The Hatfield’s & McCoys: Lieberman v. Lamont

The Hatfield’s & McCoys: Lieberman v. Lamont


I think it’s time for a little perspective and a reality check. Perhaps the most important midterm election in modern history is little more than three months away and as I watch the Lieberman vs. Lamont race, I have to shake my head at the energy being invested by Democrats to defeat another Democrat. With the latest Jane Hamsher debacle at Huffington Post on Wednesday and covered here and by the Washington Post, I’m left to wonder how the Democratic Party will ever entice enough middle of the road independent and Republican voters to take a chance on a Democratic candidate, much less giving Democrats control of the House or the Senate come November.

Look, I have no problem with a contested primary and I fully support the people of Connecticut in freely choosing the Senator they prefer…but I don’t get why the bulk of the progressive netroots feels they need to devote the lions share of their time and effort participating in this one race…while at the same time the Democrats have the best possibility to take control of the House and Senate FROM THE REPUBLICANS in years.

I’m not a Lieberman apologist and I feel the manner in which he supported the President on the Iraq war was wrong because he undermined fellow Democrats in the process. Nonetheless, I’m at a loss to see how making the defeat of Lieberman the equivalent of a public caning (in full view of the opposition and those voters who have the potential to switch and vote Democratic this election) is going to achieve the goals of the progressive netroots. Quite frankly, other than proving that they can influence a race within the Democratic Party…and likely doing so at the expense of the Democratic Party come November…I’m fully baffled by the rationale and the intensity of this feud.

Now I’ve read the carefully worded and ample pontifications on the Lieberman betrayals…and were I a woman scorned I might even run about his neighborhood putting up posters saying he’s a liar and a cheat…but since I’m not…and neither are the progressive netroots…why the hell are they doing as much? It just doesn’t add up. If we boot Joe’s booty, and we don’t gain six Senate seats, we still can’t shut George Bush down, we still can’t force an immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq, we still can’t force a moderate Supreme Court appointment, and since most of us don’t live in Connecticut, we can’t even enjoy whatever pork Lamont might bring home to Connecticut (and that assumes he can bring home some pork that Lieberman couldn’t have brought).

Anyway, I’ve long believed that if you look at a situation and the effort being expended isn’t matched by the potential outcome; something else must be at play. Well it all came clear to me today with Dear Jane’s “look at me, look at me� miscalculation. Here’s the thing. Quite frankly, my inclination is to conclude that Joe Lieberman’s petulance, as annoying as it is, is simply being matched tit for tat by equally petulant individuals. This “thing� is no less than the Hatfield’s and McCoy’s.

Read the rest of the posting at Thought Theater…here:

Previous articleIraq Civil War More Likely?
Next articleIsrael and Hezbollah
  • Meredith

    Indeed. I don’t really like Lieberman, but this looks like another Democrat dumb move. We do have a lot of other more important things to do, and it might turn off some people who we can’t afford to turn off.

  • Because..

    How very cautious, centrist, and DLC-ish of you all. Yes, we saw how well the cautious, moderate approach worked for us in the 2000 and 2004 elections right? Hmm should we continue trying to act like Republicans, or run Democrats who aren’t afraid to be Democrats?

    Why run Ned? Umm… because there’s no difference between Joe and a Republican?

    Seriously, why are you worried about the possibility of losing Joe’s seat and it potentially being harder to get a Dem majority?

    You do realize that a 51-49 Dem majority that includes Lieberman is the same as a 50-50 split right?

    This article is nothing more than a ringing endorsement of “Business as usual” and a continuation of the tired old DLC-ish strategy of “be all things to all people at all times.” It doesn’t work. Joe’s political career is over, at least as a Democrat.

    What do you care more about? Democratic/progressive values, or the maintenance of the status quo?

