See the man to your left swapping spit with our imbecile-in-chief? That’s CT senator Joe Lieberman, the guy who probably made you roll your eyes when Al Gore picked him as a running mate back in ‘00. Well, Joe’s had it quite well until quite recently. See, Joe is well-known as ‘Bush’s favorite Democrat’, which to some people such as myself, is akin to having leprosy, herpes, ebola, and genital warts simultaneously.
See, Joe, although in the past has done ok with certain Dem issues such as the environment, seems to undermine his own party at every available opportunity. He unflinchingly supports the Iraq mess, and shows a strong disconnect with the realities of what is happening.
He was one of Bill Clinton’s most vocal critics during the impeachment fiasco. He loves to come out every now and then and whine about the crass immorality of video games and such. Apparently his moral compass is out of whack, for he may whine about the Grand Theft Auto game, where lots of imaginary people are killed, but seems to be ok with the thousands of real people getting killed in Iraq, due in no small part to our involvement here. Back in December, he gave us this creepy Ashcroftian warning about criticizing the Prez:
“It’s time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be the commander in chief for three more critical years and that in matters of war we undermine presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.”
The fact that he finds any ‘credibilty’ in Bush at all is the scariest point. Now, here’s the good part. Joe is in big trouble in CT. Ned Lamont, a Greenwich businessman is creeping ahead of Joe in the primary polls, so much to the extent that Joe has said if he loses the primary, he’ll run anyways as an independent(as he continues to insist on his impeccable Dem credentials). He seems baffled as to why this is happening, framing his position on Iraq as ‘just one issue’, while failing to realize that that is the big issue on many of the Dem voters in Connecticut. And having his head so far up Bush’s ass that he can see what he ate for breakfast doesn’t play too well in a true-blue state like CT, either. Lieberman still continues to ‘not get it’, playing the victim of those ferocious ‘liberal bloggers’. For Joe, it’s all about him, not what he’s doing. The left blogosphere has done a fantastic job with this, and has raised an incredible amount of money and awareness for Ned Lamont. So, where am I going with all of this?
Well, part of why the Republicans have been so successful over the past 20 years is because of thier ability to mantain strict party discipline. Part of what made the 1994 landslide happen was a sort of purging of the party of mushy-middle-of the-road types. And now, that is what I feel the Dems need to do. Stand up for traditional Dem values. Have primaries again. Get rid of people like Lieberman who support the opposition more than their own party, who pontificate and moralize, get thier marching orders from AIPAC (if you want to somehow imply that if one does not wholeheartedly support Israel then they are anti-Semitic, leave something in the comments and I’ll be more than happy to tear you a new one), and try to play it safe by catering to the ‘mushy-middle’. Real change doesn’t come from being moderate, it comes from being bold and standing up for something. Tell the Republican-lite DLC to piss off, too , while you’re at it. They’re a large part of why the Dems are where they are today.
Now, I do hear a lot about the only way that real change will happen is if we have a viable third party. I agree to a certain extent. But the system is so stacked against that happening that it’s leaving us three choices: disengage completely and not vote, which is to a certain extent why Neanderthals that are so far out of the mainstream keep getting elected, vote for someone that doesn’t have a chance (ahem-Nader), even though you’re ’sending a message’ (that very few people are hearing, and what kind of message does a single-digit percentage send, anyways?), or reform the party from within. Now my first choice would be to have many different parties… they’d need to work together in various coalitions to get things done and such. But, like I said, the deck is stacked against that happening, and isn’t likely to change anytime soon. So it’s time to do with the Dems what the GOP did… get some principled people in there who stand for something, and purge the ones who don’t. And yes, within that, there is room for a large diversity of opinion. But there needs to be some sort of framework that makes one a Democrat, a certain checklist of sorts, of principles that make one a Democrat. Standing up proudly for the environment, against the Christianists, against policies that do nothing but make the rich richer, etc. Kinda like our own Bernie Sanders here in VT.
Apparently some are catching on, because although not as important or high-profile as CT, it’s happening in Maryland, too. Yes, there’s only three months left before Election Day. Let’s hope that if the Dems have a landslide, they take some time to reflect and do their best not to screw it up, as they have done with so many other things in the past 25 years. And if you are able, kick Net Lamont’s campaign a few bucks, here. He isn’t afraid to call himself a progressive Democrat, a rare breed.