The Democrats Are Escalating Their Purge
It should come as a surprise to no one that the Democrats really do not like Senator Joe Lieberman. Indeed, his stance on the war has made him public enemy number one in their party. And with their current platfomr--cut-andrun/retreat-and-defeat--it is no wonder why they dislike him. Today, The Hill has a story regarding what the Democrats will do should Senator Lieberman win this November:
A group of Senate Democrats is growing increasingly angry about Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (D-Conn.) campaign tactics since he lost the Democratic primary last week.
If he continues to alienate his colleagues, Lieberman could be stripped of his seniority within the Democratic caucus should he defeat Democrat Ned Lamont in the general election this November, according to some senior Democratic aides.
In recent days, Lieberman has rankled Democrats in the upper chamber by suggesting that those who support bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq by a certain date would bolster terrorists’ planning attacks against the U.S. and its allies. He also sparked resentment by saying last week on NBC’s Today show that the Democratic Party was out of the political mainstream.
Democrats are worried that Lieberman may be giving Republicans a golden opportunity to undermine their message.
“I think there’s a lot of concern,” said a senior Democratic aide who has discussed the subject with colleagues. “I think the first step is if the Lieberman thing turns into a side show and hurts our message and ability to take back the Senate, and the White House and the [National Republican Senatorial Committee] manipulate him, there are going to be a lot of unhappy people in our caucus.”
Michael Lewan, Lieberman’s former chief of staff, has worked to quell Democratic discontent with Lieberman and to steer them away from campaigning against his former boss, said Democratic aides familiar with Lewan’s activities.
Lewan, a lobbyist with Brown Rudnick, said that he has had conversations with Democrats from between eight and 12 Senate offices. He said he understands that many Democrats have endorsed Lamont because he is the Democratic primary winner.
Hold on a second. The support for Lamont came out BEFORE the primary. When asked if they were supporting Senator Lieberman, Senator Reid, Senator Kerry, Senator Schumer, and Senator Biden all stated that they would not support their colleague. So Lamont's win does not figure into their attacks on Senator Lieberman. Those attacks were already launched, and they wanted him gone. It is simply because he will not embrace or endorse their message of leaving Iraq. To them, he is an impediment when it comes to their message. They also do not seem to care that he is with them 99.9% of the time. For these Democrats, their antiwar stance is all that matters to them.
He added, “It would be terrific from my point of view that during the time in September, October, and early November, if they campaign, they spend their time in places other than Connecticut.”
Lewan said that the issue of stripping Lieberman’s seniority did not come up in any of his conversations. He also said he has offered to share Democrats’ concerns with the Lieberman campaign.
The issue of Lieberman’s seniority would arise most dramatically if Lieberman wins re-election and Democrats recapture control of the chamber. That would slot Lieberman to take over as chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the panel primarily responsible for investigating the executive branch.
Democrats think their chances of taking back the Senate are growing more and more likely. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) last week said he was more confident that Democrats would pick up at least five Senate seats.
Allowing Lieberman to retain his seniority could put the senator now running as an independent in charge of the Senate’s chief investigative committee. If Democrats took control of either chamber they would likely launch investigations of the White House’s handling of the war in Iraq and homeland security.
“Lieberman’s tone and message has shocked a lot of people,” said a second senior Democratic aide who has discussed the issue with other Senate Democrats. “He’s way off message for us and right in line with the White House.”
In other words, he is supportive of the troops, the mission, and the overall war. And that makes him an obstacle for the Democrats; more of an obstacle than originally expected, especially on the heels of the new poll released showing him to have a twelve point lead on Ned Lamont. One thing is certain for November: Senator Lieberman is not going down without a fight.
“At this point Lieberman cannot expect to just keep his seniority,” said the aide. “He can’t run against a Democrat and expect to waltz back to the caucus with the same seniority as before. It would give the view that the Senate is a country club rather than representative of a political party and political movement.”