    I’m pretty sure I know…

  • DosPeros

    P.B. just sent me a telephathic message:

    “First, the refrigorator has fallen me and I’m trapped underneath it, please send for help. Second, if I have to read one more “poor-Joe” post I’m going to put a shotgun in my mouth and pull the trigger. For God Sake!! How many times do I have to tell you — Joe Lieberman molests children and cute animals. I would sooner eat a steaming bowel of camel excrement than have anything to do with that backstabb’in A-hole. He’s not just Republican-lite, he’s Rush Limbaugh’s cabanna boy. On weekends he goes down to Crawford, TX and lets Bush & Co. dress him up like Shirley Temple and he sings ‘Good Ship Lollipop’ while they throw darts at him….God this frig is heavey…please help…but if you send Lieberman, forget it, just let me die.”

    End of message.

  • kilroy

    I don’t think Lieberman is terrible. I don’t think a primary is such a bad idea either. As i notice the national debt ticker steadily heading upwards, I figure it may be more than just the war. Price of gas, Torture, FEMA, so on.

    18 years is an awful long time. If you’re not responsible for our current situation, are you working to change the direction we are heading. It may well be that some folks in Connecticut may want change.

    It may well be that this series of tubes is bigger than some politicians know.

  • Phillip J. Birmingham

    P.B. just sent me a telephathic message

    That’d better not be my mouth you’re stuffing words into, bub.

  • Jim

    You have misstated the title of your piece, “The Hatfield’s & McCoys: Lieberman v. Lamont”. The title should have been, “I’m Not A Lieberman Apologist.. but I’m going to be one anyway”. And, since you seem baffled with Lamont’s strength over Leiberman, let me bring you up to speed. To the electorate, Leiberman represents that which is reprehensible about the “I’m really a Republican but vote me a Democrat” members of congress. He fawns over Bush and unquestionably supports the Iraq war without caring a twit about what his constants desire or believe, ergo, Lamont’s high poll ratings. If Leiberman were a trustworthy politician he would have stated that he, sadly in the beginning, was hoodwinked by Bush and the Neocons to support the Iraq War but since has slowly (after 40 months of war) come to realized that all the evidence presented to him was pure fabrication. And, that Americans are much, much less safe now than when Saddam kept the local al qaeda and the numerous internal Iraqi gangs in check. I can say Americans are much less safe because the Iraq death toll has now reached 2500 American servicemen with another 21,000 wounded – if those figures don’t scream “much less safeâ€Â? then what does. But Lieberman to his political folly is determined to continue to prop up the Bush Iraq war concoction no matter how often Bush alters the war’s justification. I say good riddance to Liberman, his constituents and American will be better off without him.

  • Bushy

    Hey Jim you misspelled “constituants”. I don’t know who to trust.

  • Durwood

    The problem with this country today is NOT the Republicans, who are, after all, just doing what they do best. It’s the DEMOCRATS, who have apparently decided to model themselves after William Scranton and Nelson Rockefeller, who, like Joe Lieberman, were intelligent, honest and compassionate men. I like Lieberman, but if I lived in CT I’d be voting for Lamont. It would actually benefit both parties if Lieberman became a Republican. They need more men (and women) like him. If the Democrats have become marginalized, the Republican Party’s been all but destroyed by Bush & the neocons, the corpos and the rabid evangelical right. That leaves us in the interesting position of being governed by goons while the opposition tries to figure out how to push the goon agenda, only softer. Like everything else in history, this has happened before. Check out what happened when Frank Nitti took over from Al Capone. If we can’t do better than this we should at least insist our children learn Chinese.

  • Phillip J. Birmingham

    Oh, and by the way, Dennis, it’s refreshing to see someone at least acknowledge, during their chiding, that this isn’t merely the “netroots” purging a moderate candidate, but the reaping of whirlwinds that Leiberman has been planting. I disagree with you about its proportionality and wisdom, obviously, but your article evidences more thought than a lot of the articles I’ve seen from people who would likely never vote for Leiberman if they had a chance.

  • Phillip J. Birmingham

    My apologies for mangling your name, Daniel.