BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...

Subject: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: GUEST,saulgoldie
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 10:35 AM

Say "Goodbye," Joe. Oh wait, you're running now as an independent. Good for you! Nevermind the "good of the party." Ned Lamont won, and you lost the primary. And you should STAY LOST!

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 10:55 AM

I agree with you, SaulGoldie. Instead of feeling entitled to his (lost) post, Lieberman should rethink his positions... He is out of touch.

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: number 6
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:09 AM

What's wrong ... one may not agree with him ... so, as an independant he can do what he wishes to do .... even if he is out of touch ... most politicans are anyway .... hell, maybe they should all take the independant route.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: artbrooks
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:29 PM

The problem is that, if he does what he says and runs as an independent, he will seriously split the Democratic vote. He won in 2000 by 63% to 34%, so it is statistically possible (if unlikely) for the Republican candidate to win in what is really a strongly Democratic state.

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: DougR
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:34 PM

I think, and hope, that Joe wins back his seat. The fact that the Democratic Party abandoned him says a lot about today's Democratic Party. A far-cry from the party of Franklin Roosevelt.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:41 PM

Lieberman's prospects in 2006 are a far cry from the days when the Democratic Party chose him as their vice presidential nominee.

Doug, how does the current Grand Oil Party (GOP) measure up to the ideals of Goldwater?

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: Amos
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:53 PM

Jesus, Doug, you find something to twist in everything!! I suppose if Bush were impeached for crimes, found guilty and removed from post, you would say his party was disloyal to him for letting it happen. The idea that their might be some higher duty has something to do with it, even though this is not a concept very popular among politicians.



A

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: Wesley S
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:54 PM

I think both Doug and Ebbie make a good point. From what I can see the two political parties actually have two common goals. The first is to get elected. The second is to get re-elected.

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:00 PM

You forgot the last part though, WesleyS: to insure they keep getting (re-)elected, by making sure there is no chance in hell of any electoral reforms passing that would open the political process to ALL Americans, and not just American Asses and Pink Elephants who run the show on behalf of Wall Street.

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: DougR
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:12 PM

Wesley S: I couldn't agree with you more.

Ebbie: It's come a long way from the party of Goldwater and I regret it but I don't recall the GOP dumping a sitting senator because he/she only supported the Party's point of view 90% of the time. Example:George W. Bush is campaigning for the re-election of Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island. No Senator has been less supportive of Bush than Lincoln Chafee. Bush also supported the current chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee from Pennsylvania in his last race for re-election and I don't believe anyone can point to him as a great supporter of Bush.

Amos:I twisted nothing. The Democratic Party has been captured by the extreme far left. Howard Dean, George Soros, et. al. There is no place at the table for the likes of Joseph Lieberman in the current Democratic Party. Okay by me. Lamont won fair and square as far as I can see. I believe Lieberman is a good man though and that the independent voters (joined by some Democrats AND Republicans) of Connecticut will return him to office in November.

I think the Party leadership, though, is overestimating the number of voters in the U. S. that support their POV. More directly to your question:if Bush was found guilty of a crime, I would support his impeachment and his incarceration. I do not believe that to be the case however. If Bush were tried and found innocent, would YOU accept that verdict?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:20 PM

Lemme clean up a little mess here. It wasn't the Democratic Party that dumped Lieberman (no matter how much they should have), it was the voters.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:22 PM

By the way, that kinda sends a message to other Democrats, doesn't it?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:33 PM

Yes, Don. The message seems to be, if you don't start listening to us, we will elect a different Harvard educated, multi-millionaire media mogul to do the same damn thing Joe did. Except maybe vote even MORE often with the big business wing of the Republican party.

I think "the voters" who ousted Joe are upset with Joe's support of the war and his hypocrisy about Bill Clinton (ie condemning him with faint praise when he needs the votes, after disparaging him for his immoral behavior w/Lewinsky), and his conservatism on social issues (like the Terry Schiavo debacle I mentioned).

