Ed Morrisey comments on the story about Joe Lieberman's potential indepedent bid, linked below, and to Lamont's reaction to it.
Lieberman remains a Democrat, even with the independent bid, especially since he's committed to caucusing with the Democrats if elected. While one can understand why the Lamont campaign would want to make hay of both the announcement and its timing, the assignment of cowardice seems more than just a little ironic. Lieberman hasn't pulled out of the primary, after all; he still plans on contesting it. More to the point, the entire reason for Lamont's campaign and its surprisingly large following is that Lamont wants an immediate retreat from Iraq, cutting and running rather than fight the terrorists in the one place that even Osama understands as the center stage of the war on terror. Throwing around accusations of cowardice seems a bit odd under the circumstances.I suspect that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will have some uncomfortable moments in the next few weeks. Undoubtedly they will hope that Lieberman will win the primary and let them off the hook. They may do more than just hope, which may result in a nasty split between the hard-Left and the DLC factions, just as the midterms approach. It looks like the Democrats may well wind up with the split that appeared imminent in the GOP until a couple of weeks ago.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
2006 Senate Race, Connecticut
Comments (5)
Thanks for the LINK...... (Below threshold)1. Posted by brooklyn boy - hNAV | July 4, 2006 5:06 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Thanks for the LINK...
Poor Joe...
Happy INdependence DAy to all on the WIZBANG Boards...
1. Posted by brooklyn boy - hNAV | July 4, 2006 5:06 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2006 05:06
2. Posted by David | July 4, 2006 5:15 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
This is a very bad thing for Democrats nationally, I love it. I plan on voting for Joe myself.
2. Posted by David | July 4, 2006 5:15 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2006 05:15
3. Posted by Peg C. | July 4, 2006 10:53 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I'd vote for Joe if I were in CT (I'm in NY).
The interesting thing about the divisions within the parties is that, while very public, the divisions (IMHO) among Republicans are not deep fissures. In the case of the Dems, they work hard to hide their fissures which actually run core deep. The Dems are like Arabs: their factions hang together to face their common enemy while actually despising each other. A very public split would help us and be better for the country in the short run, and in the long run help the Dems regain their sanity which would have a bracing effect on the lazy Republicans.
3. Posted by Peg C. | July 4, 2006 10:53 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2006 10:53
4. Posted by Peg C. | July 4, 2006 11:00 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
One more thing, which I've queried here and there and never gotten an answer to. Lamont's candidacy is symbolic of the BDS suffered by 30% or so of the country. What are all those BDS sufferers going to do when the entire reason for their living and breathing is no longer president as of late January 2009?? I do not fear for the sanity of Republicans after the election, because we understand the world we live in. The Dems still live in an alternative universe.
4. Posted by Peg C. | July 4, 2006 11:00 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2006 11:00
5. Posted by JohnMc | July 5, 2006 1:34 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Peg C.,
But you can still be effective. Send Joe L. some money. I intend to send Joe money even though I am a Republican and live in Texas. I am still a believer in having the strongest horses running in the primaries. Our Republic benefits by having the best contestants possible regardless of political party. Its what gives the voters better choices.
And of course I recognize Mr. L is a Liberal. But compared to Lamont, Joe is sane.
5. Posted by JohnMc | July 5, 2006 1:34 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 5, 2006 13:34