Americans are fed up.
Fed up with elected officials who don't represent their constituency.
Fed up with those officials who do what "they think is best" instead of listening to the voices of those who placed them into elected office.
We have the power.
We want our country back.
And we are taking it back.
Go home, Joe.
"...Ned Lamont and the progressive movement have mounted such a serious challenge to an entrenched incumbent with such a massive corporate-backed warchest is a HUGE ACCOMPLISHMENT. In the course of just a few months, a guy who has never run for office took on one of the most well-funded, insulated politicians in America, who used all of his clout and cashed in all of his favors to get other Big Time members of the Establishment to help him. If Ned gets within 15 points of Lieberman, it is a display of real strength, and it is a major step forward in our movement."
-David Sirota, Sirotablog, 8/8/2006
Ned Lamont, a Connecticut millionaire whose candidacy for the United States Senate soared from nowhere on a fierce antiwar message, won a narrow victory in the Democratic primary last night over the incumbent, Joseph I. Lieberman.
Senator Lieberman, a national party leader and the Democratic nominee for vice president in 2000, conceded defeat in a phone call to Mr. Lamont shortly before 11 p.m. But then, in a combative speech to supporters in Hartford that was carried live on television news, the senator declared that he was not dropping out of the race, but would instead run for re-election as an independent this fall.
Unofficial returns this morning showed that Mr. Lamont won with 51.8 percent of the vote, with 98 percent of the electoral precincts reporting.
Mr. Lieberman’s determination to remain in the race may soon collide with the will of many Democratic leaders in Washington and Connecticut, however. The Senate minority leader, Harry Reid, and Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, who is leading the effort to elect more Democrats in November, planned to announce this morning that they were supporting Mr. Lamont and that the party should unite around the nominee, according to Democrats close to both men. A spokesman for Mr. Schumer said a statement would be forthcoming, but declined further comment.
A spokesman for former President Bill Clinton, who campaigned for Mr. Lieberman last month, did not return a phone message late last night. (NY Times, 8/9/2006)
9 comments:
Ha! It's just amazing how accurate the looney left can be shooting itself in the foot. If Lieberman runs as an independent, the Democratic vote will be split; a lose lose situation made to order: either Lieberman or a Republican will take the seat. If Lieberman drops out, he abets the 'good of the party' that's up to no good.
The war as a deciding issue might have made sense before it started but it's too late now. Implementing cut and run politics as funded by George Soros and pals will assure victory for terrorists and the vast majority of Iraqis who risked and continue to risk their lives to begin ruling themselves will be abandoned to the ministrations of the minority too willing to murder their way to power.
Liberals may 'have the power' but it's being directed to make things worse. I believe that's the issue the electorate will see.
I would agree that the Dems have probably shot themselves in the foot, but Dems don't like guns. Seeing Ned Lamont standing up there last night, so very happy and proud with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton standing closely behind him made me shudder. Here we go again. When will the Dems ever figure out that Sharpton and Jackson do not add credibility to their cause. Now the Dems have put forward a one issue candidate who just happens to be one of those very dirty rich millionaires that the Dems profess to despise so much. Lieberman will run as an independant and quite possibly win the Senate seat. At least 3 polls have stated this position. Lamont will go back to making his millions, the unrecognizable Republican who opposes Lamont in the general election will go back to wherever he came from and Lieberman will sit in the Senate with an (I) next to his name and have absolutely no reason to support any Dem cause. It really is too bad because we definately need new faces in the Senate. About a hundred new faces would be fine with me.
Old school thinking. Citing the name Sharpton is a tired attempt at inciting fear and loathing. Too much at stake in this country-that tired trick won't work anymore.
"Too much at stake in this country-that tired trick won't work anymore."
It's not a trick. Sharpton & Jackson are among the premiere race baiters in national politics today with the Rev. 'Hymie town' Jesse always ready to make racism an issue if no one else will and Sharpton barely hiding his own racism with terms like, 'diamond merchants' and 'white interlopers'. (Cynthia McKinney could have helped them out.)
Old school thinking? Fear and loathing of what or of whom? Inviting support from Jackson and Sharpton is a proven loser. Way to go!
