Joe The Paskudnyak*

Keep digging, Joe (4.00 / 1)

The more Joe talks, the deeper a hole he digs.  Pretty soon, he won't have an ounce of credibility left.  He's on his way to being completely unbelievable = irrelevant.

Maybe that's been the point of this whole exercise of keeping him in the caucus.

---

by: chele @ Sun Nov 23, 2008 at 21:20:26 PM CST

Ted Stevens' wife and Hadassah BFF? (0.00 / 0)

Can't find the link now, but there was an article about how the Senate gave convicted felon Ted Stevens a standing ovation on his last day at the Senate.  This needs to be put on a youtube video loop.  It unfortunately may tell us that the problem in the Senate is NOT Dem vs.  GOP, it is insider vs. outsider, and the mutual hand washing that occurs.  they are so caught up in themselves that they don't realize how it looks to give a standing ovation to noen of their own caught at unethical practices.

There was another article about a Dem who practically looks like a Lieberman understudy that I also cannot find, and the bottom line was again Senate doing  weak-kneed enforcement.

Perhaps this is a year when it will become clearer to the populace the extent to which elections are dog and pony shows staged for the appearance of democracy and benefit of the populace, but the same folks keep on running the show.  or some of us are, anyhow.

Tracing the money  as it flows back and forth across the tennis net is one way to get clearer on this.

The philosophical GOP members who say, "It's the Democratic party's turn" are not kidding, it appears.  

---

by: greenpeas @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 08:36:57 AM CST

oh yeah, Hadassah (0.00 / 0)

Sorry, I was so busy sharing that I forgot the point...

Lieberman stood up at the Ted sendoff (sendup??) and said how his wife and Ted's wife were really good friends and people didn't realize that senators were real people with real lives.

Oh, yes we do.  Joe - completely unaware of how it sounds that his wife, the lobbyist, knows the wife of Ted (whose downfall was at the hands of lobbyists?) so well...

If you tell me, "Well, it's unavoidable," I guess I might say, I rest my case.

---

by: greenpeas @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 08:39:16 AM CST

I've only heard paskudnyak (0.00 / 0)

used as a friendly, teasing term (sort of like foos in Lebanese)

I'm just sayin'

.Adding Another Dimension of Vituperation Toxicity to Blogging since 1999!.

---

by: nolopro @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 08:48:51 AM CST

Joe (0.00 / 0)

 I hope  the Censure  Resolution  in State Central, I think on Decenber  goes  forward....any interested democrat  ought  to be buttonholing  their state central person to vote for his censure.

I hope  the leaders of  the censure resolution are organized for this effort....

---

by: BruceRubenstein1 @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 09:58:14 AM CST

Honestly (4.00 / 1)

I think there is absolutely nothing to gain for State Central or CT Democrats in censuring Joe Lieberman at this point.

We all agree the guy is an idiot and what he did was inexcusable, but how will people view CT Dems after this resolution is passed?  With everything going on in the economy, with the state budget in shambles, State Central is going to waste time debating this resolution?

When it passes, the media will throw a mic in Joe's face and he's going to say the exact same thing he said two months ago when this first came up: "what is this, the Soviet Union?"  Everyone will have a good laugh and Joe will go right back to his Homeland Security chairmanship.  State Central and CT Dems will be left with egg on their faces.

President-elect Obama has turned the other cheek.  The Senate Democratic caucus has acted (not well in my opinion, but it has acted).  We won the election.  This is over.  We need to move on and concentrate on the wealth of problems our state and this country faces.  All a censure resolution does is make us look petty.

Two months ago, in the heat of battle, maybe I would have supported it in some revised form.  Today - it's not worth our time.  If you don't like Joe, work in 2012 to replace him.

---

by: CT203 @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 10:34:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

It is more critical now than ever! (0.00 / 0)

Lieberman wants to worm his way back into the Democratic Party in order to prevent a real Democrat from running for the Democratic nomination in 2012.  He wants to keep his right-wing Republican friends, donors, and strategists, at the same time claiming the Democratic mantle.  That's what this is all about.

If we don't stand up as Democrats right now and clearly condemn Lieberman for the liar and Republican that he is, we will be saddled with him for even more years after 2012.  

And this is also about standing up for our values and our party.  We must tell the Senate Democrats and our state central committee that we're better than Lieberman, that we will not put up with anyone in our party pandering to a right-wing slimeball like Lieberman, and that, although he wasn't held to account by Senate leaders, we Democrats will most certainly hold Connecticut leaders accountable for siding with Lieberman.  

