The difference zython is we keep our eye on the ball, and are less concerned with party purification. We understand the need to compromise if you are going to have a big tent.

Translation: Democrats, like Republicans, should only judge politicians by the banner they carry, and not by their actual merits.

mrpedro, I understand that criticising a member of one’s own party is a strange concept that confuses and angers you, but just because someone plays for a team doesn’t mean they’re a team player. You’ll understand when you get older.

It’s the “truth” that killed this thread, not laughable wingnut you.

“Several registrars of voters in the New Haven area agreed, saying they are even getting some calls from Republicans asking if they can still change their registrations in time to vote in the Democratic primary.”

only “some” democrats (not “loads), who are actually too late to do anything.

I would expect the media response would be “yawn” a few people are trying to change affiliation….

Yea, the thread did get kinda slaughter didn’t it? Funny how the truth is so hard to argue with isn’t it?

Registered Republicans are trying to switch party affiliation so they can vote for Joe in the Democratic primary. (fortunately they’re too late… heh)

Now let us pose the following Gendankenexperiemt… if the reverse were happening and, say, loads of Dems were trying to register as Repubs to support a screaming wingnut in a primary opposition to, say, McCain, what do you think the media response would be?

If this was a bunch of connecticut residence going door to door, I might have a different opinion of it, but it isn’t.

Either way, it’s fine with me. You guys continue to piss into the wind and comment on ‘that nice cooling mist” that is surrounding you. Spend the money, eat your own young. In the meantime, the grownups will continue to run the country, and may well GAIN seats as the apostate Democrats realize what a bunch of immature sissies their party has become.

That wouldn t be so bad, but this whole thing is being driven by Nutroots, and lots of folks outside of connecticut.

Yeah, and I’ll expect to see your letter to the Lieberman campaign demanding that he return all contributions from outside Connecticut shortly.

The Party faithful are excorcising this particular heathen (and jewish) demon& .I keep waiting for cartoons of Lieberman to show up with a hooked-nose and a yarmulke& ..to paraphrase Ollie&  Give into the hate, lefties, give in..

Ah, I was wondering how long it would take for the anti-Semitic meme to creep into this thread. This is an old canard, especially in conjunction with discussion of the ideology of neoconservatism. Used to be that the very existence of same was categorically denied, and anyone raising the question was blasted as an anti-Semite. Thanks for restoring my faith in the vileness of the Right, pedro. Now tell me again who’s “suppressing dissent” and trotting out “infallibility” (as Coulter calls it), when criticism of a sitting Senator and using the ballot box to oppose his views can casually be dismissed as anti-Semitism?

At least Oliver has the class not to call you a white supremacist for always coming out and trashing him while he happens to be black.

I don’t support Hillary now. Not only because of her pro-war stance, but also because of her anti-video game and general pro-censorship positions.

Actually Marc isn’t saying that if Lieberman loses we will be worse off. As usual for Danziger, his real point is even dumber than that.

He assumes Lieberman will win. He appears to assume that most of the time Lieberman will vote with the Dems but that he may not always vote with the Dems, as if that were any change from what is happening now.

No, Danzie, if Lieberman wins what Lieberman says will happen is that he will caucus and vote with the Dems. Remember he claims to be a “petitioning Democrat”.

If he wins what will happen is that Hannity, Rush, and Danziger will try to beat us over the head how we kicked ubermensch Lieberman out. BUT, Lieberman, having been kicked out of the Democratic Party, will no longer be able to claim he is a member of the Democratic Party whenever he bends over for a special Rove/Cheney message.

Remember, Danziger was wrong on the most obvious and basic question. Iraq. He still wants to claim he was right, or that he has any cred. Remember too, he picked his monicker, the armed liberal, to remind us all that we are all faggot pussies that would suck Osama’s cock compared to Marc.

Now after having been wrong time and time again, he wants to know where he can go. I suggest back to Roger’s bed, Roger’s site is looking a bit limp these days, perhaps Marc can fluff it up.

1. As has been abundantly stated, we Democrats have not asked for nor do we need Rethuglycans’ help in our primaries! We do not have to excuse or explain anything we do to anyone, especially to right wingnuts. Really. We don’t need your help in teaching us how to “convince moderates” and “win votes”. Lol.

2. Joe Lieberman represents the DLC wing of the Democratic Party, the wing of corporatists, the wing that worships “electability” and “moderation” and gave us John Kerry as our 2004 candidate. DLC minions like Lanny Davis have been all over the media bashing Lamont; DLC heavyweights have been busy convincing people like Sen. Boxer tha Holy Joe deserves an incumbent’s God-given right to hold his seat.

3. But it ain’t a DLC world anymore, Thank G-d: If Kerry had depended on the DLC to manage and fund his 2004 campaign, he would never have gotten anywhere near GW Bush’s 300 mill in early 2004. It was only because of the Internet bats and drives that Joe Trippi and Howard Dean pioneered, because of activist small donors, that the Democratic Party ever caught up to Bush in August, and caused them in panic to throw everything behind the Swift Boat-Security-911 card that came up a winner for them again. But it was VERY close. And the DLC had nothing to do with it.

