Tuesday, June 06, 2006

As Goes Lieberman, So Go the Democrats

There are few things more revealing about intraparty struggles than primary challenges to incumbents and the really ugly battles that are peculiar to those races. Such unwelcome things bring very little benefit to the party. They are rarely successful, and most often result in an incumbent with few resources and less energy heading into a general election. They provide a general election opponent with free and early bad press on the incumbent and they are the hammer that the other party can use to show that the sitting politician is out of touch, not just with the voters but with his own insular gang.

And such is the lot of Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) who may be engaged in the primary battle of his life. Nobody has ever accused Lieberman of being a Kennedy socialist nor a Kerry secularist. He is a moderate politician who is guided by and remains true to his Jewish faith. Lieberman often holds attitudes different than those of his own party mainly because he lets facts, not mantras determine his course. In just about every way, he is an independent-minded and fair individual. Having been called "the conscience of the Senate", Lieberman brings to the table a certain set of qualities that transcend the usual political sniping that characterizes Washington.

But the primary battle now before him results from the fact that he supported and continues to support the Iraq war because, upon invesigation, he believes that we are there on a good mission and that that mission must be accomplished. The left, of course, cannot tolerate any across the aisle cooperation--unless it's the Republicans capitulating to them, so as punishment, they are trying to decapitate Lieberman.

And if they are successful, they will set a course for their party's implosion.

Lieberman's opponent, Ned Lamont is a fairly radical guy who is adored by this crowd. Beating Lieberman would send the very obvious message that the Dems are not interested in reasonable people, but rather far leftists as their elected members. But it would also have the effect of turning the party in such an obviously and publicly leftward direction that Americans would begin to realize that the party is so completely out of touch with America that it can no longer be trusted with handling the business of the American people.

It is nothing new that the Democrats are the party of the far left, just that they are more open about it. And dogmatic openness that unseats a very respected, ethical and honorable member of the U.S. Senate because he chose to remain true to what he believes is right, rather than remaining obedient to the Reid-Pelosi-Dean drumbeat will be just the kind of thing that over a few years time clues Americans into the fact that today's Democrats are promoting the same brand of ideas that we fought and defeated in the Cold War.

5 Comments:

Blogger Repack Rider said...

I'm not sure I understand your point.

Connecticut Democrats have every right to choose their candidate for the Senate, and Lieberman has no more "right" to the nomination than any other citizen of the state. In a DEMOCRACY people get to vote on the basis of someone's record. Isn't that a GOOD thing?

If the vast majority of the Democratic voters oppose the war, and Lieberman does not, then they have every right to choose someone who represents their views.

If you are not a Democrat or a resident of Connecticut, your opinion is unimportant, but you seem perturbed that the people of Connecticut might actually vote for someone they like instead of someone who has not honored their views.

Bottom line the seat will still be Democratic, Ned Lamont could not possibly be worse than Republican-Lite Lieberman, and the odds are good that he will be an improvement.

Why do you care?

10:22 PM  
Blogger tal Kepi said...

Of course the Conn Dems have the right to pick who they wish. The point here is the desire of the Dem establishment to whack a standing member of the Senate in an act of ideological cleansing. It shows, once again, the true intolerance of the left when confronted with positions that are not idealogically correct. As they demonstrate this publicly more Americans will have to decide whether they wish to pursue the goals demanded by the Dem leadership or not. I would suspect not.

11:58 AM  
Blogger Repack Rider said...

The point here is the desire of the Dem establishment to whack a standing member of the Senate in an act of ideological cleansing.

You are 180-degrees wrong. The Democratic "establishment" supported Joe. The people who do not are those pesky voters.

It shows, once again, the true intolerance of the left when confronted with positions that are not idealogically correct.

It shows that if you do not represent your constituents, who are not, by the way, the beltway, they will look for someone who does. It's called, let me think, oh yes, DEMOCRACY.

As they demonstrate this publicly more Americans will have to decide whether they wish to pursue the goals demanded by the Dem leadership or not. I would suspect not.

Hey, you're getting it. The Democratic voters are tired of "leaders" who lose elections because they are wimps who do not reflect the views of the people that they want to vote for them, and often fail to oppose the Republican agenda.

If you are not a Democrat from Connecticut, why should anyone care what you think? As I said before, since they couldn't find a WORSE Democrat than Joe, by replacing him they might actually improve the situation.

8:51 PM  
Blogger Lawjedi said...

Repack Rider seems to be missing the point of this post and probably disqualifies himself to leave the comments he does.

The point of my post is that the Dems, by trying to knock off Lieberman in a primary challenge, seem to be following in the path that they have been very publicly forging since 2000--one of demanding of their members leftist doctrinal purity and orthodoxy over reasoned decisions made in good faith for the best interests of the nation.

But through his uni-dimensional post, Repack untwittingly dug himself into a nice hole.

He presumes that this insurgent primary challenge is the will of the Connecticut Democrat voters simply because it is his will. But no election has yet been held, and Lieberman is still favored to win. If Lieberman wins, would Repack argue that the Connecticut voters got it wrong?

He also opens the can of worms that because I don't live in Connecticut that I have no basis to offer an opinion. Which would mean that Bill Clinton had no authority to command the U.S. Armed Forces, but I digress. But given that his comments went so far as to reach the merits of my arguments, it would be more than just a little silly if he was not a Connecticut resident and voter. If (as I suspect) he is not, he has impeached his own credibility to prattle on as he did.

With respect to the argument that Democrats are tired of losing elections with candidates who go along with the Administration (and I can only presume he means general elections), I doubt that he can respond with much more than the factless mantras he offers. I challenge him to name me one national Democrat who has lost an election to a Republican for being supportive of this Administration. He won't be able to do it.

Conversely, people like Max Cleland, Jeanne Carnahan, Tom Daschle, Wellstone/Mondale, John Edwards (who was going to lose his seat if he ran again), John Kerry, and others were rejected by voters for being too radical and for not being on board when it came to the war on terror. It is liberalism that is unseating national Democrats, not a conservative bent.

Lastly the silliest argument Repack offers is that Lieberman is the candidate of the Democratic establishment. If Repack actually believes that Howard Dean, Daily Kos and MoveOn and other leftist voices are not the voices of the current Democratic establishment, or that they support candidates like Lieberman, he has missed over half a decade of political evolution in America.

11:55 AM  
Blogger keenan44 said...

people like repack rider are why the dems keep losing elections. The point of this story was not the fact that the people of Conn can't select who they want to represent them. Of course they can. The point is that by electing the far left kooks it will only make it even more obvious who the Dems really are. To win generqal elections the Dems have to mask their true identity and fool the American people about their true beliefs one of which is that government is god. By dumping Lieberman it will make it harder for the Dems to fool people. i for one say let them dump Liberman and truly show the American people who the DEms really are.

11:13 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home