Ned Lamont had the guts to stand up to Lieberman and for the Democratic Party two years ago.  We should stand up for him and our party today.  If we let Lieberman get away with his lies, with his actions to hurt our Democratic candidates, and with his smears against Democratic voters, then shame on us!

---

by: thomashooker @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 11:44:25 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I disagree (4.00 / 1)

How would Lieberman be able to prevent a "real Democrat" from running for the nomination in 2012?  He won't be the Dem nominee for Senate in 2012, and I'd expect he won't be favored to win the general running as an independent given his approval ratings across the state.

I voted for Ned Lamont in both the primary and the general in 2006.  I will vote for whichever true Democrat runs against an independent Lieberman in the 2012 general.  I suspect a lot of the people pushing for a censure resolution are people who "stuck with Joe" and now feel wronged by him.  I'm not one of those people.

I share your outrage over what Joe did, but censuring him is a meaningless act that does absolutely nothing but continue a discussion that doesn't need to be continued.  What Joe did hurt Joe.  It didn't hurt Democratic candidates as evidenced by the election results.

Shame on us for giving Joe more play in the media.

---

by: CT203 @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 12:12:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Geez, why don't we just put Joe's picture (0.00 / 0)

back up on the wall at State Central?

Huh?

Of course CT Dems ought to send voters the message that the forgiveness granted by the US Senate, (cloture-related, for sure), does not apply to his relations with the CT Democratic Party.

Scores of people worked hard over the years to further Lieberman's career, and his unnecessary appearance at the GOP convention is unforgivable.

---

by: AndersonScooper @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 16:14:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Message - to voters? (0.00 / 0)

Are voters honestly going to pay attention to a piece of paper that says "Joe Lieberman is dead to us"?  Joe's already lost any reasonable Democratic voter, hasn't he?  I mean, correct me if I'm wrong here and you think that the censure resolution will actually have an impact on the 2012 race.

What I see is that by 2012 whether Joe was censured in 2008 or not isn't going to make a lick of difference.  Meanwhile, issuing the resolution now makes it look like CT Dems are still fighting a battle that we WON three weeks ago - despite the fact that there are new, challenging battles we need to fight for the good of the state and the country.

From a political standpoint the whole thing is ridiculous and will do more harm than good.  Maybe it'll make us feel better for a second, but believe me - it won't change a darn thing.

---

by: CT203 @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 16:59:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I beg to differ. This is entirely about 2012 (0.00 / 0)

Liebeman appears to have every intention to run as a Democrat in 2012 if he can slither his way into that nomination.  Such grandees as Chris Dodd and the other Senate Democrats have come out in his support, and it is highly likely that previously strong supporters within the party's state heirarchy, including state chairwoman Nancy DiNardo, will also take their cue from Dodd & Co and try to return him to Democratic status in time for the election.  If they are permitted to get away with it, real Democrats will be dissuaded from running and Ned Lamont, who deserves the seat, will once again be faced with a hostile party organization standing in his way.

Let's be clear: party leaders fully intend to restor Lieberman to D-CT status.  Only a revolt by Democratic rank-and-file will stop them.  And that revolt must take place right now, or else we will be faced with a fait accomplis well before 2012.

I wish that this were all frivolous and pointless.  But I know these people, and I know Lieberman.  They are trying to make his re-election as a Democrat a certainty and they will unless we stop them.

---

by: thomashooker @ Sat Nov 29, 2008 at 10:37:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

The right thing to do (0.00 / 0)

Sometimes you do a thing because it is simply the correct thing to do.

But then, I certainly wouldn't expect a Liebercrat to know anything about doing the right thing.

---

by: chele @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 11:55:23 AM CST

[ Parent ]

They missed their chance (4.00 / 1)

I have to agree.  This should have been done during the summer/early fall.  State Central won't gain anything by censuring him now.  

As much as I dislike Lieberman, the appropriate time to act on the matter is gone.  They blew their chance.  You don't punish a dog now for peeing on the carpet six months ago. It's time to move on.

The thing we need to do NOW is keep a very close eye on Joe, and be ready to pounce if he screws up.  It's up to US to provide the oversight now; and if necessary, to remind the rest of the Senate how they failed in their jobs.  

Connecticut Bob

---

by: Bob Adams @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 13:00:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

chances (0.00 / 0)

The time has come to hold state central responsible.

