RACE TO LEAD GOP’S FUTURE SHAPING UP

As the McCain led defeat of Republicans sets in, high hopes rise. As the race for President ended, the battle for the GOP’s future has begun.

Several days ago, I disclosed the likely contenders for Republican National Committee Chairman and some of those mentioned are beginning to fire their first shots.

One of those touted to want the job, Michigan Republican State Committee Chairman Saul Anuzis, has fired up a web site for the job .

A name that I did not list among the seven most mentioned contenders was former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. I for one, don’t think that Newt has a desire to reenter the political fray. I know and appreciate that he is completely involved in the ideological fight and the battle of ideas that he relishes in the more realistic world of the free, private sector. But I do not anticipate his willingness to actually get back into the political arena.

Would his return be welcomed? That’s not a question for Democrats. They picked the leader of their party when Barack Obama became President-Elect Barack Obama. It is a question for Republicans to answer.

As a Republican myself, I would welcome Newt‘s involvement. He is an asset. He knows politics and he knows the issues. He also puts the party, as well as the nation, before himself. He demonstrated that when after Republicans lost some seats in the House of Representatives back in the late 90’s, he offered his resignation as speaker. He did so because the media made him more important than the issues he was dealing with. He felt that he was such a lightening rod, that his continued role would take away from the issues we had to deal with.

Years later, now that he is not involved in the legislative post he once held, the party leadership role might be just right for him, as well as the GOP.

Of course, the left will begin every campaign that they run in 2010 and beyond, with the name “Newt Gingrich”. They will continue the demonization process of Gingrich and the GOP as they try to put an angelic face on themselves. But, will that have a bearing on the effective direction that Newt could put the party on?

The public image that Democrats will try to create for Republicans with Newt Gingrich’s face as the RNC chairman, would have an impact on initial public perception. But would the negative impact of anti-Newt, liberal propaganda outweigh the positive effect of Gingrich’s leadership for the party?

In the long term, probably not, but this, I can’t I can’t be sure of.

I do know Newt Gingrich understands what the GOP stands for and he knows how to shape the arguments and messages that we need. He is also capable of employing the right people to help the RNC articulate that message. Additionally, he helps reaffirm the base when it comes to where the party is going. Newt represents the conservative political thinking that many feel the party has strayed from……a straying away that coincided with the decline of Republican political preeminence since his departure from the congressional stage. He could also create great cause for many disaffected libertarians to join the Republican ranks.

Right now the party needs direction. Not just organizational direction in setting a strategic plan for future elections but also direction of purpose. We need to make that which differentiates us from Democrats clear. Over the past 5 or 6 years the lines of difference have been blurred. For one thing we had an incumbent Republican President who was about as fiscally conservative as Imelda Marcos in a shoe store. For another thing, we had Republican elected officials who allowed Democrats to get the upper hand when it comes to rhetoric denouncing the wars we are in. Many Republicans backed away from their public defense of our war efforts, fearful that too many voters were questioning it’s worthiness.  The sad fact being that too many elected officials allow themselves to be fearful of perceptions and unconcerned with their convictions.  Too many lack the cojones to use their convictions and stand up to wrongly held public perceptions.  That however, is not a fault possessed by Newt Gingrich

So we need someone who can help distinguish the differences between us and Democrats.
Newt could do for us if he chose to. He could actually energize the forces and he has proven to be capable of organizing national campaigns that promote the application of conservative legislative principles.

It’s difficult to make a decision when you do not yet know all your options, so although I am inclined to embrace Newt Gingrich’s wisdom, innovation capabilities and sense of ideological conviction, I reserve my own final conclusion until I know who else is wanting the job of Chairman. I refer to the word “wanting” because there are groups seeking to recruit some names. I do not want someone who has to be convinced that they should be the chairman of the RNC. I want someone who wants it and wants it for all the right reasons. Someone who wants to do the hard work and wants to fight for our cause.

I admire some of the names out there. People like former Maryland Lt. Governor Mike Steele of GOPAC.

I agree with him on most all issues and I appreciate the messages that he uses in trying to bring the point home. Of course being African-American, if Steele is selected to be chairman, the loony, left, libs will say that his being black was the only reason we picked him, but you know what?……I really don’t care what inconsequential, liberal, loudmouths think. They will be fighting the titular leader of their party, President-Elect Obama, as they try to force him to lead from the left instead of the middle. So they have their own battle to wage. This one is between us republicans……”No Liberals Allowed”….thank you.