By adopting in this primary the methods attributed by Dems to the late Senator Joseph McCarthy, the Democratic Party has completely obliterated any pretense of diversity within its own ranks and abandoned its own former VP candidate, now a three term Senator, and let a politically inexperienced rich honky (Oops! forget I said that. I know you can do it.) white guy buy the primary for what reason? Joe didn't take the hypocritic oath like most other dems and Lamont wasn't and isn't in a position to go back on his word. Yet. Great strategy.
Shhh, No one will notice, block your ears and hum with your eyes closed, don't you dare say anything bad about throwing Lieberman under the bus. I'm not listening, hmmmmmm.
Idiocy.
No one knows more about McCarthy area tactics than the thousands of American families today-this very morning-that find themselves subject to witchhunt scenarios that take place in our country.
I find the comparison of McCarthy and the Democratic Party horrifying. Our eyes have been very much opened as was Edward Murrow in the days people were ruined because of the use of fear, shunning, loathing, and the government's self-appointed "mission"-to protect the people.
The loss of civil liberties has very much awakened everyday people-many who work anonymously for fear of retribution.
Tossing out Lieberman is tossing out politics as usual. The Beltway media has taken notice-no more business as usual-no more determining the candidate for the American voter-no more business as USUAL.
The evocation of the name Sharpton and Jackson demonstrates the politics of yesterday. Democrats share diversity as a commonality. In the past, the issues we fight for with drive and passion, have proven fodder for those who use such to instill fear.
My point is: these tactics will not work anymore. We are moving forward-together. Citing the Race Card in the above post is an example of the use of a political talking point that serves as a reminder that many not part of people-powered politics are not informed about the forward movement of change in the Democratic Party.
The Dems need not apologize for the differing passions that bring us together as a Party.
The outster of Lieberman is symbolic of the change in business as usual.
We are fed up and won't take it anymore.
Race card? What race card? I said, (I think) that Sharpton and Jackson take away from the little credibility that the Dems have. I never mentioned anything about color. I was talking about people. You brought up color. HMMMM, who is playing the race card here????
You brought up color. HMMMM, who is playing the race card here????
Boone, I did, of course, in referring to what must be Jackson's & Sharpton's, if what Sunny says is true, past lives. I'm glad they have changed their MO's, if in fact that proves to be the case.
As far as diversity is concerned, the Dems don't have it now and it's unlikely to show up anytime soon. The only passions I see are to cut and run from Iraq; impeach GWB after regaining majority status in Congress; to pretend that if we treat Islamofascists with respect, they won't try to kill us anymore; and to 'toss out' (like former Dem hero Lieberman) any Democrat that publicly strays from these goals. The only diversity involved here is the degree of myopia involved in pursuit of these ends at the expense and greatest risk to our citizens' lives, nevermind their politcs.
Sunny, what civil liberties are we missing? And how, in particular, would a Democratic administration restore or increase those liberties, after taxes, especially.
What witch hunts? What thousands of families that nobody know about? The awakening you refer to would seem to be that of the electorate that tossed out empty suit Kerry and Gore before him.
Breeze through my archives to learn more about how the rights of certain families are violated everyday...the families that can't fight back.
The rules have changed. American politics is shifting back where it belongs-in the hands of its people and out of the hand of an almost incestuous relationship between career politicians and the Beltway Press.
And with it, the distractions away from the real issues through use of caricature statements of those Democrats who hold a more public persona....just sad comments of those who aren't part of the solution and obviously unaware of the regular people that will never hold the spotlight-the ones that worked diligently for Lamont.
Candidates of our time are learning quickly to engage the citizens that obviously, circumvented Lieberman's primary win.
I don't dispute inequities are experienced by some people/families as a consequence of incestuous partisanship. nepotism and the like. That's not new and it's not peculiar to just one political party. Despicable as those consequences may be, they are not equivalent to a national loss of civil liberties. I do think that Lamont's primary win has nothing to do with any kind of cure for that type of issue. In fact, I believe it is an escalation in kind. Lamont's unstudied policy statements just align him with a more extreme branch engaged in more extreme and primitive disregard for democracy, not a cure, not a repair, not even a step in the right direction.
The idea that this one little primary signifies a change in party-wide status quo politics is wishful thinking. Candidates of our time, like Lamont, are quickly cashing in on opportunism by focusing on single issues. Otherwise Sharpton and Jackson would have suddenly appeared someplace else. That is not engaging citizens, that's manipulation. Lieberman has consistently voted in opposition to Bush throughout his tenure, except for the war. Lamont has done nothing.
Post a Comment