1) They choose to give only tepid support to Lamont
2) Many "leadership" choose to actually continue to support Joe after he lost to Lamont

The DTCs have to make it clear that loyalty to Lieberman is not acceptable. They have to force the State Central to take a stand, once and for all, that Lieberman is not acceptable. Any Democrat who says nice things about Lieberman has to know that they do so against the will of the Democrats in the State of CT.

In addition, it has to be made clear that rank and file will not support or do work for any Democrat that doesn't toe this line. If that means that a GOP serves another term because no Dem stands up and says Lieberman is not a part of the CT Democratic Party when running for Gov, then so be it.

Lieberman should be a litmus test in CT. You want money, you want organization, you want support, then you had best stand up and be a Democrat and support the party and it's principles, or you can join Joe and run on the CfL ticket.

I guess at this point the best that we can do is use Joe as a line in the sand. Democrats cross that line at their peril.

The question is not what you are, we already determined that, we are now negotiating price.
electrealdemocrats.com Online since 3/07 -- TimetogoJoe.com Online s

---

by: Met00 @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 20:04:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Harry Reid Needs the Dog Whisperer (0.00 / 0)

What is very current moment is that the dog peed on the carpet and the people in the house (er, Senate) did not punish the dog in a timely way, and when they got around to voting on whether to punish the dog, instead they gave it a, well, a bone.  The owners back in CT don't believe in giving their dog a bone when he pees on the carpet, and they are after all the owners.  So a message as much to the dog as to its handlers in DC is timely, and clarifies that in the future, the owners - those who sent the dog to DC where he has repeatedly peed on the carpet -- have a different set of standards as relates to peeing dogs and the appropriate targets for that pee.  

Frankly, I have to ask whether there is a bad time for making a statement of conscience (Are we going to let Joe have the corner on consciences?  just askin').  Better late than never?

Here is a link to a video about Cesar Millan, the dog whisperer.  It is clearly promotional (but how apropos), but if you watch a few minutes of it, you get the message that dogs misbehave because their owners do not know how to handle them.  They could be talking about Joe and Congress.  And, there is poodle there that may look familiar....

Harry Reid is not the owner.  The people of CT are.  Harry Reid is the kennel director at Doggie Camp.

I think we need to take up a collection and send Cesar Millan to Congress.  He could work wtih Harry, Nancy, and if he has leftover time, help Malia and Sasha with their new dog and maybe Cesar can use the dog as a metaphor to teach their dad some lessons in life at the same time.

Somebody needs to tell the Senate that if you don't want the other dogs peeing on the rug, when a dog pees 7 or 8 times, you don't give it a standing ovation.

---

by: greenpeas @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 21:55:34 PM CST

[ Parent ]

. (4.00 / 1)

I think there is absolutely nothing to gain for State Central or CT Democrats in censuring Joe Lieberman at this point.

Wrong. The loyalty of your activists is a commodity that will wither up if not tended to diligently.

With everything going on in the economy, with the state budget in shambles, State Central is going to waste time debating this resolution?

No, the facts are clear, and no further time for debate is really necessary. They should pass it with the same ease with which the prior meeting's minutes are generally accepted. Plus, is State Central going to fix the budget? That's an insane premise.

When it passes, the media will throw a mic in Joe's face and he's going to say the exact same thing he said two months ago when this first came up: "what is this, the Soviet Union?"  Everyone will have a good laugh and Joe will go right back to his Homeland Security chairmanship.  State Central and CT Dems will be left with egg on their faces.

Your fear of being embarrassed by Lieberman is pathetic. The fact is, we have the right of free association, and by attacking Obama, supporting McCain, and breaking the promises he made to win support from our party in 2006, we're well justified in demanding his hasty exit.

If someone came to your house and defecated on your floor, you would throw them out, and you wouldn't be the second coming of Stalin for doing it. You wouldn't be petty, you'd be right.

Two months ago, in the heat of battle, maybe I would have supported it in some revised form.  Today - it's not worth our time.

You will find that this community supported this measure two months ago, and it was tabled because it was going to be a "distraction" -- which, of course, was bullshit. Distracting State Central from what, exactly?  

–7.25 / –7.28

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...

---

by: mattw @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 18:18:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Paskudnik (0.00 / 0)

Paskudnik is a word used in Yiddish that coems from Russian and it does indeed mean someone horrible, a nasty piece of work.  I never heard my parents use it affectionately--it was always an insult.

