Lieberman punished by democrats?

Question

http://buzz.yahoo.com/buzzlog/91770

According to this website, Lieberman could "face punishment for party disloyalty." How exactly could he be punished? I mean, you can't blame a person for switching parties, I've done it before so what exactly is meant by that?

Answer 1

Lieberman became an Independent a few years ago because the Democrats disowned him for being in favor of the Iraq war.  He had to run for the senate as an Independent because the Dems put up another Dem candidate in his state.  Lieberman won the election as an Independent but the Democrats kept him on their side to keep a majority in the senate.  They would throw him overboard the minute they had a stronger majority in the senate anyway.  He is not being disloyal to the Democrats.  They already dumped him and have been using him to their advantage.  He owes them nothing.

Answer 2

No, I guess they probably mean that they're going to punish him on a sociocultural level. Like the cool kids do in high school to people they don't like.

Answer 3

They're going to pull his committee chairs come the next election and the traitorous jerk deserves it

Answer 4

He has already been punished by Democrats and was elected as an independent as the Democrats did not put him on the ticket.

On  a personal level what irks me about Joe Lieberman is that he runs for himself and not the public. He will be whatever party it take to get elected. His views are also predominantly conservative including supporting going to war in Iraq even if it was on false intel.

Answer 5

When a party candidate runs he takes money from the national party organization, nothing at all illegal.

But if the man takes the money and then says hes not a member of that party, then that's false pretenses, not just for the national party that supported him financially, but for the voters who thought they were getting one thing and find out they got another.

He can be  penalized by not getting anymore money from them, which I think is pretty fair, and by being denied high party positions, again fair.

When a citizen changes party its not a big deal, you aren't flying under false flags, lying to people about your views, taking money with no intention of doing what you can for the party.  

Its not treason,its just dishonest morally and ethically, not criminally.

There is an Independent party, Leibermann is one of them.  Why on earth should he even wish to remain on committees of Democrats hes scorned is beyond reason, yet they do have to tolerate his seeming desire to look like a Democrat turned Republican lapdog.  They need the fact that he sides with them most of the time, and they have a tiny majority.

Hes loving every minute of getting courted by both sides, he is actually the most important vote in the Senate...no mean feat.

Answer 6

Lieberman has the better hand in this partisan game - the democrats absolutely need him to maintain a democratic majority on Capital Hill - they know this and he knows it.

It's obvious that he's not their favorite son - but they really can't do anything about it. And the facts are also on Lieberman's side - he supported the surge while the democrats in general had accepted a policy of defeat. They were clearly wrong and he was clearly right, and that's just another burr under their saddle that they have to try and spin.

Answer 7

They'll just throw him out of the briar patch...oh no! lol

Answer 8

This is just another fine example of the liberal intolerance of anyone who dares to oppose their views. Sad, really.

Answer 9

They would say "mean things" to him.  They'll take away his tree-hugging liscense and abort his future grandchildren.  

Answer 10

They already tried to sink his ship.  He lost the Democratic primary in CT, but ran and won as an Independent.

He still considers himself a democrat, but does not follow the party line enough to suit the punishers.

Answer 11

he holds seats on committees as a democrat, but clearly is not one.

he behaves and votes as a republican but keeps important positions because he says he a democrat when it's expedient - only leadership party members can have these positions.

why should he be allowed to keep important posts as a dem, when he clearly hates his own party?