4. The DLC has largely become irrelevant to Dem politics today, an atavism, an appendix, a coccyx bone. The Body Politic Democrat runs on much higher octane, we have with the blogosphere begun to equal the flood of new ideas and energies that AEI and the rest of the Conservative media machine provided to fuel GOP dominance. It’s a new world, but Holy Joe has become a symbol of the old, the Democratic Party that lost decades of Elections.

5. After his tirade against his President Clinton in 1998, I would have personally torn off his Dem insignia and cast the smug, Bible-thumping bastard out into the wilderness he earned. I was outraged that Gore made the mistake of picking him for VP, only to watch Lieberman embarrass him by refusing to give up his Senate seat and cushion himself with a little insurance policy. I was outraged at his behavior during those crucial days in November 2000, when he acted the mealy-mouthed “statesman” instead of holding GOre’s coat while he fought. I have been continually outraged by his pro-Bush, pro-corporate, pro-GOP stance on Terri Schiavo, on the bankruptcy bill, on the Roberts confirmation, on so many important national politcal issues, most especially on continually providing cover for Bush on his abuses of power and on Iraq.

There’s a reason why scum like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Brit Hume, and Ann Coulter have publicly and athletically supported Holy Joe: He’s got no balls, and they like that.

Lieberman has made his choice, he’s picked his road. Let’s make him stay on it and finish his journey.

“why is it then also bad for Connecticut voters to try and bring about greater national party unity on the biggest issue of our times at the ballot box”

That wouldn’t be so bad, but this whole thing is being driven by Nutroots, and lots of folks outside of connecticut. The Party faithful are excorcising this particular heathen (and jewish) demon….I keep waiting for cartoons of Lieberman to show up with a hooked-nose and a yarmulke…..to paraphrase Ollie…”Give into the hate, lefties, give in..”

2. Again, since something like 60-70% of Americans want out of Iraq, I fail to see how trying to elect more people in line with this position will turn off more voters. Certainly not voters outside Connecticut (unless you believe that voters in New Jersey, or California, or wherever, will somehow think “Gee I’d like to vote Democrat but they’re so mean poor Joe Lieberman, I think I’ll vote Republican this time!”

3. It’s hardly a straw man when a great many pundits and certainly many on the right refer to the act of Connecticut voters voting against Lieberman as an ideological “purge”, and even “fascism”. Fascism?!?! By voting for another candidate in a Democratic party primary!! Somehow I do not think that word means what wingnuts (or Lieberman’s campaign manager) think it means.

except the war

Yeah, if only there was something more substantial.

blame the entire weakness of the democrats in the early part of this millenia on Lieberman

If repubs can blame everything on Clinton, OW gets to blame everything on Joe. Too bad OW never said that, though, ’cause I kinda like the rightwing cartoon villian dynamic.

As for the Dubai ports deal, that was political theater for Congressional repubs struggling under low Bush approval ratings in an election year. I seem to recall there still being some sort of transfer of ports after the initial political storm passed. It must be tough to juggle the illusion of being pro security even as you sell our most vulnerable access points to foreign interests (well, not white foreign interests, anyway), all the while stoking the flames of intolerance, particularly against brown folks.

Harriet Myers was thrashed, but I’m not sure of the actual reasons why. Sure she lacked a hard right paper trail to mollify the crazy fundies, but her nomination seemed so monumentally ill conceived that I have to wonder if it wasn’t part of a plan to knock the door down for Alito. Given the GOP predilection for leveraging the obstructionist label to intimidate the dems into rolling over on any number of issues, it isn’t much of a stretch to believe that they saw Harriet Myers as a sacrificial lamb to throw under the bus. Then, when Alito came along (a clear cut example of judicial Viagra to the cons), they played the “hey, we went out and got a qualified candidate this time and still you guys complain? Obstructionists!” card. And as we readily saw, it worked. The dems rolled right over on Alito despite his seriously troubling history. “What, you are staunchly pro-corporate, anti-abortion, anti-affirmative action, and favor an imperial presidency? Step right this way Mr. Ali…I mean Justice Alito.” In the public sphere, only religious fundies opposed Myers for her lack of a clear cut paper trail on key issues like abortion, which Alito cleary has. Yeah, so in the end, neo-cons got exactly what they wanted, and so did the religious nutters. Awesome example.

The immigration debate struggle, at least on the right, is between the more corporatist factions (which include neo-cons) and the radical right nutjobs (i.e. the fundie Baptists) who effectively hate all things not white and male. Bush wants the crazy racist vote because they helped him get “elected” but for a long time the GOP was trying to court the hispanic vote (often by playing the conservative christian game, which is ironic given who is leading the charge to oust illegal Mexicans). So, again, not a neo con revolt of any kind, but a problematic attempt to balance the corporatists with the extreme social conservatives.

The tent is big enough for conservative, moderate and liberal Dems. Just not ones who are trying to bring the whole structure down.

Armed Liberal tries to correct Oliver Willis, gets no comment love….