But to parallel Joe the Plumber we really should call him Joe the Prevaricator.

---

by: Viking @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 12:18:36 PM CST

More Joe (4.00 / 1)

What the Senate did only effects  Joe's national scene ventures..we here in his  home state where he was elected havent yet had  our say.I disagree with those posters  that sdaid  the time  for State Cental  to take a stand has passed.There is nothing  to prevent State Central from acting, there  won't be egg on their faces  for insisting upon taking a stand, even a stand  that Joe rejects. And sometimes it is important  to take a stand.

---

by: BruceRubenstein1 @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 13:49:35 PM CST

Trader Joe (0.00 / 0)

Lieberman should be consider for expulsion from his synagogue!! He has been a liar, and sleazy person. He cannot back away from taped video comments he made. The guy is horrible. I hope that Conn. will send him home when his seat comes up for re-election. Trader Joe needs to condemned for his actions this election cycle.

http://eye-on-washington.blogs...

---

by: jerrypl @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 17:10:53 PM CST

How Convenient (0.00 / 0)

How convenient for Joe to say we have to move forward, not back and that we have to support our new president, blah, blah blah. Nice way to take yourself off the hook.

---

by: suemag @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 18:17:58 PM CST

Pants on fire! (0.00 / 0)

Liar, liar pants on fire, Joe- you clearly said Barack Obama was not ready to lead. Did you change your mind? I haven't heard you say so. So which is it- were you lying then or now? Either way, you're still a liar. You must think we're really stupid.

---

by: suemag @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 18:23:48 PM CST

This went from here, to Kos (front paged), to Olbermann (0.00 / 0)

Now just who is this Scarce?  

---

by: Sue @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 19:48:36 PM CST

you missed (0.00 / 0)

FP'd this AM at C&L

The question is not what you are, we already determined that, we are now negotiating price.
electrealdemocrats.com Online since 3/07 -- TimetogoJoe.com Online s

---

by: Met00 @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 20:06:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Traffic from DailyKos (4.00 / 1)

The clip above was viewed 3064 times from this page alone yesterday. The sitemeter stats should be quite interesting.

Also, Think Progress used it, as well as some other sites.

---

by: Scarce @ Tue Nov 25, 2008 at 05:37:44 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Quick question (0.00 / 0)

Does anyone think that the Democratic Party of the State of CT will nominate Joe Lieberman in 2012?

It just seems so far from a possibility. I mean his approval with the Dems is less than 30%.

Am I missing something?  

I mean he will not even get the CT for Lieberman party.  

He will have to run as an indie again--maybe party-less this time or he will create another shell party.

So I am wonder what the impact of all these resolutions will be.

---

by: ctdoobee @ Mon Nov 24, 2008 at 20:37:37 PM CST

Exactly (0.00 / 0)

This is exactly my point.  It's unfortunate that some Dems decided to support Lieberman back in 2006 when he lost the party's nomination.  Is that likely to happen in 2012, now that we know (for sure this time - is anyone still not convinced??) what an asshole this guy is?  He's going to run as an independent or with his CfL BS party again.  I'm guessing nobody posting here is supporting him, and unless Ned Lamont ends up as Governor in 2010 hopefully we'll have him as our candidate again.

The fact is in the Senate Joe is an independent who caucuses with Democrats.  Anyone who was paying the slightest bit of attention the last few months knows he's not a true Democrat.  He happens to be registered as a Democrat, but so are many other people who changed the party registration during the primaries just to do Rush Limbaugh's bidding (we know we have a few of these R-turned-D's in our town based on canvassing for our state rep candidate).  Should we ask those people to leave the party too?  I'm guessing they voted for McCain.

The whole thing is silly, we have a guy who effectively deserted the party two years ago and now we're trying to demand that he leave.  He's not going to change his party registration because State Central issues a piece of paper.  In fact - issuing the piece of paper just gives him more attention that we already know he enjoys.  He'll get to do another round on the cable networks, lying his ass off, and we'll all be pissed off again.  Why?  Can't we just end this and move on?  In 2012 I will be standing right by your side making sure this guy is no longer our Senator.

The guy who should be most pissed about this is Barack Obama, and he didn't dignify the controversy with any kind of rebuke.  We shouldn't either.

---

by: CT203 @ Tue Nov 25, 2008 at 08:34:12 AM CST

[ Parent ]