The next maverick

[TexasTiger 12,829]

I like this guy. I think he may be the Dems' Hagel. Which means that he will frustrate his party from time to time.

Webb May Be Senate Maverick

By Tim Craig and Michael D. Shear

Washington Post Staff Writers

Sunday, November 12, 2006; Page C01

James Webb walked into the Fish Market restaurant in Alexandria in December and wanted longtime Democratic strategist Steve Jarding to answer just one question: What were his chances of defeating Sen. George Allen ®, one of Virginia's most popular politicians?

"Give me a number. What are my odds?" Webb, who had never run for elective office, asked.

Virginians React to New Blue Congress

Democrat James Webb's victory over Republican incumbent Sen. George Allen gave democrats a 51-seat majority in the Senate after republicans had already lost control of the House of Representatives on election night. Washington-area residents question how much can be accomplished with a republican president and an all-democratic congress.

"I said, 'Jim, they are really low,' " Jarding recalled. Webb shot back, "Give me a number."

After Jarding said "15 percent," Webb confidently said, "If I have that much of a chance, I will take it and win."

Webb's long shot paid off last week as he unseated Allen after a bruising campaign, giving Democrats control of the Senate.

With the campaign having centered on Allen's gaffes as much as it did on Webb's views on issues, few know what to expect when the former Marine and novelist enters the nation's most exclusive club, where the art of the deal rules the day.

But Webb, a former Republican and Reagan administration official, said he might be a bit of a maverick in the Senate, which could frustrate Democratic leaders who poured more than $6 million into his campaign.

"I have my own views, and I have a lot of experiences, and I think I can bring the experiences I had to issues rather than having to read off a party briefing sheet," Webb said Friday in an interview.

Webb said he will model himself after former New York senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D), whom he described as someone "who had government experience that was shaped by the intellectual world."

But being a senator can be as much about politics as policy, and Webb on the campaign trail was almost the antithesis of the typical politician.

Webb was nervous in front of large crowds, couldn't understand why people wanted to shake his hand and hated asking people for money. He even turned down checks from people he didn't think could afford to give up, as he called it, "their gas money."

Until a few months ago, he would walk down the center of the street during a parade instead of zigzagging the route to shake hands. When he got tired, he refused to make fundraising calls or he took time off. That's what he did when he decided not to visit churches the Sunday before the election.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ml?nav=hcmodule

[otterinbham 0]

Given that Webb was Secretary of the Navy under Reagan, he certainly doesn't fit the standard Democratic archetype.

[TexasTiger 12,829]

Given that Webb was Secretary of the Navy under Reagan, he certainly doesn't fit the standard Democratic archetype.

He's definitely his own guy. Should be interesting to watch.

[otterinbham 0]

Actually, I thnk a lot of the newly elected Dems will probably be more centrist than anybody expects. Further, I think Lieberman will probably lead a "party within a party" on the subject of foreign affairs and defense, probably rallying around several of the newly minted Democratic Senators from outside the Rust Belt. After all, Clinton campaigned against him in his own state. What hold does anybody have on Lieberman now?

[otterinbham 0]

On the other hand....

HARTFORD, Conn. --Sen. Joe Lieberman on Sunday repeated his pledge to caucus with Senate Democrats when the 110th Congress convenes in January, but refused to slam the door on possibly moving to the Republican side of the aisle.

Asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he might follow the example of Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont, who left the Republicans in 2001 and became an independent, ending Republican control of the U.S. Senate, Lieberman refused to discount the possibility.

"I'm not ruling it out but I hope I don't get to that point," he said. "And I must say -- and with all respect to the Republicans who supported me in Connecticut -- nobody ever said, 'We're doing this because we want you to switch over. We want you to do what you think is right and good for our state and country,' and I appreciate that."

A spokeswoman for Lieberman would not elaborate when contacted by The Associated Press.

Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont defeated Lieberman in the Democratic primary in August. Lieberman was elected to a fourth term last Tuesday as an independent, and said Sunday his political affiliation will be as an "Independent Democrat."

