Wednesday, August 09, 2006

Lieberman loses Democratic primary, decides to run as Republican

Joe Lieberman, moments after conceding defeat to Democratic challenger Ned Lamont in the Connecticut primaries, vowed to home-state voters that he would be back on the ballot, only for the other party. "Let's face it, Connecticut wants me to go back to Washington to represent them," the 2000 Vice Presidential candidate told reporters at a press conference Wednesday morning. "I mean, 51% of Democrats don't, but I guarantee that a lot of Republicans would love to see me there. Did you see where I stood on the Terri Schiavo case?"

The Lamont-Lieberman contest was marred with political dog-fighting, each side accusing the other of negative campaigning. According to the CNN news article, the Lieberman camp blamed the Lamont campaign and liberal bloggers for the disruption that took down the Lieberman website. The Connecticut Senator called it "Rovian tactics," a swipe at Karl Rove, President Bush's head campaign strategist known for dirty political tactics, and also Lieberman's new party ally.

As Democratic lawmakers rally around their new poster child for the anti-war left, Lamont, they have begun to alienate Lieberman, who believes he has a better shot tackling the general election straight from the right. "Throughout the campaign, Democrats labeled me as 'too close to the President', and hit me hard for voting for the War," Lieberman said. "I realized last night when I got my ass handed to me by Ned Lamont that, given my voting record, maybe I should just switch teams."

Lieberman later added, "Plus I think the perks of being on the Republican team are much better. You get paid vacations from corporations, get to make fun of Democrats for being soft on everything, you get to hang out with Bill O'Reilly, and all you have to trade for it is your morality."


At 10:22 AM, Blogger Refugee from Reason said...

Take this in the spirit in which it is intended and from an old guy who covered the Congress (both houses) in the days when it was appropriately collegial and the legislative branch was bent on passing legislation important to our nation. The second caveat relates to Mort Sahl, again in the old days, as my view is that all political satire is measured by him and later Mark Russell. All of that out of the way, my view is that you're about 75 percent there with your satire. The writing style's crisp, but I think it needs a bit more subtlety to truly drill your points home.

That said, in many respects, if not all, I agree with you, but my old news nose and rapidly shrinking viscera suggest that Lamont's just not a prospective Senator in the vein of the great ones, i.e. focused on what's best not only for the nation, but for its citizenry.

All of that said, my view is this: Sweep out every member of the House and Senate (with the exception of maybe Bobby Byrd because (a) who else speaks Latin and (b) the Senate needs a doddering icon); and limit all campaign spending to that with Proxmire used to allocate for his races.

There are times, incidentally, when Nixon's looking pretty good by comparison and that I think I'd vote for Jerry Falwell if he'd guarantee national healthcare, a complete ban on firearms, as well as other social legislation critical to the nation.

Take care and keep it up.

At 10:37 AM, Blogger Chip Peterson said...

What message is this sending to todays Democratic party? In Jan. 1945, Democrat President Frnaklin D. Roosevelt said "we have learned that we can not live along, at peace, that our well-being is dependent on the well-being of other nations far away". Senator Lieberman is'nt even a moderate Democrat. He votes with Republicans only 10% of the time. There are 17 Democratic Senators who are more liberal then he is. I'm sorry that you and your family have had to go though this Joe.

At 10:48 AM, Blogger Granny said...

Funny and thanks for sending along.

Come back anytime.

Ann (granny)
Is America Burning

At 10:48 AM, Blogger Granny said...

Link doesn't work. You know where to find us.

At 10:54 AM, Blogger TheSarc said...

I fixed Granny's Link in case people were interested... here it is: Is America Burning

At 11:31 AM, Blogger Charles said...

Chip Peterson misses the point.

Lieberman voted with corporations and against the citizens of Connecticut repeatedly. He voted for the MBNA Protection Act (known in Washington as the Bankruptcy Bill). He used his power to protect companies like Enron from the oversight of the SEC.

He was also roundly disliked for having been such a weak candidate in 2000. When Cheney claimed never to have accepted any money from the government, that was a huge lie. Aside from being on the government teat at Halliburton, he collected many a federal paycheck as Congressman and from the DoD. But Lieberman let it pass. In Florida, Lieberman insisted on counting ballots from members of the military who we now know illegally voted after Election Day. He did not care about counting the legal votes of Americans abroad, some of whom serve in conditions of equal danger as some members of the military.

And then there was his indifference to civil liberties. Democrats back to Jefferson tend to be fairly sticky on issues of freedom from wiretapping, torture, and detention without charges.

But the bottom line is this: many Democrats sacrificed in time and treasure to build Joe Lieberman's career. Serving in the Congress and being able to set this nation's course really is a privilege. So, when the very people who had worked for and sacrificed Lieberman tired of him and resolved to replace him with someone who represented their values, what did Lieberman do?

Using gushers and geysers of corporate money, he resolved to deny them their choice of representative.

By contrast(NB, Refugee from Reason), Ned Lamont saw the unhappiness with Lieberman. He's a rich man. He could have outright bought the seat. But he said he would run only if so-and-so many people would donate and only if so-and-so-many would volunteer. A poor person's $5 counted as much as a rich man's $2,100. These are marks of a man who cares about the nation more than he cares about himself.

(And Sarc, I liked your piece).

At 2:28 PM, Blogger Phoenix Woman said...

I second Charles' comments. :-)

At 10:45 PM, Blogger N said...

Dudes that is some funny stuff but yet it is sadly way to close to the truth. stop by any time and if you are looking for some new stuff I'd be glad to join in.




Post a Comment

<< Home