he'll be 70 by election day 2012. I think the trick is to get him not to run for re-election. That way, if Obama isn't popular in 2012, we don't risk another Lieberman win. If Obama is popular, I think Lamont would take him out.

If Lieberman stops cloture, then I say kick him out of the party. He has one chance to redeem himself. If he warrants by actions other than 2008 expulsion from the party, then we can run against him and win.

Short answer -- No

The CT resolution is ridiculous.  Joe Lieberman is NOT A DEMOCRAT, though he caucuses with them in the Senate. Same as Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Asking him to "resign" or "leave" the party is a foolish notion when the party voters already rejected him in 2006. He chose then to LEAVE THE PARTY to run as a "CT for Lieberman" Independent.

I applaud the sentiment behind it, and I would support a "censure."  But, to ask him to "resign" procedes from a false assumption.

I was hoping Lieberman would lose his chairmanship, but I disagree that committee chairmanships are the place to punish wayward Democrats. The appropriate way would be to withhold DSCC funds or surrogates, though of course it's too late for that.

Lieberman will pay the price when he tries to form consensuses in his committee and on the floor. What first-term Democrat is going to follow Lieberman in an unpopular direction? And for the senior generation, it's looking harder and harder to come to Joe's defense.

It's funny that I was just watching season one of The Sopranos. Tony just threw his support publicly to Uncle Junior, but below the surface, he took more power for himself and shoved his uncle to the side. I have to think that Obama's support came with a price for Joe to pay-- and his power may be fading as fast as his relevance.

I took a quick look at what the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs actually does (http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/index.cfm ?Fuseaction=About.Jurisdiction) and it became clear to me that Henry Waxman's ascendancy is far bigger than Lieberman's stagnancy.

I anticipate a major shift in the organization of the Dept of Homeland Security. The Senate Committee's jurisdiction over DHS is already limited (e.g. it has no jurisdiction over the Coast Guard, TSA, Secret Service, INS and Border Patrol) and I'll bet FEMA is removed from DHS in the next year or two.

On the Government Affairs side, it's Carl Levin's subcommittee that gets to conduct investigations (you know, what Waxman used to do on the House side).

So my guess is that in lieu of a punishment for Mr. Lieberman's Uncle Junior moments, Obama and the Democrats will just shrink his little territory and let him fade into obscurity until he retires.

joe is still stuck being joe. He's very high on himself, and moralistic, that's why he left his first wife, she wasn't good enough for lofty him. He'll get to keep his ill-gotten gains, but he'll still have to be himself, and I while I can imagine many I'm glad I'm not, he's on that list.  

Something that roils me is labelling as revenge the desire to strip Lieberman of his chairmanship. Yea, well, I guess sixty-plus million people decided to take revenge on 4 November when they voted against the current party in power in the White House. They're called ELECTIONS and, as Barbara Boxer so succinctly put it, elections have consequences. And that's what we have here with Lieberman. I don't like his policies, the people with whom he associates and their policies, etc. He can't be trusted, and the only person he represents is himself. So why can't I just simply say I want him voted out without the revenge label?  

Does Connecticut have a recall process for Senators?

Barack Obama continues to show the world that he looks at situations from a different perspective than anyone else in politics.  Most Dems want Lieberman to pay a price for what really were horribly disgusting transgressions.  Instead of being vindictive like normal people, Obama would rather gather up a whole stable of people that owe him a huge favor.  It's just one more building block in the plan to actually get things done instead of play partisan politics.

It's simple. Do not donate a single dollar to any of the democrats who voted for Lieberman. It is that simple.

Let's give Harry Reid a run for his money.

Put Lieberman on the spot and ask him again to clarify the 60 vote thing he said he did not want to see happen.

Put Lieberman on the spot and ask him to endorse Jim Martin over Saxby.

Put Lieberman on the spot and ask him if he is bipartisan why hasn't he endorsed a SINGLE DEmocratic PArty senator in the last 2 years?

Why don't these Conn. Democrats recall the dude? Is there some legal reason is can't be done there?