In any event I have no objection to Mike Steele for the spot. He is a good, loud voice but based on abilities between him and Newt, I lean towards Newt.
In either case, both of these guys, as pointed out in the Washington Times, have not gone public with their desires. They seem to be wrangling behind the scenes and hoping to create a public yearning for their expertise that makes them humbly answer some sort of call to duty. If Gingrich continues to be coy and Mike Steele makes it clear that he wants the job, he’s got my support.

Two of my favorite choices would be Mitt Romneywho has almost as much of the ideological qualities and articulation abilities that Newt Gingrich has, but without the image problem and baggage. Former Maryland Governor Bob Erhlich is also a talented favorite of mine who has the ability to help us reclaim our ideological strengths. However, neither of these two have indicated the desire to be the new chairman and as for Romney, I would rather see him gear up for a run for President in 2012 then get bogged down in partisan politics. Right now, him and Sarah Palin need to convince me which will best qualified for our presidential nomination, so both should remain focused on that.

In regards to one of those who have made their RNC leadership intentions clear, Michigan Republican State Committee Chairman Saul Anuzis has potential but so does South Carolina Republican Chair Katon Dawson Chairman and Florida’s GOP Chairman Jim Greer. But I do commend Anuzis for naot playing any games and making his intentions clear. Unlike him, Dawson has been using the slogan “Renew, Reform, Restore,” in a survey that he has mailed out to a few hundred national committee members, the members who will elect the new chairman. Greer has been on the phones and testing the water.

All of these people have produced positive Republican results in their states. Of course though, Florida and South Carolina have fairly positive atmospheres for conservative oriented causes and campaigns. Saul Anuzis is relatively successful in a state that is not quite as open and friendly to Republicans as his counterparts in the South. To me, that shows that Saul Anuzis has plenty of grit and the type of underdog tenacity that the GOP needs nationally.

All of this speculation and conjecture is nice but there exists a very crucial question that we, as a party, must answer before we select someone to lead our party. What direction do we want the party to go in? Knowing the direction we want to go in could help us decide which leader is best suited to lead us in that direction.

Part of the answer to that question lies not in the race for RNC Chairman. It lies in the Republican leadership of the house and senate.

If our elected Republicans in congress, the guys on the front line of the ideological battle in government, elect the status quo to house and senate minority leadership, than we can write off any hopes for increasing political power in the near term.

People like Eric Cantor of Virginia need to win election as the Republican whip and I for one would like to Indiana’s Mike Pence assume overall leadership of the house.

On the Senate side, South Dakota’s John Thune is a favorite of mine. He has solid credentials and great vision. Unfortunately, the senate is an institution that offers less opportunities to young guns. Seniority rules there.

The logistics of the fact that US senators are elected from an entire state causes individual senators to be less cutting edge and more moderate than their counterparts in the house, who get elected from a segment of the electorate in their home state, that may have more extreme views than do the entirety of a state. But the legislative leadership that republicans have in congress will have a lot to do with the effectiveness of whoever is chairman of the Republican National Committee.

Our leaders in the house and senate must be leading legislative efforts that are in sync with the direction and message that the party is taking. If we, as a party, are preaching spend less, drill more, reduce government intrusiveness and fight harder, it won’t be believed if congressional Republicans are approving Democrat budgets that are full of increased social welfare and government programs, limiting our abilities to exploit natural resources and accepting retreat on any front in the war on terror.

We need legislative leaders who are of the mind of those who were a part of the ‘94 Republican revolution (which was orchestrated, sponsored and led by Newt Gingrich) that took congressional control away from the liberal party. If our congressional Republicans were of that same thinking now, half the battle would be over.  Mike Pence, Eric Cantor and John Thune are just exceptional examples of that thinking and are the type of legislative leadership we need.

Ultimately, as for the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee. I would like to see a power sharing effort that involves Gingrich, Steele, Dawson, Anuzis and Romney.

Together I would like to see them hammer out the road map. Then let Gingrich shape the debate, Mike Steele deliver the message, Katon Dawson and Saul Anuzis organize the ground game and Romney raise the money. Is this likely?………Nope. But it could be ideal.

For now I would be inclined to give Dawson, Anuzis and Steele the inside track and hope that if any one of those three get the job, they will reach out and work with the team that I would like to see work together.

