

"I'm one who does not feel that somebody should be rewarded with a major chairmanship after doing what he did."

"I felt some of the attacks that he was involved in against Senator Obama...went way beyond the pale," Leahy continued. "I thought they were not fair, I thought they were not legitimate, I thought they perpetuated some of these horrible myths that were being run about Senator Obama."

"I would feel that had I done something similar," Leahy concluded, "that I would not be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the next Congress."

Truth is so simple. The above is not the entire case against Lieberman but is in itself sufficient to decide he should not be chairing important committees for the Dems. Another reason would be that he already has a history of not acting responsibly as chairman.

On the other hand, those attempting to make a case for rewarding Lieberman for acting in a thoroughly irresponsible manner sound more like they're following a Republican script.
--------------------------------

So much for the idea that the Dems can take care of Lieberman later if he should act like himself (which he will). Seems it takes:
a Senate resolution to change a chairmanship, and that resolution could be subject to a filibuster." ...[U]nder Bayh's proposed scenario, Republicans would have every reason to filibuster a new Senate resolution taking Lieberman's chairmanship away if he was proving an effective antagonist of President Obama.
So either the Dems act responsibly now or they are going to pay dearly for their recalcitrant behavior later.

No comments: