Harry Reid For Something Other Than Senate Majority Leader

Joe Lieberman shouldn't even be in the Democratic caucus NOW. Contrary to popular belief, if he caucused with Republicans it would not flip the leadership in the House because the initial rules were written to keep the Democrats in control of the chamber. So he's free to endorse John McCain, and bash Democrats on Fox News and elsewhere, and stick his Homeland Security and Government Reform committee chair's gavel up his ass without using it for any meaningful investigation of Bush Administration practices, without the fear that his seniority will be taken away.

And that includes next year.

Lieberman's constant presence at McCain's side fuels speculation that he would join a McCain administration. Yet he already has talked with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid about his future in the caucus.

Would Lieberman, 66, a four-term Connecticut senator, be stripped of his committee chairmanship and seniority if Democrats no longer had to rely on a self-described "Independent Democrat" for their one-vote majority?

"I can tell you Sen. Reid had talked to me a few times and said he knows there will be talk if we get more than 51 Democrats next year," Lieberman said. "As far as he is concerned, I will retain my seniority, etc., no matter how many Democrats there are next year."

Reid's spokesman, Jim Manley, confirmed Lieberman's account.

This is a firing offense for Harry Reid. The DNC had enough sense to strip Lieberman of his superdelegate status. It's ridiculous to keep this ticking time bomb inside the caucus. I don't expect Lieberman to change - Democrats didn't elect him and have no leverage over him. In 2012 we're going to beat him handily. But Harry Reid's behavior here is inexcusable.

A lot of people have speculated that the loser of the Obama-Clinton nomination battle should get the Majority Leader's position. I don't know how nicely they'd be able to play with each other; in many ways that needs to be a closer relationship than the President and Vice President. But I like any scenario where Harry Reid is the biggest loser. He hasn't done enough to forcefully explain Republican obstructionism, there was the FISA mess where he refused a hold from a colleague (although with 68 votes it was likely immunity would have gotten in that bill no matter what), and he allows a mole inside the caucus. That's it. No more excuses.