During the wild days of run-away Republican corruption in the last decade a ‘liberal’ group was formed to challenge it. The Group was CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) and it was suppose to be a Democratic/progressive/liberal answer to the crazy Judicial Watch organization that spent the 1990s hunting Bill Clinton 24/7.
I never really trusted CREW. Something about their endless self-promotion always gave me the creeps. Tonight I read something that helped to explained that feeling.
During the Bush years CREW raised lots of money, filed some interesting Freedom of Information Requests and issued lots and lots of press releases. They were very good at claiming the space of fighting corruption and getting the name of their organization and their Executive Director, Melanie Sloan on the teevee. I think they did some good, but I always thought they held back when it came to the nuts and bolts of fighting corruption. Mostly they seemed to play off the work of others, pivoting off of news stories to promote their organization.
Half a decade ago I met with them to tried to get them to focus on Jack Abramoff’s work to protect the sweatshops and labor abuse on Saipan. I had documents, billing records, witnesses, other details, but they just did not seem to care–unless it was something that the Washington Post was going to write about. Their interest in the Abramoff scandal seemed to be more about fund raising and less about justice. I could never get them to give a rats ass about the Marianas Islands, human trafficking, sweatshops, money laundering and the other forms of corruption that Republican rule protected and allowed to flourish. It just wasn’t news-worthy enough. Eventually I gave up trying to work with them at all and spent my time sharing information with reporters and groups who fought corruption even when it meant zero publicity and zero chance of getting on the teevee.
Still, even a group that is primarily focused on self promotion can sometime do good work and that was the box where I placed CREW. And yet whenever I read a story about CREW or heard their executive director speak, something always seemed off-putting and odd. I found that I had a hard time trusting the organization’s commitment to fighting corruption. And it looks like I was right to feel that way.
Earlier this evening I’m was checking in with Pravda on the Potomac–as I sometimes do to follow the beltway crowd’s spin of the day–and Ben Smith was reporting:
Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), will join the firm Lanny J. Davis & Associates, she told attendees at the Democracy Alliance summit of liberal donors in Washington D.C. and confirmed in an emailed statement.
“Given the new political climate in Washington, this seems an ideal time to make a transition to private practice,” Sloan said the statement.
Naturally she is leaving the corruption watchdog field just as the Republicans are returning to power and of course she is going to cash in on the coming wave of witch hunts. And more than that, I am somehow not surprised that she will be working with Jack Abramoff’s old pal Lanny Davis. Davis is a long-time corruptionist of Washington DC. Back in the day he used to help Jack plant stories in this or that news outlet, but his ties to Jack are innocent when compared to the rest of his career. Lanny Davis is a perfect example of what is wrong with Washington and that is something that CREW and Sloan would have learned in the last decade had fighting corruption been as important as fundraising and self-promotion.
I’m sure Lanny and Melanie will be on our teevee 24/7 in the coming years to weep like the carpenter and the walrus over the endless scandals being investigated by Issa and his endless witch hunt. I’m sure they will weep as poor staffers and civil servants go deep into debt to pay the fees that Team Lanny demands. And I’m sure that Issa will keep up a steady flow of investigations and more victims of his abuse that will turn to Team Lanny for help–and then be overcharged. It is all part of the great circle of corruption. One wonders which other ‘Democrats/progressive/liberals’ will cash in and join the beltway witch hunt industry in the coming weeks. One wonders who will be fighting Lanny and Melanie for a piece of the action as they all join the feeding frenzy for table scraps tossed by Republican grifters to the shadows below the wing-nut inquisition gravy train.
I knew there was a reason that CREW always kinda gave me the creeps. I guess tonight’s new explains why.
Cheers
dengre
mikefromArlington
Scum.
morzer
Every time I see anything related to Lanny Davis, I regret that crucifixion is no longer a legitimate judicial reaction to public corruption.
KDP
Sigh! Big, deep, hearfelt sigh! Today, I contacted my rep, Pete Stark, via email and tweet to request support for Kucinich’s bid a minority chair on the Oversight Committee. I can only hope that he gets that seat as I see him as the only member of the committee to stand up to Issa.
