… that Joe Lieberman’s a jackass? Digby reminds us that for all that Holy Joe was “deeply troubled” by the more raw elements of our pop culture (a sentiment many liberals share, actually), there he was chumming up with Don Imus lo, these many years.
Does. Not. Compute.
This is one of the myriad reasons I have to ask our neighbors in the Nutmeg State: What the hell were you thinking/drinking when you sent this guy back to the Senate for another six long years? Does this guy really represent your values? Your concerns? Are you really “all in” for as much more incompetent, monstrous warmongering as the President wants?
I really, really don’t get it. I predict that sometime next year, Lieberman’s approval ratings will be in the tank; he’ll speak at the Republican convention; and there’ll be a push to recall him somehow — feasible or not.
Maybe they thought Ned Lamont was a one issue nut.
is a multiple issue nut.
Let me ‘splain it all to you.
<
p>
It took me–an independent “unenrolled”–a while to figure this out. The parties at the national level do not exist for anything more than incumbent protection rackets. The national Dem party did not support Lamont, the state Dem party candidate, for one reason. Lamont was an insurgent who threatened the job of a jackass who (laughingly) promised to caucus with the Dems in the Senate.
<
p>
If the national Dem party had supported Lamont in the general election–as they should have–that might have put, the jobs of the other Dem senators at risk to other insurgents.
<
p>
It really is as simple as that. Lamont was an insurgent, rocking the boat, and the national Democratic party doesn’t want their boat rocked. And that’s why they gave him no support. And, indeed, that’s why they encouraged Republicans to vote for Lieberliarman.
<
p>
Some Dems might some day rue the day that that happened, but, not now. Dems have neither tactics nor strategy, they just want to keep their jobs.*
<
p>
*One reason why I have no use for Dems at the national level.
<
blockquote>The national Dem party did not support Lamont, the state Dem party candidate
<
blockquote>
<
p>
That’s wrong. The national Dem party did support Lamont once he won the primary. Sure, there were a few elected Democrats who supported Joementum after the primary, but most supported Lamont. But don’t take my word for it. Consider:
<
p>
WaPo
MSNBC
Barack Obama (via Lamont’s site)
Faux News
This, of course, makes the rest of your conclusions — if based on your assertion regarding Lamont — wrong too.
Thanks for the citations. I read not only the text, but also the subtext (between the lines). Of course the national Dem party was going to give lip service to Lamont’s candidacy in the general election. But I actually read lefty Dem Connecticut websites such as FireDogLake, and some of Shumer’s remarks (he, being head of the Democrat Senate financing committee), and it was pretty obvious that the lefty Dem CT websites were disappointed in the rather lukewarm support that the national party gave to Lamont’s candidacy.
<
p>
After lightning struck me, it all became clear. Reference above.
<
p>
Of course, Shumer would never say out loud what I mentioned above. Certainly not to the media. But that issue is what’s driving the issue. An incumbency protection racket.
That’s precisely why a bunch of us went to CT to volunteer for Ned Lamont. Often. Once we knew that Deval was doing OK we spent the rest of the election season in CT.
<
p>
Joe is and always was a liar and a wanker. Many of us figured that out a long long time ago. The voters in CT weren’t paying attention.
<
p>
2. Don Imus.
<
p>
3. Pundits
<
p>
4. Joe Lieberman
<
p>
5. The war in Iran
<
p>
How do you explain the voters of West Virginia sending a clansman to congress or the Massachusetts voters sending
the likes of Kerry and Kennedy to Washington?
<
p>
I guess it is in the realm of the unexplainable.
It seems like Lieberman has decided to endorse Susan Collins (R-ME) for re-election.
is here.
<
p>
And apparently, it’s not even clear who will be running against Collins yet. But apparently, however spectacular the Democrat may be, he or she won’t be good enough for Joementum.
An Indpendent chooses whom to support based on information other than the letter in parentheses after the person’s name. Scandalous!
<
p>
Also, a politician chooses to withold support from the party that went out of its way to f–k him over. The horrors!
<
p>
Maybe if the Democrats continue to crap on him, we can have new leadership in the Senate, and then 100% of the Democratic agenda can stall. Then, in 2008, the Democrats can campaign on all the progressive issues they care about, but not so much as to actually do anything other than whine.
tell us why we should support her. i know nothing about her.
Do it yourself. It’s called a learning experience.
is on the person trying to make the original point.
Joe Lieberman, who is an old school Democrat who believes we need a strong defense like JFK, will be the Republican Nominee’s choice for VP on a “unity ticket”
It’s not like I can call up the nominee and say hey pick Joe.
What are you kidding? Loyalty?
<
p>
Joe Lieberman walks onto the senate floor and Ted and John et al and the remainder of Joe’s stand up fellow alleged “friends” run out to repeatedly shank him. He sinks to the floor bleeding profusely and begging for help and who’s the first person to “reach out”. There are a lot of folks that need to do some big time soul searching re the Lieberman hit. Joe has always been a stand up guy and loyal to Israel. There is a prominent politician just south of Joe who professed a desire to convert, amongst other things, and this very frightening person would be the first person to drop a big dime on Israel then throw them under the bus.
<
p>
The Democratic party only could wish that they have other folks like Joe Lieberman with a D after his name.