I’ve not hid that I think Joe Lieberman is scum not worthy of the bottom of my shoe. It is quotes like this that lead to such an opinion:
If the public option plan is in there, as a matter of conscience, I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote.
Listen, I’d disagree if Lieberman claimed he had to vote against the bill because he disagrees with it, questioning his illogical sounding argumentation about opposing the public option for budget deficit reasons, but I would respect his right to do so.
But making it a moral obligation to not only vote against but to filibuster? That is an outrageous claim. It is a symbolic representation of just how institutionally sick the Senate has gotten. I know it seems a long time ago, but ten years ago…hell, five years ago, the filibuster was an unusual device, used selectively. Now it is assumed. This cannot be tolerated. If the public knew anything about anything, there would be a popular revolt to get the Senate to eliminate the filibuster. Sadly, the public drinks the civic religion kool-aid thinking that Constitution is perfect and should not be touched, and seems to believe that the filibuster is essentially Constitutional, even though it is not.
It is just insane that we apply a super-majority rule to basic governance. And that is the real moral imperative…to restore majority rule to Congress (and California while we are at it).