But when it comes to conservative economic policies, they are ALL, liberal and conservative, Democratic and Republican, sleeping with the same whores in the same bed. The ones that maintain the middle class status quo.

Middle class blacks, Latinos, union members, etc. are ALL voting like the conservative, middle class Reaganites that they are.

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: kendall
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 03:01 PM

Why do we always look to politicians to do the right thing? Too many of them don't know what the right thing is!

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 03:14 PM

So the fact that Lieberman is a Jewish man who supports Israel above and beyond what is reasonable, in many Americans' considered opinions, and supports the war in Iraq because of his views on Israel didn't turn off the voters? He skewed his support base so much with the war support that he was bound to lose. That was a no-brainer. Yes, he is probably going to be a spoiler for the Democratic party. That is also a no-brainer.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 03:15 PM

MAJOR CUT AND PASTE ALERT!

But well worth it to put the "Lieberman loss" into perspective. From today's Seattle Times (you do need to read all the way to the end for the punch line):

Finding meaning in Tuesday's primary results

Posted by David Postman at 10:09 AM

As with any good pundit and political reporter this morning I'm trying to figure out the broader implications of the big campaign news of the day: The loss by an incumbent in a primary election who had been painted so far out of step with his party he was made to look like all but a traitor to the cause. And today the results have some wondering whether it signals a major split in the party that could have fallout across the country.

I'm talking about the Michigan Congressional race where Republican Rep. Joe Schwarz was defeated yesterday by Tim Walberg, a former Republican state legislator. Walberg painted Schwarz as a big-spending liberal and attacked him for his support of abortion rights.

Schwarz was endorsed by President George Bush and Sen. John McCain. But Walberg was backed by the anti-abortion groups and the Club for Growth. In fact, this was the first primary win ever for a candidate backed by the Club for Growth, a conservative, anti-tax group, that targets GOP members they call RINOs, Republicans in name only.

The Associated Press reported "the implications could reach far beyond the borders of the rural southern Michigan district." Schwarz was reported as saying:

"I look at this election as probably a victory for right to life, anti-abortion, anti-embryonic stem cell groups but it's a net loss for the Republican party because it just pushes the party farther to the right."
Of course most of the attention today is on another primary, Tuesday's Democratic vote in Connecticut that saw liberal businessman Ned Lamont defeat Sen. Joe Lieberman in a campaign largely focused on Lieberman's support of the Iraq war.

It's that race that Republicans want to define the 2006 mid-term elections. In the coming days you can be sure that Republicans will be describing Democratic candidates as the "The Ned Lamont of (your state here.)"

This morning Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman gave a speech to the City Club of Cleveland. He was there to give a boost to Sen. Mike DeWine who is facing a tough challenge from Rep. Sherrod Brown. Mehlman talked a lot about the results in Connecticut's Democratic primary:

"Why is this relevant in Ohio?
"Because right here, the Democratic Party has chosen to nominate for Senate a leading proponent of the isolationist, defeatist, blame America first philosophy.

"Sherrod Brown is Ohio's answer to Ned Lamont."


Mehlman is spinning Lieberman's loss as evidence - proof really - that "defeatism and isolationism are now Democratic Party orthodoxy." He describes the Connecticut primary as a major turning point for Democrats. He seems so nostalgic for the old Democratic Party - the pre-Tuesday Democratic Party - one wonders what he ever found to criticize them before Lamont's victory.

I can't imagine that this will play a significant role in Washington state races. I'm sure Hong Tran hopes it does, but her long-shot campaign against Maria Cantwell is likely not in a position to capitalize on the Lieberman defeat.

Republicans here will spread the Mehlman gospel and play up divisions on the war we've already seen among state Democrats. Anyone want to take bets on how long before we see a GOP-penned line that includes mention of Lamont and Dwight Pelz?

