reading the new york observer, you can smell the desperation:
“What’s most unfortunate about [the New York Times endorsement editorial] is, most of the criticism of Lieberman in it is premised on a myth,” [former aid Dan] Gerstein said. “They were willing to cast aside a national leader with 18 years of experience and all his qualifications, and endorsed a cipher who’s not qualified to be a U.S. Senator, on the assumption that Joe Lieberman has not stood up to the Bush administration on a number of key issues. And it’s just not the case.”first of all, calling joe lieberman "a leader" is like calling tony blair a leader, i.e., they're not... both have sold their reason for being in government to become dubya's sidekicks, and for little more than a nibble at some illusory apple called power... and what, it not being the case then, has joe lieberman ever done to inflict even a modicum of discomfort on george bush... ?
goddamned right we're willing to cast that aside... !
and "a cipher," dan... ? "not qualified"... ? are you, like, stupid... ?? the guy's worth $300 million, reportedly self-made... you call that a cipher not qualified... ?
desperation, i say unto you, is like napalm in the morning...
it smells like... victory... !!
4 comments:
It occurs to me that going after Lieberman for being too centrist is like going after Specter for being too centrist. Or am I just crazy for noticing the obvious?
I say Lamont in 06!
Given the effect it will have on the Senate (no numerical gain, but a palpable shift left for the Dems), I gotta wonder if the GOP should secretly boost Lamont, the way Santorum secretly boosting the Green candidate in PA. Think about it - once a state goes solidly Blue, it makes it easier for the GOP to paint the Dems as the party going leftward, and opening itself up to attack. Also, the GOP could not beat Lieb in CT, and probably won't beat Lamont, but the odds are better. Also, it makes it easier to marginalize Conn. because it will have less clout(think defense contracts going to Texas and the Gulf Coast rather than United Technologies). Finally, it slaps the DLC hard.
IMHO, the DLC is the only thing keeping the Dems in the presidential and leadership game, yet the true believers appear intent on killing it. Rove couldn't have scripted it better.
"obvious" to those whose eyeballs are pointed at each other, maybe...
listen old man, i've told you this before but it seems not to sink in: a) lieberman's no "centrist"; he's a considerably right-wing moralist, who voted moderate whenever it didn't hurt the repos; and 2) it was *never* the message that hung liberalism up in america the last 40 years, it was the chickenshit messengers they -- we -- were trotting out to "fight" for our values...
we became inbred... but now we're generating a fresh infusion of blood... and, i dare say, bloodlust...
and your message to the voters is, what? "yah, bush sucks... but *they're LIBERALS!!"...
it just won't work this time... and you need to stop underestimating the disgust by mainstream americans toward this president...
and it ain't no secret to us in the netroots about the repo-funding of the greens; of course it undercuts your whole argument here, as bob casey -- and you'll correct me if i'm misinformed -- is *con*ser*va*tive... ??
I tend to agree with G on this. I think Lieberman knew his audience and what state he was running in. He had no chance as a pub. Fortunately, the nauseating and over-extended political saga of the Lieb will soon come to an end to make way for a real lefty. Or, at the very LEAST, a true moderate.
Post a Comment