Shoved one of these up the next reporter’s ass who asks about Holy Joe, and his post-Prom plans, or moons on about the Whimper of Whipped Blogs (been waiting weeks to swipe that one from Harlan Ellison), or insists on prattling about...
Well let’s let commenter terry of the C.A. sum up what a whole lot of people are pissed about:
What I hate is all this bellyaching about how this whole sha-bang was *hi-jacked* by the leftyist of pinko-commies and doesn't mean anything about the *real* people on the ground. Huh? Don't registered Dems in the state of Conn have the fucking right to vote as they see fit....or did I miss something? And are these same voters somehow *not* the party?
And here is Subcommander Gilliard (though Kos be the wiser) administering one of his patented blunt-force-trauma sermons on WTF “democracy” actually means (and his Photoshopping skills are coming right along too.)
Leiberman and democracy
If you wonder how dictatorships start, look at Joe Lieberman.
It isn't that he is running an independent campaign which is dangerous, but that he refuses to respect the results of an election.
I've been thinking all day about how to comment on Lieberman's independent run, but it came to me, the thing which is so odious, so wrong, is that he's running after losing, as if those votes didn't mean anything.
He has placed Joe Lieberman over elections, over party loyalty, over democracy.
An independent run has always been an option for him, he didn't have to run as a Democrat, but he did. But he refuses to accept the verdict. He, instead, claims he was cheated out of victory by dirty tactics and a campaign which ran on divisive tactics. Which is demonstrably untrue. Lieberman not only refused to accept the verdict of the voters, he seems to be contemptous of it. He seems to think that if he can't convince one electorate, he can convince another.
It isn't about Joe Lieberman should be Senator, but that no one but Lieberman is fit to be Senator. And that is dangerous to democracy. Because it goes to the core of what democracy is supposed to be, which is a contest of ideas. Instead, Lieberman sought to demonize his enemies and act as if some great offense had been committed by challenging him.
...
Joe being "the story" and using the microphone that comes with that territory was to be expected. After all, Progressives made real, honest-to-Wellstone history Tuesday, and did it as Balzac said, “with clean hands and composure”.
Bully for the good guys!
However the history we made wasn’t crossing an ocean in record time or jumping further than any man has every jumped. The Lamont crew are in the process of bringing down the Great Bull of Heaven with a bow and arrow, and they are doing it in the zero-sum, cult-o'-personality arena of Big Media Politics. And the flailing and thrashing and whining and bitching of Holy Joe as he falls and craters is inevitably a huge part of the story.
Fine.
But starting tomorrow the story needs to be that Lieberman lost, period. And the race has moved on to a contest between the duly nominated Democrat and the nominated Republican. And if the Lieberman-centric, Lieberman-obsessed shit doesn't die down, if it were me, I'd start having Lamont voters and supporters showing up in front of the camera with purple fingers.
And when reporters ask (as they will) I'd say that apparently this is the only fucking way the proudly expressed will of a free electorate gets any play in U.S. Press.
But that's just me, and I am widely known to be low and perverse.
8 comments:
But that's just me, and I am widely known to be low and perverse.
Self-deprecating, don't forget self-deprecating. ;-)
This is a great idea DG. Too bad there's no effective way to depict purple fingers in paper mache for a float.
that is a great idea Drifty, only I'd use the middle finger.
but that's just me.
Tony Snow sez: I think instead it’s a defining moment for the Democratic Party, whose national leaders now have made it clear that if you disagree with the extreme left in their party they’re going to come after you.”
The undeniable liberal refutes: Once again, there was a similar Primary in Michigan's 7th congressional district, A republican primary, where an alleged moderate was defeated by an extreme right-winger. Does the shoe fit? Yes it does ,Tony. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THE EXTREME RIGHT-WING REPUBLICANS, "THEY" ARE GOING TO COME AFTER YOU.
It's fucking amazing how the repukes control the narrative and talking points and the "liberal drive-by" media falls for it again and again.
There is going to be one hell of an October Surprise coming, and the only question: will the Cheney administration wait until October to stage it?
Blue fingers! Blue fingers! Makes the point and highlights the difference.
parsec
Driftglass, sir, I am honored.
Puple fingers: excellent.
Anonymous/parsec: blue fingers. Me likey.
I also agree with pwapvt: use the middle one!
Re: Lieberman and the myth of the raging left-- on Saturday morning a letter to the editor appeared in the Washington Post that essentially said this: Connecticut liberals have no right to determine the results of the Democratic primary in Connecticut because a Senator serves a national role, and the wishes of "centrist" voters were not served by the Lieberman defeat. Ergo, it was an illegitimate election and Lieberman should run in the general election despite losing the primary.
This is the kind of drivel that the Washington Post sees fit to publish these days, and it follows closely on the heels of a Post editorial stating that Lieberman should stay in the race because he'd be a better senator than Lamont. I've suspected for a long time that the Post is in the bag for the Republicans, and every day that suspicion gets stronger. It's going to be a long, long battle to reclaim the public forums from the David Brookses.
--gravie
Hey from an Atlanta conservative. I'm about to take a cue from Newtie and try out some cross-party cooperation and support the heck out of Lieberman's Democratic opponent on my blog. (what's his name again?)
Post a Comment