Lieberman is proof that we don't need term limits. It doesn't matter how much power you have in Washington - when you abandon the wishes of your electorate and then whine about being entitled to your post regardless, you'll get kicked out. And good riddance.
And considering the desperate thug tactics this past week in the name of Joementum, I think we can abandon the idea that he's a "good guy." He's not. Nor do we need moderates in elected office. We need passionate people of all stripes who can find creative solutions to their differences. When your job is to govern, moderate is a nice word for milquetoast, which is where the money goes.
When you say you want more moderates, you're essentially asking for more corruption. I don't know - I trust a guy who passionately believes the opposite of what I believe a lot more than a guy who'll sell his opinions to the highest bidder (like Joe.)
Again, good riddance. But yeah, McKinney is unstable. She can go now.
Some of my favorite Joementum moments of the last week:
1.) Sending his people to ambush a Lamont campaign stop and shout down everything he said - perfectly within his (and their) rights, but certainly not what I'd call the actions of a "decent guy." Then the Lieberman folk get physically violent with the Lamont staffers and supporters, which obviously Joe wouldn't have called for. So what does Joe do to handle the scenario? He rails against Lamont for HIS staffers getting physical. Luckily there were about a dozen cameras rolling on the event which all prove Joe's lie.
2.) Smearing Lamont for owning stock in Halliburton, which Lieberman himself owns stock in. I know that this can be spun a number of ways, but it still smells like desperate hypocrisy.
3.) Last night, Joe's website goes down. The site redirects to a standard screen reccommending that one contact the billing department, but was more likely the result of heavily increased traffic on the eve of the election. Still, not one to pass up the opportunity, Joe has spent the day claiming that Lamont hacked him. As of this writing, he has not yet gotten his site back up, but he did offer up an e-mail from his own staffer (read: NOT from myhostcamp) saying that it was a hack-job, as proof. Well, Joe, if we can't trust an e-mail that you essentially wrote to yourself, what can we trust? I'm reminded of the "bug" that Karl Rove found in the John Clements office on the eve of the '86 Texas gubernatorial.
And 4.) My favorite, Joe goes on the attack by saying that Lamont is, well, from Greenwich. He says it over and over again, and it's true. Lamont is in fact from Greenwich. What bugs me, and to me is the most insidious thing in all of this, is Joe's plan to win support by disparaging a town within his own electorate. I mean, I know Joe's from Stamford and all, a whole five minutes away, but still. Divide-and-conquer politics is cynical, petty, and spits in the face of a representative democracy.
Yeah, I'm with Joe. Not that I like the guy, personally, and I was less than impressed by some of his commentary during the presidential primary. But, honestly, I'm not going to vote for someone I'd want to have a beer with, I want to vote with someone whose policies I agree with or who is willing to rationally and intelligently analyze policies, especially if he's willing to support policies he feels are correct despite popular opinion. You know, what Prometheus said, but less articulate-like.
Honestly, though, I hope Joe loses the primary and then wins as an independent. That way I'll avoid what I feel are Lamont's counterproductive views on the war and I'll get the satisfaction of a situation that spits in the eye of the two-party system.
6 Comments:
Lieberman is proof that we don't need term limits. It doesn't matter how much power you have in Washington - when you abandon the wishes of your electorate and then whine about being entitled to your post regardless, you'll get kicked out. And good riddance.
And considering the desperate thug tactics this past week in the name of Joementum, I think we can abandon the idea that he's a "good guy." He's not. Nor do we need moderates in elected office. We need passionate people of all stripes who can find creative solutions to their differences. When your job is to govern, moderate is a nice word for milquetoast, which is where the money goes.
When you say you want more moderates, you're essentially asking for more corruption. I don't know - I trust a guy who passionately believes the opposite of what I believe a lot more than a guy who'll sell his opinions to the highest bidder (like Joe.)
Again, good riddance. But yeah, McKinney is unstable. She can go now.
Of course, I like Chafee, so I might be a little bit of a hypocrite here.
One out of one-hundred senators is in serious danger of losing his seat, and this is proof we don't need term limits? Color me skeptical.
Some of my favorite Joementum moments of the last week:
1.) Sending his people to ambush a Lamont campaign stop and shout down everything he said - perfectly within his (and their) rights, but certainly not what I'd call the actions of a "decent guy." Then the Lieberman folk get physically violent with the Lamont staffers and supporters, which obviously Joe wouldn't have called for. So what does Joe do to handle the scenario? He rails against Lamont for HIS staffers getting physical. Luckily there were about a dozen cameras rolling on the event which all prove Joe's lie.
2.) Smearing Lamont for owning stock in Halliburton, which Lieberman himself owns stock in. I know that this can be spun a number of ways, but it still smells like desperate hypocrisy.
3.) Last night, Joe's website goes down. The site redirects to a standard screen reccommending that one contact the billing department, but was more likely the result of heavily increased traffic on the eve of the election. Still, not one to pass up the opportunity, Joe has spent the day claiming that Lamont hacked him. As of this writing, he has not yet gotten his site back up, but he did offer up an e-mail from his own staffer (read: NOT from myhostcamp) saying that it was a hack-job, as proof. Well, Joe, if we can't trust an e-mail that you essentially wrote to yourself, what can we trust? I'm reminded of the "bug" that Karl Rove found in the John Clements office on the eve of the '86 Texas gubernatorial.
And 4.) My favorite, Joe goes on the attack by saying that Lamont is, well, from Greenwich. He says it over and over again, and it's true. Lamont is in fact from Greenwich. What bugs me, and to me is the most insidious thing in all of this, is Joe's plan to win support by disparaging a town within his own electorate. I mean, I know Joe's from Stamford and all, a whole five minutes away, but still. Divide-and-conquer politics is cynical, petty, and spits in the face of a representative democracy.
So yeah, screw Joe Lieberman. Good riddance.
Yeah, I'm with Joe. Not that I like the guy, personally, and I was less than impressed by some of his commentary during the presidential primary. But, honestly, I'm not going to vote for someone I'd want to have a beer with, I want to vote with someone whose policies I agree with or who is willing to rationally and intelligently analyze policies, especially if he's willing to support policies he feels are correct despite popular opinion. You know, what Prometheus said, but less articulate-like.
Honestly, though, I hope Joe loses the primary and then wins as an independent. That way I'll avoid what I feel are Lamont's counterproductive views on the war and I'll get the satisfaction of a situation that spits in the eye of the two-party system.
Victory!
Post a Comment
<< Home