Barack Obama won the election the far far left liberal Democrats wanted Joe Lieberman "punished" by stripping his position as Chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, for daring to use his vote the way he thought best and after the Democratic caucus met, it was determined that Joe Lieberman would keep his chairmanship of that committee and lose chairmanship of a subcommittee for the Environment and Public Works Committee.
“He’s part of this caucus,” the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, said after the Democratic caucus voted behind closed doors in the old Senate chamber off the Capitol Rotunda. “We are not looking back. We are looking forward.”
Mr. Lieberman, who had angered many Democrats by campaigning for his longtime friend Mr. McCain and sharply criticizing Mr. Obama, emerged from the private session looking pleased. He called the result “fair and forward-looking” and one of “reconciliation and not retribution.”
YouTube clip of Harry Reid making the announcement below, published by TPM.
The far far left liberal Democrats across the web have been actively campaigning for Lieberman's removal from the Democratic caucus as well as his being stripped of his chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and with today's news about this not happening, a few of them are howling in outrage as evidenced by Jane Hamsher from FireDogLake:
I hope this puts to rest the notion that this is all some master stroke of kumbayah, of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer.
This is about telling you that you mean nothing. That democracy is a nice word, but it should never threaten the entitlement of the most exclusive club in the world.
No matter what Joe Lieberman does, the people who are protecting him hate you much more than they hate him.
The same type of temper tantrum can be found over at Americablog:
Maybe we don't need those extra Senate seats in Alaska, Minnesota and Georgia. I mean, I'd love for Begich, Franken and Martin to win, but what's the point? Why bust our asses for these guys, for the party, when people like LIeberman, who actually campaigned AGAINST some of these guys, are rewarded for their betrayal? It's becoming increasingly clear that the current crop of Democrats are genetically incapable of showing, or growing, a spine. The only way to get anything in this party is to publicly betray the party, to beat the living crap out of them, to stick the knife in deep and twist. Lesson duly noted.
Blah blah blah blah blah... no doubt when another election comes up they will suck it up and do what the Democratic politicians know they will do and vote party anyway, but for now, they are having their little hissy fits.
Last example, so it doesn't get repetitive but shows the basic theme of the far far left's howling at the moon in outrage, comes from Daily Kos:
But in all seriousness, I think we've now learned that Joe Lieberman is the smartest politician in DC. He knew Democrats were spineless capitulators who would cave at the merest threat no matter how many times he shit in their face.
He's probably having a great laugh about it just about now.
Given how much he is hated by his constituents, he at least knows that the Senate Democratic caucus are a bunch of spineless asses utterly unwilling and unable to deliver the change the American people requested.
Chris Cillizza from The Washington Post's "The Fix" pretty much sums it up:
Asked what it would mean if Lieberman kept his chairmanship, one Senate Democratic aide said bluntly: "The left has been foiled again. They can rant and rage but they still do not put the fear into folks to actually change their votes. Their influence would be in question."
Last but not least, David Sirota from Huffington Post:
So, in many ways, the public attacks on "the Left" from congressional Democrats - while motivated from their Reagan-era cultural hatred of Dirty Fucking Hippies - is to be completely expected from a party that has failed to deliver on every major progressive promise it has made, and has nonetheless faced no real retribution. It is par for the course from leaders who quite understandably feel little fear from a still-weak progressive movement.
They believe - with justifiable reason - that come election time we'll all forget their failings, whether failing to end the war or failing to disempower Lieberman. They believe that most "progressive movement" activists will actually do what they did during the last election - berate anyone who floats the idea that movement organizing and carrot-and-stick treatment of the Democratic Party during election time is actually a good thing. They believe, in short, that come 2010, we'll all fall in line and be an ATM machine of partisan campaign contributions and candidate volunteer time because we are still very much organized as a party, not a movement.
And here's the thing: Except for a few fleeting primaries, most of recent history suggests their calculation is right.
So, bottom line is, Lieberman got a little slap on the wrist, but kept what was most important to him. Senate Democrats showed they would not cave to netroots and far left liberals of their party and the netroots are "claiming" they are understand they cannot force their politicians to comply with them, and whining about how they aren't "respected", while throwing tantrums.
They will still fall in line like robotic lapdogs in 2010.
You catch more whining and fits of temper over at memeorandum.
.