No offense to the Democrat aide, but has Congress not acted as such in recent years? Senator Kerry's attendance in the senate is terrible, as was exposed in the 2004 Presidential campaign. William Jefferson's office was searched by the FBI--with a legal search warrant, and well within the boundaries of their jurisdiction--and both Dennis Hastert and Nancy Pelosi had hissy fits over it. Indeed, the Congress has enaged in nearly imperial behavior. But Senator Lieberman will not have to worry about the Democrat caucus when he wins in November. As a matter of fact, I do not believe Senator Lieberman would really care for those whom he once called friends after how he has been treated by them.
The aide said that it would make no sense to keep Lieberman in a position where he might take over the Governmental Affairs Committee.
Ironically, a lawmaker with a good shot of replacing Lieberman atop the Governmental Affairs panel, Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), is spearheading the effort within the Senate to preserve Democratic support for Lieberman. Carper is the third most senior Democrat on the panel after Lieberman. But the two Democrats who outrank him, Sens. Carl Levin (Mich.) and Daniel Akaka (Hawaii) are likely to keep their perches as the most senior Democrats on the Armed Services Committee and Veterans Affairs Committee, respectively.
Carper’s chief of staff, Jonathan Jones, has contacted Democratic aides recently and urged them that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee should not spend money in the race between Lieberman and Lamont, said two Democratic aides familiar with the conversations. Jones said the money would be better spent elsewhere since the seat will remain in Democratic hands, said the sources.
This is technically true. Senator Lieberman is a liberal, and he will likely continue to vote as he always has. His sticking point--the one thing that sticks in the caucus's craw--is the war. And on that issue Joe Lieberman will not budge.
Carper, who like Lieberman often works across the aisle with Republicans, is one of a handful of Democratic centrists who have continued to support Lieberman since his primary defeat. The others include Sen. Ken Salazar (Colo.), Mark Pryor (Ark.), Ben Nelson (Neb.) and Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii).
Bill Ghent, Carper’s spokesman, said that Jones “has been on vacation the last week and a half and has not been out there advocating what anyone should do regarding the Connecticut election.”
The view that Lieberman should lose his seniority is likely to become more ingrained among Democrats if Lieberman continues to align himself with Republicans, as he has in the last few days. Lieberman took a call from senior White House political strategist Karl Rove on the day of his primary election. And since losing, he has adopted rhetoric echoing Republican talking points.
“If we pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England,” Lieberman said about U.S. troops in Iraq and the recently foiled terrorism scheme. “It will strengthen them, and they will strike again.”
In June, 38 Democrats and Sen. James Jeffords (I-Vt.) voted for a resolution sponsored by Sen. Levin that called for Bush to take several steps to change the “open ended commitment” of U.S. forces.
On the same day, 12 Democrats and Jeffords voted for another resolution requiring the redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq.
Sen. Russ Feingold (Wis.), a Democrat who voted for both resolutions, called Lieberman’s statement “regrettable” and said Lieberman “doesn’t get it.”
Excuse me? Senator Lieberman does not get it? I think the Democrats need to do some serious soul-searching on this one. Our enemies are licking their lips, once again, over the division in this nation caused by one of its central political parties. Much like the North Vietnamese during the Vietnam war, the Islamofascists are hoping that the Democrats can break the morale and resolve of the nation. And these are the same Democrats who championed Judge Anna Taylor's utterly retarded decision yesterday declaring the NSA program "unconstitutional." This is the same party who announced they had "killed the Patriot Act" at the end of last year on the day the Act expired. And this is the same party who continually tries to hogtie the president when it comes to prosecuting this war. If anyone does not get this war, and the situation we are in, it is the Democrat Party.
Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean has likened Lieberman’s recent statements to the rhetoric coming from Vice President Dick Cheney and Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman.
Asked yesterday about the race, Dean said, “Ned will win,” adding that Democratic turnout for Lamont will help the party in other Connecticut races.