Don’t say this to a cop

The top 20 things not to say to a cop when he pulls you over.

20. I can’t reach my license unless you hold my beer.

19. Sorry officer, I didn’t realize my radar detector wasn’t plugged in.

18. Aren’t you the guy from the villiage people?

17. Hey, you must have been doing 125 to keep up with me, good job.

16. I thought you had to be in relatively good physical shape to be a police officer.

15. I was going to be a cop, but I decided to finish high school instead.

14. Bad cop. No donut.

13. You’re not going to check the trunk, are you?

12. Gee, that gut sure doesn’t inspire confidence.

11. Didn’t I see you get your butt kicked on cops?

10. Is it true that people become cops because they are too dumb to work at McDonalds?

9. I pay your salary

8. So uh, you on the take or what?

7. Gee officer, that’s terrific. The last officer only gave me a warning.

6. Do you know why you pulled me over? Okay, just so one of us does.

5. I was trying to keep up with traffic. Yes, I know there is no other cars around, that’s how far they are ahead of me.

4. What do you mean have I been drinking? You are the trained specialist.

3. Well, when I reached down to pick up my bag of crack, my gun fell off of my lap and got lodged between the brake and the gas pedal, forcing me to speed out of control.

2. Hey, is that a 9mm? That’s nothing compared to this 44 magnum.

1. Hey, can you give me another one of those full cavity searches?

WHO WILL LEAD REPUBLICANS BACK INTO POWER

As the GOP recovers from a drubbing at that ballot box that served them with an eviction notice at the White House and a foreclosure on many seats in the house and senate, a reorganization is in order.

Crucial to a successful reorganization is the selection of it’s next national chairman.

Florida Senator Mel Martinez

After the losses which cost them their majorities in the house and senate during the 2006 midterm elections, the powers that be, hastily installed Florida Senator Mel Martinez as the new chairman. At the same time they also elected Mike Duncan, a veteran political strategist and former Treasurer General Counselor to the RNC, to run the “day to day operations” of the national committee. In other words Duncan was actually the Chairman and Senator Martinez was to be the face of the party.

It was an arrangement that did not last long.

A few months into this arrangement, Senator Martinez stepped down and Mr. Duncan had the title all to himself. Not that it mattered. Whether it was his fault or not Republicans were outspent, out argued , outmaneuvered and voted out.

Outgoing RNC Chairman Mike Duncan

I will not blame Mike Duncan for the hemorrhaging of Republicans in this election cycle. That began before he took office, less than a year ago, and it simply continued for the time period that he was in office as chairman. It is more than likely that no individual chairman of the RNC could have prevented the losses Republicans suffered but we do know that the chairman did not help prevent them from happening.

So I do not blame Mike Duncan but I do harbor ill will to the party officials who gave up after 2006 and installed quick replacements to head up the Republican party. It was quite apparent that the party was simply trying to just get through the last two years of President Bush’s term in office. The RNC leadership were more like caretakers than leaders. They did not seek to adopt a leadership that was cutting edge and enthusiastic about revolutionizing the capabilities of the party organization and preparing us for the mother of all elections, the presidency.

It is the same complacency that helped cost Republicans their majorities in congress. Elected officials lost the anti establishment thinking that won them favor back in 1994. After becoming “the establishment” they slowly began to forget that government was there to work for the people not for the people running government.

So here we are saluting a new President-Elect, a new Democrat President-Elect. One who will be partnering with a majority of legislators who are also Democrats.

It might sound depressing to fellow Republicans but the truth is it is that for a number of reasons it is not depressing:

• Can’t Get Much Worse -We have just about bottomed out. It truly can’t get much worse so the prospects for improving our numbers in the next election are good.

 

• Liberals Gone Wild -With Democrats in total control of government, there is little to hold them back and prevent them from showing their true colors. When those true colors come out, Americans will realize that the direction they offer is too sharp a turn to the left for their tastes. The last time they had total control was in 1993 when Bill Clinton was President. After two years of liberals gone wild, Americans gave control, of both the house and senate, to Republicans for the first time in forty years. It was something that Republicans could not achieve on their own. It took the combined left leaning radicalization of today’s Democrat party to bring that about and it is about to happen again. In fact the greatest challenge that the new President will face comes from his own party. He will be struggling against them and fighting them in an effort to lead from the center rather than the left.