The Democrats won control of the Senate with 51 seats. Lieberman and newly elected Bernie Sanders of Vermont are the Senate's only Independents.

A switch to the Republicans would bring the Senate to a 50-50 division, giving Republican Vice President Dick Cheney opportunities to break tie votes.

Jeffords' decision to quit the GOP and become an independent tipped the balance of an evenly divided Senate, handing control to the Democrats with a one-vote margin.

[TexasTiger 12,829]

On the other hand....

HARTFORD, Conn. --Sen. Joe Lieberman on Sunday repeated his pledge to caucus with Senate Democrats when the 110th Congress convenes in January, but refused to slam the door on possibly moving to the Republican side of the aisle.

Asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he might follow the example of Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont, who left the Republicans in 2001 and became an independent, ending Republican control of the U.S. Senate, Lieberman refused to discount the possibility.

"I'm not ruling it out but I hope I don't get to that point," he said. "And I must say -- and with all respect to the Republicans who supported me in Connecticut -- nobody ever said, 'We're doing this because we want you to switch over. We want you to do what you think is right and good for our state and country,' and I appreciate that."

A spokeswoman for Lieberman would not elaborate when contacted by The Associated Press.

Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont defeated Lieberman in the Democratic primary in August. Lieberman was elected to a fourth term last Tuesday as an independent, and said Sunday his political affiliation will be as an "Independent Democrat."

The Democrats won control of the Senate with 51 seats. Lieberman and newly elected Bernie Sanders of Vermont are the Senate's only Independents.

A switch to the Republicans would bring the Senate to a 50-50 division, giving Republican Vice President Dick Cheney opportunities to break tie votes.

Jeffords' decision to quit the GOP and become an independent tipped the balance of an evenly divided Senate, handing control to the Democrats with a one-vote margin.

I don't know if Joe ever plans to run again, but while campaigning he promised to caucus with the Dems. I doubt most CT voters would forgive him if he hands the deciding vote to Cheney in the Senate. I also think that 2008 is far more favorable to Dems picking up more seats than was 2006. He may end up cutting off his nose to spite his face.

[otterinbham 0]

On the other hand....

HARTFORD, Conn. --Sen. Joe Lieberman on Sunday repeated his pledge to caucus with Senate Democrats when the 110th Congress convenes in January, but refused to slam the door on possibly moving to the Republican side of the aisle.

Asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he might follow the example of Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont, who left the Republicans in 2001 and became an independent, ending Republican control of the U.S. Senate, Lieberman refused to discount the possibility.

"I'm not ruling it out but I hope I don't get to that point," he said. "And I must say -- and with all respect to the Republicans who supported me in Connecticut -- nobody ever said, 'We're doing this because we want you to switch over. We want you to do what you think is right and good for our state and country,' and I appreciate that."

A spokeswoman for Lieberman would not elaborate when contacted by The Associated Press.

Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont defeated Lieberman in the Democratic primary in August. Lieberman was elected to a fourth term last Tuesday as an independent, and said Sunday his political affiliation will be as an "Independent Democrat."

The Democrats won control of the Senate with 51 seats. Lieberman and newly elected Bernie Sanders of Vermont are the Senate's only Independents.

A switch to the Republicans would bring the Senate to a 50-50 division, giving Republican Vice President Dick Cheney opportunities to break tie votes.

Jeffords' decision to quit the GOP and become an independent tipped the balance of an evenly divided Senate, handing control to the Democrats with a one-vote margin.

I don't know if Joe ever plans to run again, but while campaigning he promised to caucus with the Dems. I doubt most CT voters would forgive him if he hands the deciding vote to Cheney in the Senate. I also think that 2008 is far more favorable to Dems picking up more seats than was 2006. He may end up cutting off his nose to spite his face.

Oh, I don't know about that. I think Joe Lieberman signals a trend. Namely that voters prize an independent person over one who carries the water for Brand X political party. Nobody can ever say that Lieberman sells out principles, that's for sure. Evidently, selling out his party isn't that big a deal for the voters, who really don't like either Republiicans or Democrats.

[TexasTiger 12,829]

On the other hand....