Lieberman is expected to make a hard sell to Republican voters. Sean Smith, who stepped down as Lieberman’s campaign manager after the primary, told Lieberman as he was resigning that the candidate would have to pursue Republican voters in order to win the general election, said sources familiar with the conversation.
Lieberman said he agreed with the analysis, according to the sources.
The majority of Connecticut's registered voters are Independents. He will appeal to them. And courting the Republicans there will help him more than it is helping Alam Schlesinger--the current GOP nominee. Mr. Schlesinger is polling at 4% compared to Lieberman with 53% and Lamont with 41%. Lieberman will end up taking from both of them in the win.
So far, at least 26 Democratic senators have said they are supporting Lamont, including Reid, according to a survey conducted by The Hill. Reid spokesman Jim Manley said Democratic leaders would make no decisions about committees until after the election.
The simple fact of the matter is that the Democrats are desperate to stop Senator Lieberman. This is why they are issuing statements like this about how he will be treated should he win. They do not think he will, but the polls are not lying in this race. Furthermore, all of the prognosticators are stating that Lmont does not have a chance. His virulent rhetoric during the primary has sent the message to Connecticut voters that he comes form the McGovern camp of the Democrat Party.
McGovern's firm stance against the Vietnam war cost him dearly in his presidential bid against incumbant Richard Nixon in 1972. And now the Democrats are drawing on their past, hoping that this time such a platform will propel them into controlling the House and the Senate this year, and will lead them to the White House in 2008. The problem the party has it that it has seriously underestimated the support of the president and the nation's soldiers abroad.
I believe that the Democrats have bought into their phony polls for far too long. They did it in 2002, when the mid-terms showed that the GOP was going to lose seats in both Houses of Congress. They believed their polling--including the over-inflated exit polling on election day--in 2004. And now they are buying the hype again. This is a party that is seriously out of touch with America. They sit in their offices, in their skyscraper fortresses, away from anyone with any sort of common sense, and click their tongues at their intellect. Their worldview is one where they are the people in control, and people do their bidding when they snap their fingers.
The reality is that they are not the ones in control. They keep losing at the ballot box, and it confounds them after the election is done as to why they did not win. First, you need a plan, then a platform. And the problem they have with that is their platform does not resonante with America. It is a radical agenda that America has never embraced. It is one of weakness and capitualtion to others in the world, such as John Kerry's affinity for the United Nations.
Joe Lieberman knows that when it comes to defense and national security his party has no clue what to do. And it is a shame that his party has turned their backs on seemingly the only man who can help them understand those points. For the Democrats, doing the right thing for national security only comes around when it is politically expedient to them. If it is not, then they do not care anymore. And that will be the tragic epilogue written on November 8th.
Marcie
It should come as a surprise to no one that the Democrats really do not like Senator Joe Lieberman. Indeed, his stance on the war has made him public enemy number one in their party. And with their current platfomr--cut-andrun/retreat-and-defeat--it is no wonder why they dislike him. Today, The Hill has a story regarding what the Democrats will do should Senator Lieberman win this November:
A group of Senate Democrats is growing increasingly angry about Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (D-Conn.) campaign tactics since he lost the Democratic primary last week.
If he continues to alienate his colleagues, Lieberman could be stripped of his seniority within the Democratic caucus should he defeat Democrat Ned Lamont in the general election this November, according to some senior Democratic aides.
In recent days, Lieberman has rankled Democrats in the upper chamber by suggesting that those who support bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq by a certain date would bolster terrorists’ planning attacks against the U.S. and its allies. He also sparked resentment by saying last week on NBC’s Today show that the Democratic Party was out of the political mainstream.
Democrats are worried that Lieberman may be giving Republicans a golden opportunity to undermine their message.
“I think there’s a lot of concern,” said a senior Democratic aide who has discussed the subject with colleagues. “I think the first step is if the Lieberman thing turns into a side show and hurts our message and ability to take back the Senate, and the White House and the [National Republican Senatorial Committee] manipulate him, there are going to be a lot of unhappy people in our caucus.”