• The War – Although the economy helped push the war off the front burner, the changing tide of the surge in Iraq also made the war less of an issue because violence and combat was down and it was being won. The war in Iraq did not help Republicans in this election cycle but not because it was unnecessary, as democrats claim,  but, as I explain in the link referenced here*, Americans became weary and leery of the war. While the surge was delayed and the administration wavered, violence spiked as a result of a resurgence of radical Islamic terrorists in Iraq. That is when Democrats successfully exploited a declining resolve to continue an effort that people were beginning to think was becoming a quagmire. Since the increased deployment of troops into Iraq, the situation improved and there is light at the end of the tunnel. As a result, despite the cries of candidate Obama to end the war, President Obama will not be withdrawing all of our forces from Iraq anytime soon.  Now that he has seen the national security data that demonstrates the dangers of his misguided promises as a candidate, as a President he will not be so quick to screw things up. Ultimately Republicans will be proven right on the issue.

 

• The Economy – Typically our economy goes through cycles of growth and contraction every ten to fifteen years. More accurately, just about every 11 years, we encounter economic turmoil brought on by the cumulative effects of industrial shifts, world events and other related circumstances. That being said, it is how we maneuver through these cycles that determines their severity and the length of time that we endure them. The liberal propensity to raise taxes and redistribute wealth during these times does not help. Those policies simply deepen the crisis and draw out the cycle. If the knee jerk, liberal tendency towards more taxes and an expansion of government does occur, Republicans will be able to stem their losses and start increasing their numbers. The current crisis that we are experiencing is not a result of Republican economic policy. It is a result of their complacency and unwillingness to differentiate themselves from liberals when it came to spending. Our own President had no problem with cutting taxes, a good thing, but he also never cut spending and neither did fellow Republicans in congress.

All of this allows for those Republicans, who are in office, to offer alternatives to the counterproductive liberal agenda that will undoubtedly dominate national policy. To effectively achieve that, Republican members of congress need to reestablish their fiscally conservative roots and inherent sense of an offensive strategy when it comes to national security. The fact that, as Republicans, we choose to eliminate threats rather than tolerate them will be made much clearer with liberals in control and it must not be ignored.

Now that Republicans are not in control we now have the luxury that Democrats had. The luxury of not having to defend our leadership. Democrats will now have the chance to be held accountable for everything that happens. They will have to take blame for the results of increasing taxes, increasing unnecessary regulations and increasing the size and cost of government. With their leadership comes responsibility. With responsibility comes credit as well as blame. After eight years of taking blame for all that is not liked, Republicans can now luxuriate in being able to place blame on Democrats as they have done to Republicans.

But while those Republicans elected to congress do their job by providing alternatives to liberal policies and maintaining their role as the loyal opposition, our political leaders must hit the ground running.

The question now is, who is best suited to reorganize and reinvigorate Republicans? The person needed to rally Republicans must be articulate. But a good speaker is not all that we need. The person who is made the new chairman of the party must have a passionate desire to advance the cause, incredible organizational skills, the ability to delegate responsibilities to the right and most qualified people, endless energy and stamina as well as creativity and resourcefulness and a proven record of success.

The new chairman needs the same type of vision and commitment to conservative principles that the freshmen members of congress who were elected in the 1994 Republican revolution had. The new chairman must have a vision which understands that the best government is the government that gets out of the way and allows freedom to flourish by defending it at home and abroad and by insuring that opportunity is available to all.

Currently, there are seven frontrunners. They include:

Mike Steele

Michael Steele – GOPAC , former Lt. Governor of Maryland and unsuccessful candidate for US Senate in 2006.

Chuck Yob

Chuck Yob – Successful Michigan businessman, GOP fundraiser and Michigan National Committeeman

Saul Anuzis

Saul Anuzis – Chairman of the Michigan Republican State Committee

Alec Pointevint

Alec Poitevint – Georgia’s Republican National Committeeman

Katon Dawson

Katon Dawson – Republican Party Chairman of South Carolina , the state that had the best performance for Republicans during this election cycle.

Jim Greer

Jim Greer – Florida’s Republican party Chairman

Chip Saltsman

Chip Saltsman – A former Chair of Tennessee’s GOP and the former campaign manager of Mike Huckabee’s failed candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination.

Mike Huckabee

Speculation has not only Huckabee’s former campaign guru on the list, Mike Huckabee himself is rumored to be a potential contender. So is one of Huckabee’s former opponents for the GOP presidential nod, Mitt Romney.