HARTFORD, Conn. --Sen. Joe Lieberman on Sunday repeated his pledge to caucus with Senate Democrats when the 110th Congress convenes in January, but refused to slam the door on possibly moving to the Republican side of the aisle.

Asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he might follow the example of Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont, who left the Republicans in 2001 and became an independent, ending Republican control of the U.S. Senate, Lieberman refused to discount the possibility.

"I'm not ruling it out but I hope I don't get to that point," he said. "And I must say -- and with all respect to the Republicans who supported me in Connecticut -- nobody ever said, 'We're doing this because we want you to switch over. We want you to do what you think is right and good for our state and country,' and I appreciate that."

A spokeswoman for Lieberman would not elaborate when contacted by The Associated Press.

Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont defeated Lieberman in the Democratic primary in August. Lieberman was elected to a fourth term last Tuesday as an independent, and said Sunday his political affiliation will be as an "Independent Democrat."

The Democrats won control of the Senate with 51 seats. Lieberman and newly elected Bernie Sanders of Vermont are the Senate's only Independents.

A switch to the Republicans would bring the Senate to a 50-50 division, giving Republican Vice President Dick Cheney opportunities to break tie votes.

Jeffords' decision to quit the GOP and become an independent tipped the balance of an evenly divided Senate, handing control to the Democrats with a one-vote margin.

I don't know if Joe ever plans to run again, but while campaigning he promised to caucus with the Dems. I doubt most CT voters would forgive him if he hands the deciding vote to Cheney in the Senate. I also think that 2008 is far more favorable to Dems picking up more seats than was 2006. He may end up cutting off his nose to spite his face.

Oh, I don't know about that. I think Joe Lieberman signals a trend. Namely that voters prize an independent person over one who carries the water for Brand X political party. Nobody can ever say that Lieberman sells out principles, that's for sure. Evidently, selling out his party isn't that big a deal for the voters, who really don't like either Republiicans or Democrats.

Maybe. But when Lowell Weicker turned Indy in CT years ago he didn't promise to caucus with the Dems or Republicans to my knowledge. Lieberman said one thing before the vote, another thing after the vote. The voters there may conclude that is unprincipled. They are not Bush/Cheney fans and I doubt they will appreciate giving them control of the Senate. They will accept Joe voting against the Dem line, but not caucusing with the Republicans, IMO.

[DKW 86 7,419]

So after the CT Dems bury a knife in his back, and he is elected by the PEOPLE of CT, he owes the Dems his allegiance?

[CCTAU 3,312]

So after the CT Dems bury a knife in his back, and he is elected by the PEOPLE of CT, he owes the Dems his allegiance?

Hard to figure ain't it? That's why the dims are kissing his a$$ every chance they can. He signals a change in their constituency. But the first chance they have to squash him, they will. He is an embarrassment to them and a reminder that they can be beat by one of their own excommunicated members.

[TexasTiger 12,829]

So after the CT Dems bury a knife in his back, and he is elected by the PEOPLE of CT, he owes the Dems his allegiance?

No, he owes the voters of CT the integrity of his promise. Many Dems and Indies voted for him with this understanding. If he was up for grabs, he should have said it then, not after the election. He can vote any way he wants, but he promised to caucus with the Dems. Just like Linc Chafee in RI-- he often voted against the party line, but he caucused with the Republicans.

[DKW 86 7,419]

So after the CT Dems bury a knife in his back, and he is elected by the PEOPLE of CT, he owes the Dems his allegiance?

No, he owes the voters of CT the integrity of his promise. Many Dems and Indies voted for him with this understanding. If he was up for grabs, he should have said it then, not after the election. He can vote any way he wants, but he promised to caucus with the Dems. Just like Linc Chafee in RI-- he often voted against the party line, but he caucused with the Republicans.

He owes the Reps that crossed over and voted him in office far more than he owes a few dozen Dems that actuaklly had consciences and didnt vote for the Lamont-bot that the Party wanted in there. If any Dems did vote for him, they were voting against the Party anyway. If they were voting against the party, why would they want him to continue to support the party that buried the knife in his back?

