What is the VP's power

It seems that even fellow Dems don't like Joe. Why else would the Senate Dems do this?

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/dec/07/biden-unwelcome-senate-huddles-where-cheney-wielde/

Washington — In a move to reassert Congressional independence at the start of the new presidential administration, the vice president will be barred from joining weekly internal Senate deliberations, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said in an interview with the Las Vegas Sun.
Reid’s decision to exclude Vice President-elect Joe Biden from the Senate arena where he spent most of his adult life is intended to restore constitutional checks and balances that tilted heavily toward the executive branch during the Bush presidency.

In the comments, there is the argument that Cheney was a bully, and that it twisted the powers of the VP in the Constitution. It really doesn't matter to me even though it should because if Cheney were a Dem, it would be they who say it was within the realms of power and the Reps who would have said it was a violation. Constitution games that Cheney played are par for the course in American government, as seen with HRC and the promotion to Sec State.

But the overall story talks more of how Biden is shunned and how the Dem Senate is regaining their independence. It is a good thing - if Cheney did overreach and "bullied" the Reps as the report implies, then many things that could have been avoided were ignored, like maybe the light approach to Iraq or even the 2005 Bankruptcy bill's changes. OTOH, Dems are infamous for hardheadedness and infighting, which could stymie important things like how to handle Iraq post surge or how to handle the recession. Either way, it's not pretty. But fun to watch if like me you can't stand Biden.

God Bless Barack Obama

As a Christian, I believe in the phrase "God bless us, everyone" even if I have to grit my teeth. But I'm sincerely happy about this one. Why?

Joe Lieberman gets to keep his Senate Seat (reuters)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Democrats on Tuesday yielded to the wishes of President-elect Barack Obama and allowed Joe Lieberman to keep his committee chairmanship despite having backed Republican John McCain for the White House, Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa said.
Emerging from a closed-door meeting, Harkin told reporters that Democrats had stripped Lieberman of a subcommittee chairmanship, a far lesser punishment.
There were fears that Lieberman, a former Democrat turned independent, might become Republican if he lost the chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee. Democratic aides said Obama urged Democrats to do what it takes to keep Lieberman, who represents Connecticut, in their Senate conference where he routinely votes with them.
(Reporting by Richard Cowan and Thomas Ferraro; editing by Doina Chiacu)

I strongly disagree about the "punishment" aspect, and I am definitely pissed over the concept of party loyalty. Where are we, Soviet Russia? Joe Lieberman is a good liberal. He gets "As" in abortion rights, gay rights, medicare, and pretty independent on affirmative action, and health care liability. But the Dems only wanted to punish him for supporting W on Iraq. To isolate him to the point of bring in pseudo-Dem to challenge him in CT back in 2006 changed not only my opinion about Dems but also changed the opinion bloggers like Brendan Loy. Many liberals are truly liberal - we destest bullies. So what happened to Joe the Politician and Joe the Plumber enrages us.

Both parties have been acting like four year olds over the concept of party loyalty. What about loyalty to represent the citizens??? Can I get an Amen, somebody? Neither Lieberman nor Obama, nor Tancredo or anyone else should be forced to get in line. It's not just childish, it's dangerous for this country. It ruined Rome, it ruined Russia (White vs. Red factions after Lenin's death), don't let it ruin this country.

A Formal Congratulations

As Obama won the presidency tonight, I give him congratulations. However, I hope he realizes that his honeymoon is beginning to end. Forgive me for being cranky, but in my opinion, he did not deserve to be President. I don't care about his ties to his family nor to Wright or Ayers. Rather, his lack of effectiveness as state senator in Illinois.

Now I know Southside Chicago is not Palm Beach. It is rough. But Obama had a chance to prove himself and failed. The thing that bothered me was Gross Park housing project. To me, if O could not take care of his own neck of the woods he could not be trusted with anything larger. Add Joe Biden to the mix and I ended up writing in my candidate.

On the blog cynical nation, I argued that I would try not to care, as if Obama was elected, the whole kit and kaboodle of responsiblity would be blamed on the Dems and Dems alone. But I am bothered. I'm bothered by the press allowing him a pass on his effectiveness as leader. I'm bothered by the far left turn this country has taken (I'm liberal, but I do want balance). And I'm worried that the thug tactics Obama's troops have done to the media and Joe the Plumber will continue even worse as President. There is no record of his legistlative behavior, so how will we know how he will govern?

Knowing my luck , however, I'll be defending him when the chips are down and his so called fans leave him like rats from a sinking ship. When people stop riding on his coattails because he is popular. Just like W :)

Still, Obama needed to win. McCain would not have recieved media respect or objectivity as he would be the "second president to steal the election" or "Bush III"