Of all these names the one person who I believe could do the most for the Republican National Committee is Mitt Romney.

Mitt Romney

Romney has been successful at every job that he has undertaken. He is passionate. He is articulate, savvy and has an eye for recruiting those who are the best at their jobs. Mitt Romney could do wonders for the party. He would be able to provide the GOP’s highly rated, get out the vote, 72 hour program with great improvements and he would create a top notch center for Republican organization, communications, fundraising and creative strategy.

Problem is that I want Mitt Romney to be able to run for President. I am looking forward to either him or Sarah Palin being our 2012 nominee. Becoming the political leader of the party does not help him establish the bipartisan image that a Presidential nominee needs. If he did as a good a job for the party as I think he would, having been the chairman of the party he rebuilds, could help him get the party’s nomination though.

However, I feel that a truly smart RNC chairman would involve Mitt Romney and utilize his expertise. Doing so would keep Romney free to expand his nonpolitical credentials while still allowing for his Midas touch to assist behind the scenes.

As for the other names mentioned, Mike Steele, Katon Dawson and Jim Greer are the only names that really interest me. Each of them have demonstrated ideological superiority to one extent or the other and have achieved outstanding results for Republicans.

Former Maryland Governor Bob Ehrlich

One name not mentioned but is at the top of my list, is former Maryland Governor Robert Erhlich. After losing reelection in the 2006 GOP sea of change, Bob Ehrlich has not been discussed much. That is a shame because he happens to be one of the best in the newer generation of conservative politics. He was the first Republican to be elected governor of Maryland in almost 60 years. Through it all Ehrlich maintained his principles and conservative ideology. Not once did he try to win favor by acting like a democrat. Instead, he successfully implemented conservative ideology into government application. He also happens to be articulate and effective in his ability to explain and deliver the conservative message.

 

Sometimes referred to as a Kempite Republican, Bob Erhlich could be just what we need to rekindle our spirit and rally the cause.

Whoever the grand poobahs of the GOP hierarchy install as chairman, it is my greatest hope that they recruit the right people to carry out the mission that is ahead.

Patrick Ruffini

People like political Internet champion Patrick Ruffini who could incorporate the most cyber savvy organization politics has ever seen and Ralph Reed who is a master at reaching out and organizing the grassroots.

Ralph Reed

Being the minority party is not a problem to be feared. Becoming the minority is what we needed to fear and now, we are there.  So the worst is over. Now we have the chance to take advantage of what Democrats took advantage of for a long time, minority status and the ability to place blame on the powers that be that comes with it.

From here we can only come back, and if we take the right steps, we can come back quickly. To do so will require that our first steps be the right steps . In this case that would be done by picking the right person to map out our future and recruit the brightest lights to help illuminate the fast track to the reinvigoration that the party is capable of.

 

Q: What’s the problem with Barack Obama jokes?

A: His followers don’t think they’re funny and other people don’t think they’re jokes.

 

 

WILL ELECTION RESULTS MAKE DEMOCRATS TURN ON ONE OF THEIR OWN?

Independent Democrat Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut

Two years ago, despite having been their  Vice Presidential nominee,  Democrat, Connecticut, Senator Joe Lieberman was defeated in his attempt to win the democrat party’s nomination for re-election. A very far left candidate won the nomination instead of him. But Senator Lieberman stayed in the race. He ran as an Independent and ultimately defeated the Republican and Democrat nominees in the general election and held on to his senate seat.

Since then, Senator Lieberman has considered himself an Independent Democrat and aligned himself with Democrats by joining their conference. Because of his caucusing with them, he was given the chairmanship of the senate’s all important homeland security committee.

Over the course of the two past years, Senator Lieberman has voted in line with democrats on most all policy issues. The only exceptions were rooted in our involvement in Iraq and the war on terror.

Beyond policy, Senator Lieberman broke with Democrats and endorsed Senator John McCain for President.  He sees very deep differences with the defense policies of Democrats.  He also sees those differences to be so important and significant, that for the sake of national security, above political loyalty, he endorsed John McCain.  It was a courageous act.  Especially when you consider that electing Republicans to federal office from Liebermans’s home state of Connecticut is a very rare event and not looked upon positively by the elctorate that Lieberman represents.  However, Joe Lieberman put country first and his own politcal fortunes at home, on the line.