Tex you arent just making NO sense here. You are making NEGATIVE sense. He doesnt owe any Dem in CT anything. They owe him BIG TIME. If I was Leiberman, I would tell Reid what Chair I get to personally choose from or I go Republican and take away his majority before he gets it. Politics is a blood sport and JL owns every card in the deck. Hell I would tell that I will be the Democratic Leader in the Senate or I go Republican. They have a ONE VOTE Majority. JL is THE POWER in the Senate Today. Burying that knife in me would cost the Dems EVERYTHING I could think of the next 6 years.

[TexasTiger 12,829]

So after the CT Dems bury a knife in his back, and he is elected by the PEOPLE of CT, he owes the Dems his allegiance?

No, he owes the voters of CT the integrity of his promise. Many Dems and Indies voted for him with this understanding. If he was up for grabs, he should have said it then, not after the election. He can vote any way he wants, but he promised to caucus with the Dems. Just like Linc Chafee in RI-- he often voted against the party line, but he caucused with the Republicans.

He owes the Reps that crossed over and voted him in office far more than he owes a few dozen Dems that actuaklly had consciences and didnt vote for the Lamont-bot that the Party wanted in there. If any Dems did vote for him, they were voting against the Party anyway. If they were voting against the party, why would they want him to continue to support the party that buried the knife in his back?

Tex you arent just making NO sense here. You are making NEGATIVE sense. He doesnt owe any Dem in CT anything. They owe him BIG TIME. If I was Leiberman, I would tell Reid what Chair I get to personally choose from or I go Republican and take away his majority before he gets it. Politics is a blood sport and JL owns every card in the deck. Hell I would tell that I will be the Democratic Leader in the Senate or I go Republican. They have a ONE VOTE Majority. JL is THE POWER in the Senate Today. Burying that knife in me would cost the Dems EVERYTHING I could think of the next 6 years.

That's because your ego greatly outweighs your integrity. I understand. That's why you are so perplexed by my post.

You're not making sense as usual. This isn't complicated. Candidate X says "I will do Y if elected." Candidate X should do Y. What don't you get? If he hadn't promised that, it wouldn't really matter. He could do whatever he wanted and not be a liar. If, during the campaign, he had said, "OK, I lost the Dem nomination, now I'm a free man. I will caucus where I see fit," he would not have any obligation to caucus with the Dems. Ain't complicated.

Here's what the scum that you admire so much said earlier:

Earlier last week, after delivering a speech that he called his "closing argument" for his re-election, he called the matter of his party affiliation a "closed issue."

"It is a totally closed issue. I know this is a great sport ... but I pride myself on keeping my word," Lieberman said. "And I have said explicitly that I will, if I am re-elected, I will organize with the Democrats."

http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-liebe...headlines-local

You'd go back on your word in a heartbeat, so you understand Joe. I get it, I get it.

[channonc 466]

I am not sure what the bickering is really all about. Lieberman WILL be Chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee.

He WILL be caucusing with the Democrats, its already been settled. The media has just tried to make a story out of some vague statements.

DKW, you stated that any Dems that voted for him were breaking from the party, well the same can be said for any of the Republicans that voted for him... there was a Republican running for the seat, Alan Schlesinger.

[DKW 86 7,419]

I am not sure what the bickering is really all about. Lieberman WILL be Chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee.

He WILL be caucusing with the Democrats, its already been settled. The media has just tried to make a story out of some vague statements.

DKW, you stated that any Dems that voted for him were breaking from the party, well the same can be said for any of the Republicans that voted for him... there was a Republican running for the seat, Alan Schlesinger.

And even Schlesinger knew he was cannon fodder for JL.

Besides Channonc, I thought the reason for this post was that he had backed away from caucusing with the Dems??? Strange days...

[channonc 466]

Sen. Joe Lieberman on Sunday repeated his pledge to caucus with Senate Democrats when the 110th Congress convenes in January

This is the first part of the first sentence of the article. That pretty much clears it up.

but refused to slam the door on possibly moving to the Republican side of the aisle.