In Cleveland this morning - according to excerpts of the speech the RNC sent me - Mehlman contrasted Democrats as the party of exclusion with the Republicans and their "commitment to a big-tent Party, where independent voices like Mike DeWine, Ken Blackwell, and George Voinovich are welcomed."

Joe Schwarz? Not so much.

UPDATE: Even if Republicans are successful in making the Lamont victory a declaration that the Democratic Party is now the anti-war party, I'm not sure how that will play with the electorate.

This from CNN today:

Sixty percent of Americans oppose the U.S. war in Iraq, the highest number since polling on the subject began with the commencement of the war in March 2003, according to poll results and trends released Wednesday.
And a majority of poll respondents said they would support the withdrawal of at least some U.S. troops by the end of the year, according to results from the Opinion Research Corporation poll conducted last week on behalf of CNN. The corporation polled 1,047 adult Americans by telephone.


I don't think Democrats have yet settled on what the Connecticut results will mean. But this is the best quote I've seen:

"This shows what blind loyalty to George Bush and being his love child means," said Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the leader of the Democratic House Congressional campaign. "This is not about the war. It's blind loyalty to Bush."

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 03:36 PM

I think Lieberman will hang in for awhile, until it is obvious to him the money isn't flowing to him, and the party is running away from him.

I think the truth of the matter is, this was Democratic primary, not a general election. Despite 30,000 new Democrats registering (whom I believe are most likely anti-Bush and anti-war independent voters, not non-voters suddenly joining the process), this is really a referendum on the Democratic Leadership Council's grip on the party.

Same thing happened with St Paul Mayor Randy Kelly, a pro-big biz Bush Democrat, who lost the election last November to an equally conservative, pro-big biz Democrat, who exploited the anti-Bush sentiment and "party betrayal" by Kelly.

So in other words, this is a year in which Democratic incumbents who have supported Bush, will be spanked by Democratic party loyalists at the polls.

That matters little in the general election, where I expect we will see nothing earth shattering happen, even if control of one or both houses of Congress changes hands. The tipping of the scale to a few more Dems than Repubs simply won't matter that much. Bush will still be president, and he has two more years to save the party.

Well, let the Repub party hacks with intelligence and marketing savvy try and save the party from the Bush administration's excesses, anyway.

Which isn't very likely either. Hitler could run as the Dem nominee in 2008 and get elected at this point.

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: GUEST,MarkS
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 04:55 PM

Yeah. Hitler might be elected as a Democrat these days but neither JFK nor Hubert Humphry would even get a hearing.
As Trotsky said when the ice axe went into his head, "I guess orthodoxy really is more important than principle."

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 05:58 PM

Dead on there, MarkS. Which makes me wonder when they will have Feingold meet with a nasty accident, a la Wellstone.

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: Arne
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 06:44 PM

DougR:

I think, and hope, that Joe wins back his seat. The fact that the Democratic Party abandoned him says a lot about today's Democratic Party.

What? That they vote their own minds? Heaven forfend.

The Democratic Party didn't "abandon" him; he got support from prominent Democrats across the country, including Bill Clinton. The voters just said they wanted someone else instead. And now the Democratic Party will support the chosen candidate. That's the way it works.

Then JoeMentum hs the balls to say he's going to do what he thinks is right for "my party". But the Democrats acted ... uhhh, "democratically".

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: Arne
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 06:50 PM

DougR:

I don't recall the GOP dumping a sitting senator because he/she only supported the Party's point of view 90% of the time.

You ignore the fact that Specter almost got dumped by a more "palatable" candidate to the foaming RWers that make up the core of today's Republican party. JoeMentum could probably have sneaked by if he hadn't been so stoopid that he insisted on mounting a petition drive to run as an independent in case he lost the primary, and refused to agree to accede to the party decision, as Lamont did. JoeMentum just acted arrogant and showed disdain for the party constituency whose nomination he was seeking. Shouldn't be any surprise they decided to dump him.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: robomatic
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 08:08 PM

It is a shame that the Democratic party has lost its gonads and chosen to be an opposition party rather than a proponent of anything. I would love to keep the ones with guts and character like Lieberman and lose the gutter trash like Sharpton, rebuild the party around some principles and consistency. Right now it is a mess and morass.