Now that the election is over Joe Lieberman, who was not running for anything this time around, might be one of the first victims in the aftermath of Obama’s victory.  As President-Elect, Obama is going to the White House.  His rival, John McCain, is off the hook.  But for supporting John McCain over Barack Obama,  Joe Lieberman finds himself to be a target.

Republicans, in need of any extra warm bodies that they can find on their side, are targeting Joe Lieberman so that they can get what they were denied in the election …a win.

Democrats are targeting Joe Lieberman so that they can achieve something too. Retribution. Retribution for one of their own supporting the opposition.

If Democrats were smart, they would not target Lieberman for retribution. Instead of threatening to strip his committee chairmanship away they should be embracing him. Liberal senate majority leader Harry Reid of Nevada would actually be better off for doing so.

By keeping Lieberman on, Democrats can send a message which states that their leadership does not put petty, partisan politics above service and the national interests. Democrats claim that they are the big tent and if that is the case, how big is that tent if it actually doesn’t have room for someone who agrees with them on everything except for the extent to which we must be on the offense in the war on terror? Are liberals that fearful of one of their own raising questions about their liberal defense policies?

Ronald Reagan once stated that “my 80 percent friend is not my 20 percent enemy” and he was right. For Joe Lieberman to be penalized, for supporting John McCain, would be an act that reveals some fatal flaws in their thinking.

One would be that they are more concerned with the 20 percent of difference that they have with Lieberman than they are with the 80 percent of agreement that they share. Such a view does not help reach compromise nor does it unite people.

The other flaw that would be demonstrated by stripping Lieberman of his post, would be Democrats misguided priorities. It would indicate that they are less concerned with an honest assessment of the issues that allows for all opinions to be properly aired and debated. Essentially they would be showing that, to them, party comes before country. Denying Joe Lieberman his chairmanship would help prove that Democrats are playing games with our security and the war on terror.

On the other hand, if Harry Reid was smart, he would understand that the homeland security committee is quite important and as such it would behoove him to instill some faith in the decisions that come out of that committee by having an independent face leading it.

Reid needs to keep someone like Lieberman on as it’s chairman. The issue of homeland security needs to be tackled by sincere efforts and devoid of partisan politics. As an Independent, Senator Lieberman is just right for that job. On top of that, he is still a member of the Democrat caucus. As such, Harry Reid’s best interests are being served by  having a friendly Joe Lieberman that is as cooperative as possible rather than a disgruntled Joe Lieberman who has an ax to grind.

So if Reid was at all smart, he would sit down with Lieberman and say “you’re gonna keep your committee chairmanship on homeland security, but you owe us”.

On the other side of the coin, leaders of the senate minority, in the Republican senate chambers, have also met with Lieberman and targeted him to make up for some of the multiple losses that they suffered at the ballot box.

That is a smart move on their part.

While being threatened by Democrats and in jeopardy of losing his power, Lieberman could easily become a Republican if they offered him the right incentives.

Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada

If they made Lieberman the ranking Republican on the homeland security committee, he would become the leading oppositions to Democrats on the committee. That would make any opposition that Joe Lieberman has to Democrat initiatives regarding homeland security even stronger. Each time a report came out on any disagreements, it will begin with “former Democrat Joe Lieberman challenged Democrat’s proposals to…..”.

Having one of their own ,opposing Democrats, will not help to gain support for Democrat positions .

On top of adding more persuasiveness to Republican arguments regarding homeland security, Lieberman’s presence in the senate as a Republican, would help to demonstrate the fact that Republicans are actually the party with the big tent that respects different opinions.

As for Joe Lieberman personally, he is actually in a good position. If Democrats do the right thing, they will allow him to keep his chairmanship. If they do, Lieberman will not experience any less power or influence than he has now.

If liberals show their spitefulness and dump Lieberman, than he will be one of two independents and the only one not caucusing with either of the two parties. That would significantly reduce his staff budget and legislative influence. If that were to happen,   by caucusing with Republicans, Lieberman could make his voice the loudest one in the room on some key issues and maintain a budget provide by the the GOp and all that comes with being it’s ranking member on the homeland security committee.

Such a move would also embarrass Harry Reid and his fellow democrat senators. At a time when democrats have taken total control of Washington, DC, losing one of their own to the other side, at the onset of the party’s rise to power, will not bode well when it comes to the longevity of their majority status