Thanks
Ruckus
Said this before,
PT Barnum was wrong, there is a grifter born every minute.
asiangrrlMN
Goddamn it. I had to read the post twice to make sure I understood, and now I’m royally pissed off!
Chris
Remember, it was just a couple weeks ago – in fact, within a day or two of the election – that the Center for Public Integrity promoted John Solomon, formerly of the Washington Times and author of some transparently stenographic hit pieces on Democrats.
I suppose we’ve gone from needing to ask, “Who will watch the watchers?” to “Who will watch the watcher-watchers?”
Chris
Also, it ain’t like Judicial Watch has gone away.
dollared
I gave them money for five years. Then Melanie got poor service from Dell when her laptop broke, and – I am not kidding you- they went on a 90 day jihad about technology corporations and their misleading support promises, featuring Dell. It was petty, off mission, and breathtakingly shameless, and I got tired of pointing it out on their Facebook page.
Really sorry to see a noble cause served by yet another self promoting tramp. Remember the name Melanie Sloan – for the next 30 years, we’re going to be groaning about her….
Morbo
Lanny…Davis. I got the same impression about CREW at one time or another, but I certainly don’t have the same level of insight. It was probably some of the weak tea stuff that they were all over in the midst of all the other forms of corruption out there. Credibility is pretty well shot dead now though, that’s for sure.
Don
CREW is an unofficial arm of the DNC. And I’m a liberal.
Comrade Luke
That’s some seriously good sleuthing, Dennis!
ricky
I refuse to believe that excrement flowing from the loins of liberal saints smell anything like shit. It simply isn’t possible. But you do know conservatives think the world is flat. We are so much better.
Corner Stone
This is pretty weaksauce Dennis. Indicting CREW due to one person in leadership making a career change?
Saying CREW made you leery is fine but the conclusions you’re drawing? Not so much.
Unless there’s more than an unelected attorney switching from one job to private practice?
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
Professional Left™
ricky
@KDP:
“support for Kucinich’s bid a minority chair on the Oversight Committee.”
You hijacked this thread on liberal hypocrisy to promote a flake for a non existent position so Dennis the K. can generate more publicity for himself?
Joel
Lanny Davis is a shitstain.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@KDP: what makes you think kuchinich will stand up to issa? Kuchinich was one of 31 blue-dog-democrats in the house to fund the witch hunt Bill Clinton’s pen*s in 1998.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1998/roll498.xml
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@KDP:
what makes you think kuchinich will stand up to issa? Kuchinich was one of 31 blue-dog-democrats in the house to fund the witch hunt Bill Clinton’s pen*s in 1998.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1998/roll498.xml
Villago Delenda Est
@Joel:
And that’s a positive comment about him!
Dennis G.
@Corner Stone:
It is weak sauce.
There is no hard link to corruption and no indictment of CREW beyond my impressions. I stand to be corrected. CREW may yet turn out to be a serious corruption fighting organization. An executive director can have a big impact on an organization for good or for ill. Perhaps their new ED will have different priorities than their old ED had. Time will tell.
And it is not as simple as just an attorney switching jobs. That downplays her role with CREW significantly. This is not some ‘unelected attorney’ (whatever that might mean), it is CREW’s executive director and she is cashing out her reputation to work with Lanny Davis to profit off of the coming witch hunt mania. Leaving CREW to work with almost any other firm would not be worth a comment. The fact that switch was to work with Lanny Davis is just plain creepy and that was–I thought–worthy of note.
But you are correct. It is weak sauce, like all ranting on the internets is weak sauce.
Cheers
MikeJ
@Dennis G.: Democrats are going to get investigated left and right, and there’s nothing CREW can do to stop it. She went to work for the attorney that Clinton hired when he was impeached. Meaning there’s a good chance that she’s going to wind up defending Democrats.
How is that bad?
ricky
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century):
He saw the vote. It was unidentified.
But he has neat things in his pocket and he is unelectable beyond inner Cleveland. What better excuse for REAL progressives to rally behind him. He’s a lot younger than Nader and he’s been elected to two different jobs.
Ruckus
@Joel:
Sir, you are too kind.
By about 10 tons worth of kind.
