He is no longer a Democrat in HIS OWN MIND. He's a Republican. He's pinning all his hopes on McCain.

Meanwhile Harry Reid is waiting until January to figure out what to do with Joe. My guess is that Reid wishes everything could be swept under the rug and forgotten, but that will be difficult, the way Lieberman keeps drawing attention to himself. There will be tremendous pressure to strip Lieberman of his committees, but certainly NOT before January, so that the Republicans don't get control of the Senate for a bout of last-minute devastation (they could adjourn for instance, allowing Bush to make a massive number of recess appointments).

If McCain wins, then Lieberman will get a job in the McCain Administration, probably a cabinet post.

If Obama wins, then Lieberman will simply switch to the Republican party and they will give him seniority for all the good work he's doing them.

In no case is he going to stop attacking Obama and kissing McCain's ass between now and November. He already had a confrontation with Obama aobut his personal attacks and then Lieberman's spokesman issued a big "fuck you" ("Joe Lieberman won't be intimidated") statement. He basically laughed about it.

He couldn't care less what Harry Reid or anybody else thinks. He's got 4 more years to go in office and he'll figure something out to do in that time because he knows he'll never in hell get re-elected in CT. There are plenty of right-wing jobs waiting for him when he leaves office.

He's already realized that he'll never become President. He already failed miserably in his Democratic quest back in 2004, and the Republicans aren't ever going to nominate him no matter what he does. Conservatives don't like Joe no matter how many countries he wants to bomb.

I'd never vote for Trent Lott, but I know what you mean.  At least Lott believes what he believes. I seriously doubt Lieberman really believes anything that isn't politically expedient.

Question is would he have been supporting McCain if it wasn't for Lamount?

If the answer is no and it costs Obama the election maybe you should be the ones doing the listening...

Lieberman is the reason the democrats have held the senate for 2 years.

again

Lieberman is the reason the democrats have held the senate for 2 years.

again

Lieberman is the reason the democrats have held the senate for 2 years.

Lamount almost lost us the senate.

again

Lamount almost lost us the senate.

and one more time because I know it takes repeating for some of this to sink in.

Lamount almost lost us the senate.

That's all. He knows it's either a post in a McCain administration or retire at the end of his term.

Since his term won't end until 2012 though, he could hope to get a job in a Republican administration if a Republican wins in 2012 too, even if McCain loses.

Scrapple - a dish as repulsively gross as Lieberman himself.

Lieberman WILL get seniority status and committee chairmanships from the Republicans when he switches parties. They always want more Senators.

Plus, he'll have spent the last 8 months on the campaign trail stumping for McCain.

Assuming Obama wins, Lieberman just goes into the minority.

As for CT residents, they have nobody to blame but themselves. They can scream all they want to now, but why should Lieberman pay any attention? He isn't going to run for re-election so what does he care what they think?

Once the Republicans adjourned Congress, Bush would immediately make hundreds of recess appointments some of whom couldn't be fired for at least a year, and all of whom would be trying to wreck the government to cause more havoc for an incoming Obama administration, because the only thing blocking him is that Congressional Democrats have kept Congress technically in session for over 1 year now.

Republicans would be grandstanding and demanding "instant action" on a huge number of bills and "Blue Sheep" Democrats would be caving in again. It would be a disaster.

You are simply presuming what the "deal" was, without any basis in fact.  Plus, politics doesn't lend itself to "forever" deals.  

Just be honest, you're making this argument because you like Lieberman,agree with him on foreign policy, and will be voting for McCain.  Come on, we all know what your deal is.

McCain's voting record is clear, unambiguous and nowhere near Democratic. He's got something like a 22% record with the ACLU (even Lieberman pulled 36%). All that "maverick" crap is window dressing. It's lipstick on a very conservative pig.

I do agree about the need for Dems to keep their promises.

"Controlling the Senate for 3.5 years out of 8 was for the greater good even if Lieberman ends up VP for McCain."

McCain will never in HELL pick Lieberman. That's an idiot media idea. Most conservative Republicans would instantly bolt his campaign and sit out the election. They don't trust Joe Lieberman, no matter how much he loves the "surge."

They see him as a "liberal Democrat" for a bunch of his votes over the year and would NEVER trust him 1 (feeble, old) heartbeat away from the Presidency.

McCain picking Joe Lieberman would be the last straw to a conservative party base that doesn't trust McCain anyway and is only supporting him because they hate Obama worse.

I'd hope for McCain to be that stupid, but there's just no point in getting up my hopes for something that will never in hell happen.

There are many possible candidates for VP. Having McCain's name bandied about briefly is not anywhere close to what Lieberman is doing. He has been badmouthing democrats even before his primary. He showed his character when he clearly demanded understanding on one issue (foreign policy) when he was unwilling to do the same for his opponents in the party on that same issue. Do you have an answer for Lieb's hypocrisy on this issue?