This second part says "Slam the door on" which is media code for "he never said never." While I am sure you would love to see him change parties, trust me, it will not happen. At least not in this Congress. The media loves stuff like this and is trying to make a story where there isn't one.

[DKW 86 7,419]

Sen. Joe Lieberman on Sunday repeated his pledge to caucus with Senate Democrats when the 110th Congress convenes in January

This is the first part of the first sentence of the article. That pretty much clears it up.

but refused to slam the door on possibly moving to the Republican side of the aisle.

This second part says "Slam the door on" which is media code for "he never said never." While I am sure you would love to see him change parties, trust me, it will not happen. At least not in this Congress. The media loves stuff like this and is trying to make a story where there isn't one.

Sorry Lady. The Dems drew first blood in this. Chair of Homeland Security should be spit in the ocean. He has as much power over Reid as he is willing to grab. Just like Jeffords a few years ago, JL could just go Ind and then hang out with the Reps and who would say a word? The Democrats and the Daily Kos turned their backs on him, not the other way around. He owes them bumpkis.

[channonc 466]

Sen. Joe Lieberman on Sunday repeated his pledge to caucus with Senate Democrats when the 110th Congress convenes in January

This is the first part of the first sentence of the article. That pretty much clears it up.

but refused to slam the door on possibly moving to the Republican side of the aisle.

This second part says "Slam the door on" which is media code for "he never said never." While I am sure you would love to see him change parties, trust me, it will not happen. At least not in this Congress. The media loves stuff like this and is trying to make a story where there isn't one.

Sorry Lady. The Dems drew first blood in this. Chair of Homeland Security should be spit in the ocean. He has as much power over Reid as he is willing to grab. Just like Jeffords a few years ago, JL could just go Ind and then hang out with the Reps and who would say a word? The Democrats and the Daily Kos turned their backs on him, not the other way around. He owes them bumpkis.

I agree he owes us nothing, but like TT pointed out, he does owe it to his state to keep his word. CT is still very much a blue state, and if JL switches parties, I would guarantee you a Dem would beat him in an election-- on top of the fact that he would be going back on a campaign promise. Trust me, switching would be political suicide, and eventually the Rs would end up losing that seat anyway.

Another note, being the Chair of the Homeland Security Committee is a big deal, just ask Susan Collins. She made that Committee the center of all political media. This will put JL one of the most sought after Committee Chairs for interviews, trust me a great Committee Chair spot if I ever saw one. He will constantly be in the limelight.

[DKW 86 7,419]

Sen. Joe Lieberman on Sunday repeated his pledge to caucus with Senate Democrats when the 110th Congress convenes in January

This is the first part of the first sentence of the article. That pretty much clears it up.

but refused to slam the door on possibly moving to the Republican side of the aisle.

This second part says "Slam the door on" which is media code for "he never said never." While I am sure you would love to see him change parties, trust me, it will not happen. At least not in this Congress. The media loves stuff like this and is trying to make a story where there isn't one.

Sorry Lady. The Dems drew first blood in this. Chair of Homeland Security should be spit in the ocean. He has as much power over Reid as he is willing to grab. Just like Jeffords a few years ago, JL could just go Ind and then hang out with the Reps and who would say a word? The Democrats and the Daily Kos turned their backs on him, not the other way around. He owes them bumpkis.

I agree he owes us nothing, but like TT pointed out, he does owe it to his state to keep his word. CT is still very much a blue state, and if JL switches parties, I would guarantee you a Dem would beat him in an election-- on top of the fact that he would be going back on a campaign promise. Trust me, switching would be political suicide, and eventually the Rs would end up losing that seat anyway.

Another note, being the Chair of the Homeland Security Committee is a big deal, just ask Susan Collins. She made that Committee the center of all political media. This will put JL one of the most sought after Committee Chairs for interviews, trust me a great Committee Chair spot if I ever saw one. He will constantly be in the limelight.

I humbly bow to your superior knowledge.

[CCTAU 3,312]

Hope he never turns his back that light, you will see at least 39 little knives stuck in it!