KDP
@ricky: @
Call it hijacking if you like, I thought it relevant to reference support for one of the few things that might reduce the number of Democrats and others likely to the services of Lanny Davis and crew.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century): I trust Dennis’ perspective on these matters and direct you to this post from yesterday.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@ricky: Well, he does have a super hawt wife, so there’s that.
On the down side Dennis is a vegetarian, and you know who else was a vegy…. that’s right http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_vegetarianism
Shalimar
@Dennis G.: Sloan was already linked to Davis a few weeks ago, when a story came out that both of them were hired guns for the incredibly corrupt for-profit education industry. IMO, she sold her liberal reputation to companies like Kaplan and Phoenix even before she agreed to join Lanny J. Davis & Associates.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=why_are_progressives_fighting_student_loan_reform
roshan
__
Is all this stuff available online somewhere to read and reference? Seems intriguing to me.
Sly
@MikeJ:
It’s bad because Lanny Davis is a fucking scumbag.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@KDP: Okay. I’ve reconsidered, and I’ll ask my congresscritter to support DK.
Damn you, power of persuasive argument (shakes fist).
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@KDP: Okay. That’s a good argument. I’ll call my congress critter and ask him to vote for DK.
Damn you, power of persuasive argument (shakes fist)!
Sly
@roshan:
To be honest, it doesn’t get really interesting until you get into all the coerced abortions.
salvador dalai llama
Gravy, that’s how I live
Millions of dollars, but no shit to give
Baby, it’s way too late
To make a real difference
Or try to shoot straight
Ethical misdoings
No sense of shame
I’m going off the rails on a gravy train
I’m going off the rails on a gravy train
I’ve listened to pundits
I’ve listened to fools
I’ve watched all the villagers
Who make their own rules
A strange predilection to give up your soul
The media sells it and you live the role
Conflicts of interest
No sense of shame
I’m going off the rails on a gravy train
I’m going off the rails on a gravy train
I know that things are going wrong for everybody
You gotta listen to my verbiage
Yeah
Heirs of a failed war
That’s what we’ve become
The way that I spin things, you’ve got to be dumb
Gravy, I’m dying inside
I’ve given up something that might have been pride
Ethical misdoings
No sense of shame
I’m going off the rails on a gravy train
I’m going off the rails on a gravy train
MikeJ
@Sly: Meh. When he’s lawyerin’, he defends clients who pay him. Clients like the president of the United States when republicans decided to have a witch hunt in the 90s.
If you’re a lawyer in DC and you’re interested in politics and you would rather represent Democrats than Republicans, his firm is one of the best places to be.
Knowing that the Republicans are going to restart witch hunts, doesn’t now seem like the time to be where you can fight them?
themann1086
@dollared: Wasn’t CREW one of the “anti-corruption” orgs that wanted to basically shut down the blogs back in 05? Or am I thinking of someone else?
Sly
@MikeJ:
I’d be sympathetic to the whole “Lanny Davis might be a scumbag, but at least he’s our scumbag” argument if I actually believed Lanny Davis to be our scumbag.
Martin
@Sly: Well, rule #1 of scumbags is that nobody owns them. The reason they’re scumbags is that they only give a shit about themselves.
Uncle Clarence Thomas
@Corner Stone:
.
.
Whenever a leader is proved to be depraved, it inevitably casts doubt upon every organization that previously countenanced her leadership. The organizations in question will require close monitoring.
.
.
Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle
@MikeJ: You do realize that Lanny Davis went to work for the scumbags who overthrew the Central American government last year(or was it 2008?), right?
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
This is O/T
Looks like DADT will pass and Lieberman will get a fair amount of credit.
Remember how the Professional Left™ wanted to throw Lieberman out of the caucus and when he was kept, someone we all know went all Glenn Close in “Fatal Attraction” and bellowed it was a “BETRAYAL!”.
How will the Professional Left™ deal with the egg on their face?
Will they still launch a holy war to defeat him in 2012, and if they do, will anyone care after the biggest civil rights victory in 45 years?
In short, isn’t the repeal of DADT a significant blow to the Professional Left™ ability to raise funds and sow self serving dissension?
