"John Bailey genuinely believed that primaries were not only divisive but often didn't pass the ultimate test of finding the candidate who could win," he said. If Bailey were alive, his attitude would be, "We have an incumbent senator who is quite popular in the state; we have an opportunity to elect three Democratic congressional challengers; we have a very tough race for governor. Why would we want to challenge an incumbent senator who could lead the other candidates to victory?" (Broder)
Bailey was a smart, strong chairman whose specialty was getting Democrats elected, and keeping them in power once they got there. He and other party bosses weren't especially good for democracy. The current system, which allows much easier access to primaries than was ever the case in Connecticut, devolves power away from the parties and puts it in the hands of the voters. Which is where it belongs.
Lieberman also made this troubling statement:
"I know I'm taking a position that is not popular within the party," Lieberman said, "but that is a challenge for the party -- whether it will accept diversity of opinion or is on a kind of crusade or jihad of its own to have everybody toe the line. No successful political party has ever done that." (Broder)
Well, first off, the Republicans have done that. The nearly-successful primary challenge to Arlen Specter is a good example of that trend within the GOP--and they're a moderately successful bunch.
Secondly--jihad? You're kidding. Please tell us you didn't mean that. Please?
The interview is a good example of the Two Liebermans. There's Noble Joe, who is principled and unafraid to put party aside and take a stand for what he believes in. This is admirable and all-too-rare in a politician. I like Noble Joe, even though I sometimes disagree with him. Then there's Baron Joe, who believes he deserves his seat for life, that his opponent has no right to challenge him, and that he is entitled to go to any and all lengths to retain his spot in the peerage. Baron Joe is the one who released that dumb bear ad yesterday. He's the one spouting nonsense about jihad, invoking kingmaker John Bailey's ghost and issuing vicious statements, press releases and advertisements. He's paranoid, angry and unafraid to put party, people and common decency aside in order to win. I don't like Baron Joe. He has no place in a democracy.
This split personality seems to happen to good men who spend too much time in Washington. It's sad. I have to think that if John Bailey were alive today, he'd be quietly taking Lieberman aside and saying:
"Joe. Too much. Back off. You're losing us. You're better than this. Right?"
But Lieberman has no one to do that for him. I wonder if he's even listening anymore.
Source
Broder, David. "Antiwar Crucible in Connecticut." Washington Post 17 June, 2006.
3 comments:
The Lieberman-Lamont spectacle is great for the Republicans.
You can compare it to Toomey-Specter, but there are differences. There was no serious talk of Specter running as an Independent. More importantly, however, was that conservatives were not upset with just one main issue: when Toomey was running against Specter, Specter voted more conservative than he usually does. Lieberman is more consistently liberal, and he's a bit more steadfast in his positions than Specter.
If Lieberman drops out of the primary and goes to the general, or if he loses the primary and runs in the general, that's great for Republicans. National leaders will likely support Lieberman, and in doing so, they'll say something to the effect of "We don't trust our own primary voters".
If Lieberman wins the primary against Lamont, then Lamont supporters may very well stay at home on election day. Lieberman will still win against Schlesinger by a mile, but donwticket, the Democrats could be hurt. Especially if the governor's race is a foregone conclusion. In Larson's and deLauro's congressional districts, liberal Democrats might have little reason to vote if the gov, senate and house seats are all decided, and their liberal senate candidate isn't there. This could flip a few state house and state senate seats.
If Lieberman loses the primary, and doesn't run in the general (mainly because he doesn't have the signatures), then Lamont would almost certainly win a two-way race with Schlesinger. But it'd be horrible for the national Democrats. What do they do about Hillary? She has never really renounced the war. Will Lieberman speak out against the "extremism" in the Democrat party?
All the while, no matter what happens, this race will take significant funding from other Democrats, and more significantly, will take up media time and coverage.
Joe Lieberman is a peice of sewage!
For him to use the words Jihad and Crusade to describe a simple Primary to rid this State of a second rate hack Created by William F Buckley shows how big his overinflated opinion of himself and Ego really are.
Heres a Question Joe.
When your ass is kicked by 20 points on August 8th will you use the Word Holocaust to again boost your own importance?
Integrity my ass,Joe Liberman is
a total Putz and deserves to be thrown down the Spiderhole of Deniability his legacy is about to enter!!
I'll add that I actually have read The Legacy, which is an expanded version of The Power Broker, from my town library. I've been trying to find a copy that sells for less than $20, but so far have been unsuccessful. It's a good reference for that period in state history.
Post a Comment