The difference between Democrats and Republicans

One thing on which I agree with the Republican leadership (0.00 / 0)

A party must stand for something.  A primary reflects the will of its members.  And the Republicans are right to threaten to dump Murkowski if she goes independent.

By the same token, Democrats gave their voters the back of their hand when they welcomed back Joe Lieberman and gave him his seniority as well.

But Lieberman is toast in 2012.  Let's just make sure that our elected Democratic officials- every single one of them- understands that Lieberman is no Democrat, and that they are not to lift a little finger to support him.  

---

by: thomashooker @ Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 15:28:04 PM UTC

Don't count Joe out (0.00 / 0)

I can foresee a scenario in which the Dems lose control of the Senate, Joe switches from Indy to Rep to retain his committee positions, and runs in 2012 as the Rep candidate.

In any event, if Joe decides to run he'll be a formidable, if not particularly appealing, candidate.

---

by: BranfordBoy @ Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 17:18:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wouldn't surprise me if Holy Joe becomes a Rethug and runs on their ticket in 2012 (0.00 / 0)

I was watching Rachel Maddow's show from last night and she had Meghan McCain on and Meghan spoke of Lieberman like he was a member of the Republican Party.  She lumped him with Lindsey Grahm as a description of moderates in the Republican party.  Rachel reminded Meghan that Lieberman is an Independent.  She replied that because Lieberman campaigned closely with her dad, she thought of him as a Republican.

---

by: Larkspur @ Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 17:22:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh Meghan... (0.00 / 0)

Why are the pretty ones (who might be actually capable of having a reasonable conversation about social issues) always establishment insiders?

"There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning." - Warren Buffet

---

by: joesaho @ Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 20:30:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

WWSLLIB? (0.00 / 0)

Meghan on beauty:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/b...

How's that for a profound conversation?

---

by: greenpeas @ Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 12:55:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

she speaks of what she knows (0.00 / 0)

hair and beauty. I don't fault her for this.

hell, if i had that kind of $$$ I'd be getting ' extensions and other salon magic.' every other day too

of course MY MOTHER would cut me off at the knees for pissing away her money and tell me to get a real job  

.Adding Another Dimension of Vituperation Toxicity to Blogging since 1999!.

---

by: nolopro @ Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 13:12:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here's the segment from Maddow's show where Meghan talks about Lieberman (0.00 / 0)

It starts around the 5:15-5:20 minute mark.

---

by: Larkspur @ Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 21:19:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ms McCain is dumber than a box of rocks (4.00 / 1)

who can forget her claiming ignorance about the Carter administration ("'you know I wasn't born yet so I wouldn't know." Going in for the kill, Begala fired back "I wasn't born during the French Revolution but I know about it."")

seriously.. if she didn't have mom's money she'd be seeing Holy Joe in a different light (if she even knew who he is TBH)

.Adding Another Dimension of Vituperation Toxicity to Blogging since 1999!.

---

by: nolopro @ Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 12:26:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

There is no excuse for Joe as a Democrat (0.00 / 0)

There are far too many decent Democrats around.  And elected Democratic officials who try to pander to him will be toast.  No excuses this time.  None.

---

by: thomashooker @ Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 19:03:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Let's think this one through (0.00 / 0)

You are making it sound like the Democratic party is standing up for some principles now and is likely to do so in the future.  As Paul Wellstone once said,

If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for, at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them.

 I see a number of Dems  who come under the category of not fighting hard enough.

We had a presidential candidate who drafted on the energy of  the desire for change that many people had, and then through his actions raised people's doubts about the Democratic party's seriousness about change. (Those who had an idea who Obama was pre-2008 already had some idea how much change he was likely to bring.)

We have a Democratic party that let Lieberman keep his committee chairmanship after he ran against the party's candidate.  Not a good track record for drawing lines in the sand here.

Let's consider the case that the Democrats just want to win, that's all.  So if the  CT Democrats are going to suddenly take a stand in 2012 and not run Joe as their candidate for US Senator(a departure in approach to date), then who would you envision as the candidate now, not in December 2011?

Will the party really do anything differently if they don't have a strong candidate to run? And exactly how deep is the so-called desire for change?

Rerun the Wellstone quote.

---

by: greenpeas @ Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 02:57:55 AM UTC

[ Parent ]