Xenos
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century): What utter crap. The only way to make sense of this argument is to pretend Ned Lamont would have been at least as bad as Lieberman or that Lamont would have lost to whatever nonentity the GOP had put up that year.
MikeJ
@Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle: Your father wouldn’t want to hear this, Sonny. This is business not personal.
I don’t see how it would change the fact that his firm would be the place to be if you were a Democratic lawyer. The article makes it sound as if she’ll be on the legal side of the firm, not the lobbying side. She’s going to work for a law firm that is know for defending Democrats. She said the reason she’s going is because she expects there to be a hojillion “investigations.” Democratic politicians will need counsel and many of them will go to that firm. I can’t imagine any lawyer in DC who would get that upset about any client Davis had lobbied for.
Note that I’m not saying it’s good to lobby for bad people. I know good attorneys who have turned down lobbying work because they didn’t like the client. I don’t know any who left the firm because somebody else took the client.
dollared
Seriously, you guys really should listen to Dennis here. CREW relentlesslypromoted Saint Melanie and her ever-present face. I’ve raised money for nonprofits, I’ve been the chair of a non-profit with some local big hitters in leadership positions and on the board, and in my life, I’ve never seen a face and name on non-profit releases and materials as much as I’ve seen Melanie Sloan’s face and name.
On no other evidence than that and the Dell Jihad, I stopped giving them my pathetic C-Note (with company match) two years ago. The self promotion was truly unseemly.
The cashing out Dennis reports tonight is, in a four words, simultaneously depressing and unsurprising.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@Xenos: No, no, no. Your hard drive is missing a big chunk. I’m not talking about the 2006 Connecticut senate election. I’m talking about the post 2008 election period.
Lieberman was elected in 2006 to a six year term, and keeping his promise to CT voters, he caucused with the Democrats. His vote was directly needed after 2006, as the Senate composition was 51-49. So nobody wanted to kick him out, because with him would have gone senate control.
But in the immediate days after the November 2008 election, when the Senate composition was 59-41, the PL™ wanted to expel Lieberman from the caucus, saying his vote wasn’t needed, but when he was kept, the PL™ freaked out.
So that’s what I’m referring to: the 2008 move to oust him from the caucus, not the move to defeat him during the 2006 election.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
Now, I will say this is very telling. Not even the very, very serious, smart people on the blogosphere, who better than everyone, expected the repugs to use the filibuster on every single bill. They didn’t expect to need 60 votes on every fucking bill. That’s why they demanded Lieberman’s head, they didn’t think his vote was needed.
But that said, DADT will get passed, and according to all accounts, Lieberman was instrumental in gathering votes.
So the question stands: How will the Professional Left™ deal with the egg on their face of trying to oust a person who turned out to be crucial to passing the biggest civil rights victory in 45 years?
Joey Maloney
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century):
By recognizing, as grownups who can remember ancient history (all the way back to 1996), that one good act does not redeem years and years of douchebaggery and doublecrosses. And even if that were not true, Connecticut can certainly find someone nearly as progressive but without that whiny, Droopy-Dawg-meets-Church-Lady voice. Please.
And just for the record, I’ll have you know that’s not egg on my face. I’ve had a busy social schedule this week, is all.
Joey Maloney
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century):
By recognizing, as grownups who can remember ancient history (all the way back to 1996), that one good act does not redeem years and years of douchebaggery and doublecrosses. And even if that were not true, Connecticut can certainly find someone nearly as progressive but without that whiny, Droopy-Dawg-meets-Church-Lady voice. Please.
And just for the record, I’ll have you know that’s not egg on my face. I’ve had a busy social schedule this week, is all.
Edit: Double post. FYWP.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@Joey Maloney: yeah, but if you had kicked Lieberman out, you wouldn’t have the votes to repeal DADT.
I specifically remember people being pillared for saying “keep the bastard, we may end up needing his vote”. Hell, people laughed at us, saying his vote was irrelevant.
Well, it’s the pragmatists, not the Professional Left™ who will laugh last.
Joey Maloney
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century):
I do not understand how you reach that conclusion. If Lieberman wasn’t sitting in that seat, it’d be held by a real Democrat. But even that assumes “all other things being equal”, and all other things are never equal which is why that kind of counterfactual is pointless.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@Joey Maloney: what’s wrong with you guys.