Reminds me of the line in "Trainspotting" where one Scotsman (Democrat) puts down the English (Republicans) as a bunch of wankers. His friend replies, "that makes us worse, we've been colonized by wankers!"

Or, situation normal, as Will Rogers said "I don't belong to an organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 08:33 PM

The only reason why this is seen as an upset is because Lieberman is a long standing incumbent.

People who lose in primaries go on to run in general elections around the country all the time, with and without party endorsements, etc.

That said, I think Lieberman will drop out only when it becomes clear TO HIM, that he will lose.

I doubt his pockets are deep enough to go toe to toe w/the party's multi-millioniare candidate, who will likely get the lion's share of the money being thrown at this race.

Which won't be much, incidentally. No one is predicting the current Republican candidate has a snowball's chance in hell of winning. Which means it's a continuation of the race, just like Lieberman says.

Lieberman has all the arrogance of power about him, just like Tom De Lay does. But neither of them are stupid. Lieberman may have a shot at winning. A long shot, but a shot nonetheless. And I don't think that would hurt the Democratic party in it's current incarnation one bit. Because the rules only matter when THEY need them, not when the voters need them.

De Lay, et al are putting up the mayor of Sugarbush as a write-in candidate, in hopes of being able to defeat the Democrat who is, right now, a shoe-in for winning in November against De Lay. That's a pretty big long shot too. Except it works every now and then, as this Ohio candidate proved recently.

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: Arne
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 08:35 PM

robomatic:

Ummm, exactly what elected office does Al Sharpton hold? Or what position does he have in the Democratic party?

As for "losing its [sic] gonads", I don't think you understand. Lieberman had the support of major Democratic figures, including the Clintons. The voters of Connecticut said, "no thank you, we can make up our own minds", and they did. Sounds to me like they had balls enough.

As for being a "proponent of anything", are you sure you think the Democratic party should be a "proponent" of Congressional intrusion into a very sad but personal family matter? Or a "proponent" of mass transit (gawd knows mass transit in CT sucks right now) to get rape victims to the next hospital hopefully willing to provide prophylactic birth control?

The Democratic party is the proponent of a lot of things: Better access to health care, higher minimum wage, sound energy policy, etc..... You just don't hear about it, because the RW Republicans won't even let their stuff come up for a vote. You want to fix Washington, vote more Democrats in, and you'll see what a competent party and gummint can do.

You want to know what the Republican party is a "proponent" of, it's more power to the banks over debtors, more tax breaks for the rich, more subsidies for oil companies awash with enough cash to refloat the Titanic, abolishing the best government program ever (Social Security), and endless wars to keep the fear level high and keep themselves in power. Not to mention Cunningham, DeLay, Ney, Frist, etc. Yes, indeed. Such a positive agenda.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 09:05 PM

I couldn't disagree more strongly with this statement:

"You want to fix Washington, vote more Democrats in, and you'll see what a competent party and gummint can do."

There was no evidence of that being true before they were voted out of power, IMO.

However, that said, how anyone on this planet could genuinely believe that the Republican party of Bush/Cheney is THE BETTER PARTY when it comes to national security issues after this Republican administration's running amok as it has, I will never understand.

Seriously.

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 12:04 PM

Arne:

Thanks for the pick-me-up. Seriously.

Robo

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: Charley Noble
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 10:03 PM

Any truth to the rumour that if Lieberman loses in November, he will then form his own independent senate and proclaim himself majority leader?

The above is not an original thought but, perhaps, a valuable contribution to this thread.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: One DINO Down, 2,000 more to go...
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 11:07 PM

Why is wanting to jump off the toboggan before it reaches the big rock at the bottom of the slope called 'defeatism' or 'oppositionism'?