TPMDC
Reid's Office On Lieberman Campaigning For Republicans: We're Focused On Health Care
Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT)
Share
Send to a friend!
We asked Jim Manley, the spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, whether Sen. Joe Lieberman's (I-CT) position in the Democratic caucus was still secure, in light of his declaration that he will probably campaign for some Republican candidates in the 2010 election -- or as Lieberman said, "I'm going to call them as I see them."
Manley told us: "Senator Lieberman may call them as he see's them, but for Senator Reid, the only thing that he is focused on right now is delivering on the president's promise of comprehensive health care reform."
Comments (20) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Dorn76
October 30, 2009 11:48 AM
Back to lily-livered Harry so soon?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
October 30, 2009 12:05 PM in reply to Dorn76
I actually think this was a pretty dismissive response. Particularly the quoting of Lieberman's words. To me, this response says "Joe can blather all he wants about 2010. We're trying to get something done here."
Far better than "Joe is a valued colleague, and we're certainly going to take his concerns into consideration" kind of response.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
October 30, 2009 12:23 PM in reply to CT Voter
That may be true. Joe will definitely hate being ignored.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Old Grouch
October 30, 2009 12:08 PM in reply to Dorn76
Harry does not multitask well.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
October 30, 2009 12:15 PM in reply to Dorn76
Actually, if your "WTF motivates Lieberman" model assumes (as mine does) that he has a personality disorder, It was exactly the right response.
Whenever Lieberman is threatened with consequences for his latest round of attention-whoring treachery, he escalates and expands the range of his provacative behavior which gets him even more attention than the original treachery.
Refusing to participate in the escalation is the least bad answer. It's liable to create an even more petulant outburst of passive-agressive provocation from Lieberman, but an angry response would do the same, with the added detriment of making him feel powerful and important which is, in the end, what's at the root of all of his perfidy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
October 30, 2009 12:24 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
You give Harry a bunch of credit for being wily. I admit I've been surprised by him before, but rarely.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnMcCSF
October 30, 2009 12:01 PM
Hehe...excellent Harry OUCH
Poor Mentum, desperate for some affections and attentions
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kash79
October 30, 2009 12:07 PM
I can't believe but I'm with Reid on this one, as of now.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
October 30, 2009 12:15 PM
It's not Harry Reid's job to discipline Lieberman - it's Durbin's. And I'd expect the important conversations not to be public.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnMcCSF
October 30, 2009 12:19 PM
Reid's focused like a laser beam. As he should be, for this is the moment of truth for the Democrats
I'm on Harry Reid's side
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
October 30, 2009 12:19 PM
Lieberman planning on re-election in 2012 is a very good thing really, because he's best shot, and possibly only shot, is running as a Democrat with full White House and Party backing (See Specter vs Sestak). If he decides to try and run as a Republican, even if he cuts a deal with McConnell to clear Rell out of the way, he'l likely lose the primary and if he got to the general he'd face a rapid support base for his Dem challenger, and in a Presidential cycle year, meaning president Obama would be a regular visitor to his state.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
October 30, 2009 12:24 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
Huh?
"clear Rell out of the way"? Um, Rell is by far (and I mean BY FAR) the most popular politician in CT. There isn't going to be any attemped clearing that out of the way.
He can only run as an Independent, but he's going to have to start yet another party, because he no longer can use the Connecticut for Lieberman party.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
October 30, 2009 12:27 PM in reply to CT Voter
What's sad is not how many bridges he's burned around here, but that he just doesn't seem to care.
If ever there was a poster-boy for the disconnect between our elected leaders in Washington and "We The People", it's Joe Lieberman.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
October 30, 2009 12:32 PM in reply to Dorn76
I think he doesn't care because he doesn't really realize what's happened. He's still angry about 2006, and 2004 (Joememtum!!!), and when you think about it, he did have prominent CT Dems (statewide ones) endorsing him in 2006 and lukewarm party support for Lamont. So he must feel that he's still in a pretty good position. And he may still be. I still think the most important factor in his decision about 2012 is going to be who the Democrat is.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CVille Dem
October 30, 2009 12:54 PM in reply to CT Voter
Maybe he doesn't care because he's planning to run for President of Israel.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
October 30, 2009 12:23 PM
Also I wonder if Lieberman is trying to negotiate with the White House on the Afghanistan troop numbers, implicitly of course. President Obama is going to announce his decision in a couple weeks time, it will be interesting to see if Lieberman sits on the fence until then and "makes his decision" soon after the Afghanistan announcement is made.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kash79
October 30, 2009 12:43 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
Walter:
You're thinking too hard. My best bet: Joe has advanced stage juvenile attention seeking disorder. Symptoms: Rogue, irrational behavior with severe tantrum attacks. People with the disorder are unpredictable and cannot be trusted with occupations of responsibility and authority.
My second guess: He wants to make a deal, not on issues, but for himself and no time is better than when HRC is on the line.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kash79
October 30, 2009 12:48 PM in reply to kash79
HCR
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Decider
October 30, 2009 12:34 PM
You may think of my pal Joe as just an agitator but remember that it's the agitator in the washing machine that gets the clothes clean. Heh, heh!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jward
October 30, 2009 12:37 PM
Reid's Repub. opponents in Nevada are suggesting that the Mob did not target his family car with a bomb years ago--in spite of police reports ("attempted assassination") and the bomb squad report. This was a device that could have killed his wife, who first noticed something wrong with the car, and kids. Another Gaming Commissioner had previously been killed by a car bomb. The Republicans continue to astound with how low (or in this case Lowden) they go:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/10/harry-reid-nevada-democratic-politics-sue-lowden.html
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?