I’m not talking about the 2006 election.
Surely you remember this, in the days immediately after the November 2008, there was a move to oust Lieberman from the Democratic party. Not to take his seat away and give it to someone else, but to “kick him out of the party.” They couldn’t take his seat away, but they could have kicked him out of the majority. Kicking him out of the caucus/majority would have forced him into the republican caucus, as you have to caucus with one of the two parties. It was in all the newspapers, even in all the blogs.
How is it people don’t remember this. Man, you guys should be embarrassed.
Batocchio
Sloan seemed pretty solid when she appeared on Franken’s show back in the day. I have to question her integrity if she’s going to work for a scumbag (and crappy lawyer) like Davis.
Jrod the Cookie Thief
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century): Wowie, Lieberman finally votes with the Democrats on something significant four years into his term.
How silly to think of kicking him out of the caucus after a mere two years of undermining the Democrat’s agenda. If the Perfeshnulleft had hurt poor Joe’s fee-fees any more, he would have had no choice but to vote against basic civil rights too.
Also too, Holy Joe should now get an eternal pass. Every time he back-stabs the Dems over the next two years, we can simply remember that single vote he cast, and sigh dreamily.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@Jrod the Cookie Thief: well, there’s still time to kick him out. call the senate, there’s still time to kick him out and … kill the bill.
but you nihilist prove me right: you guys are as bad as the teabaggers. They want purity, at all costs.
aimai
@Dennis G.:
I don’t agree, Dennis G (or Cornerstone) I think this is a great post and very insightful. Lanny Davis is a terrible person–really terrible–not only symbolic of everything that is wrong with professional upper class Democrats but actually really what is wrong with professional upper class democrats. And anyone who is watching knows that. Its not OK for a self proclaimed “watchdog” to go and work with the wolves. You’ve confirmed my feelings about CREW which were that it wasn’t doing much. Its a kind of astroturf organization and organizations like that don’t “grow” organically–they certainly don’t grow and evolve in ways that don’t please their owners.
aimai
aimai
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century):
Lieberman has yet to deliver. And I don’t think he will. But he certainly delivered a whole lot of disruption and backstabbing when he could do that. Yes, we would have been better off kicking him out of the caucus until he learned to behave. It wouldn’t have harmed or altered the earlier votes except that he would have had to vote with the Dems (you can vote with either party even if you caucus with one) to *get favors that he wanted.*
aimai
Woodrow "asim" Jarvis Hill
@Jrod the Cookie Thief: One can say that Lieberman is a crappy pseudo-Democrat, that Lamont would have been much better, and that kicking him out of the caucus would have hurt our cause over the last couple of years.
I remember, too, the consistent calls to toss him out, here and elsewhere. I also recall that, among other things, the only climate bill that ever stood a chance of passing the Senate has his name attached to it. One presumes that, if it were to come to the floor, he’d vote for it. (OK, yes, it’s Lieberman, but it’s be a tall call for even him to backtrack on it.)
I, for one, thought his actions against Obama were indefensible and horrid, and deserved a stronger rebuke. Yet the realities of the Senate — yes, Reid weak-willed, bah bah bah — is that we keep needing the bastard, for better or worse. Until CT gets a better class of Senator, you play with the team you’ve got.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@Woodrow “asim” Jarvis Hill BINGO!
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@aimai:
In many ways it’s better to be pessimistic and then be surprised with something good, then to be optimistic and then be let down later on.
bjacques
I used to watch Witch Hunt Gravy Train on Saturday afternoons. The music was crap and the people couldn’t dance worth a damn.
Dennis G.
@roshan:
The ongoing situation and long history of abuse is chronicled in detail, with links to source documents, at the blog Unheard No More.
Cheers
Maude
@Dennis G.:
Thanks for the post, I took CREW off my bookmarks. I haven’t read them for a long time.
kay
@aimai:
True, but wasn’t the general understanding that they’d need him and use him on DADT? That we were keeping the Leiberman powder dry for DADT?
I think he wants something historic and big to go out on, to feed his giant ego, and his sense of himself as a battler for civil rights.
I don’t know, aimai, you can look at holding on to Leiberman as weakness, or you can look at it as a necessary condition to get a specific policy objective. A sacrifice.
There is probably no one who dislikes the man more than I do, but I assumed they were hanging on to him because they needed him for something, specifically, DADT.
kay
@Dennis G.:
Dennis, is Lanny Davis shop going to be working on repealing student loan reform and/or regulation of the for-profit diploma mills? I know there were former Clinton Administration lawyers lobbying against both.
I’d like to get something going to protect that locally. It’s important to people here. We have Sherrod Brown and he’ll meet with us.
We have a high unemployment rate and half the people who wander into the law office are being targeted by the hucksters selling 15k a year online “training”. They’re loading them up with student loans that can’t be discharged in bankruptcy and they’re never going to be able to make those note payments, so their wages will be garnished, should they find a job. It’s an ongoing disaster. I’m yelling “STOP!”, but I’m only reaching one at a time.
Corner Stone
@aimai: IMO, there’s a difference.
Call Sloan out for this if you feel like it. Fine.
But as for CREW, are there any allegations of money missing? Any impropriety related to a client of Lanny Davis?
I have the same opinion of Lanny Davis as everyone else here. Doesn’t give me license to tarnish an entire organization based on one person’s decision to be employed somewhere else.
And Dennis, by “unelected attorney” I meant she was not an elected official who then cashed in at a lobbying job after public service. She doesn’t have the same duty or favors to grant, IMO.
brantl
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century): Oh, yeah, that’s a whole bunch of egg, with Lieberman fucking up everything else he can lay hands on, including having been a fucking committee chair and not having done a goddamn thing worth doing in that spot.
All that egg isn’t enough to feed a cockroach.
brantl
@Xenos: Exactly, wish I’d said that, too.
Anton Sirius
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century):
Are you suggesting that Lieberman’s support of DADT is dependent on his being in the Dem caucus? That he wouldn’t be willing to campaign for it if he were sitting with the Pubs, or floating on his own?
That would seem to support the argument that he’s an unprincipled shitbag, not refute it.
roshan
@Dennis G.: Thanks, Dennis.
Also, where can I find stuff related to Abramoff that you reference in your posts quite often?
roshan
Dennis, I think the link you gave also involves Abramoff, right? Correct me if I’m wrong. I’m not really familiar with this material yet.
BobS
@roshan: I seem to remember reading about it on Alternet 4 or 5 years ago.@Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle: He’s also pretty reliable about showing up to defend Israel’s latest violation of international law in Palestine, invasion of a neighbor, or assault and/or murder of an American citizen.
brantl
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century): No, just take his committee chair away from him and give it to someone that doesn’t suck a bag of dicks a day. All day.
karen marie
@Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century): Lieberman doing the right thing on DADT is supposed to wash away his shit-stain of a record for the last ten years?
Sorry, no.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@Anton Sirius: yeah, that’s the exact point: Lieberman’s support of DADT IS dependent on his being in the Dem caucus, he wouldn’t be willing to campaign for it if he were sitting with the Pub. He is a giant asshole.
and therefore if you only had two choices, it is better to have someone vote with you sometimes, than someone who votes against you all the time.
I think a number of you don’t understand what I’m talking about. Lamont would clearly be preferable to Lieberman. But Ned didn’t win and our choices were then do we accept Lieberman and his occasional vote back into the fold or not. Some said his vote would always be irrelevant, others like me said, keep him, he’s a douche bag, but someday may come when we need his vote. We were right, you guys were wrong.
I think the problem is people hate Lieberman to such an extent (with good reason) that it has overwhelmed their ability to think in rational on this subject.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@karen marie: yeah, that wasn’t the question.
It seems just the word Lieberman sends people into such a rage, they’re unable to use their cognitive skills. It’s either that or liberals have their set of low-information voters.
Mike Kay (Democrat of the Century)
@brantl: if you did that, wouldn’t he vote against the democrats, and the dems needed 60 votes to break filibusters.
I’m sure you know this. it was in all the blogs. Dems needed 60 votes to break constant/continues repug filibusters. Even now, the repugs are filibustering DADT, which will require 60 votes.