Michael Lewan, Lieberman’s former chief of staff, has worked to quell Democratic discontent with Lieberman and to steer them away from campaigning against his former boss, said Democratic aides familiar with Lewan’s activities.
Lewan, a lobbyist with Brown Rudnick, said that he has had conversations with Democrats from between eight and 12 Senate offices. He said he understands that many Democrats have endorsed Lamont because he is the Democratic primary winner.
Hold on a second. The support for Lamont came out BEFORE the primary. When asked if they were supporting Senator Lieberman, Senator Reid, Senator Kerry, Senator Schumer, and Senator Biden all stated that they would not support their colleague. So Lamont's win does not figure into their attacks on Senator Lieberman. Those attacks were already launched, and they wanted him gone. It is simply because he will not embrace or endorse their message of leaving Iraq. To them, he is an impediment when it comes to their message. They also do not seem to care that he is with them 99.9% of the time. For these Democrats, their antiwar stance is all that matters to them.
He added, “It would be terrific from my point of view that during the time in September, October, and early November, if they campaign, they spend their time in places other than Connecticut.”
Lewan said that the issue of stripping Lieberman’s seniority did not come up in any of his conversations. He also said he has offered to share Democrats’ concerns with the Lieberman campaign.
The issue of Lieberman’s seniority would arise most dramatically if Lieberman wins re-election and Democrats recapture control of the chamber. That would slot Lieberman to take over as chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the panel primarily responsible for investigating the executive branch.
Democrats think their chances of taking back the Senate are growing more and more likely. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) last week said he was more confident that Democrats would pick up at least five Senate seats.
Allowing Lieberman to retain his seniority could put the senator now running as an independent in charge of the Senate’s chief investigative committee. If Democrats took control of either chamber they would likely launch investigations of the White House’s handling of the war in Iraq and homeland security.
“Lieberman’s tone and message has shocked a lot of people,” said a second senior Democratic aide who has discussed the issue with other Senate Democrats. “He’s way off message for us and right in line with the White House.”
In other words, he is supportive of the troops, the mission, and the overall war. And that makes him an obstacle for the Democrats; more of an obstacle than originally expected, especially on the heels of the new poll released showing him to have a twelve point lead on Ned Lamont. One thing is certain for November: Senator Lieberman is not going down without a fight.
“At this point Lieberman cannot expect to just keep his seniority,” said the aide. “He can’t run against a Democrat and expect to waltz back to the caucus with the same seniority as before. It would give the view that the Senate is a country club rather than representative of a political party and political movement.”
No offense to the Democrat aide, but has Congress not acted as such in recent years? Senator Kerry's attendance in the senate is terrible, as was exposed in the 2004 Presidential campaign. William Jefferson's office was searched by the FBI--with a legal search warrant, and well within the boundaries of their jurisdiction--and both Dennis Hastert and Nancy Pelosi had hissy fits over it. Indeed, the Congress has enaged in nearly imperial behavior. But Senator Lieberman will not have to worry about the Democrat caucus when he wins in November. As a matter of fact, I do not believe Senator Lieberman would really care for those whom he once called friends after how he has been treated by them.
The aide said that it would make no sense to keep Lieberman in a position where he might take over the Governmental Affairs Committee.
Ironically, a lawmaker with a good shot of replacing Lieberman atop the Governmental Affairs panel, Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), is spearheading the effort within the Senate to preserve Democratic support for Lieberman. Carper is the third most senior Democrat on the panel after Lieberman. But the two Democrats who outrank him, Sens. Carl Levin (Mich.) and Daniel Akaka (Hawaii) are likely to keep their perches as the most senior Democrats on the Armed Services Committee and Veterans Affairs Committee, respectively.
Carper’s chief of staff, Jonathan Jones, has contacted Democratic aides recently and urged them that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee should not spend money in the race between Lieberman and Lamont, said two Democratic aides familiar with the conversations. Jones said the money would be better spent elsewhere since the seat will remain in Democratic hands, said the sources.
This is technically true. Senator Lieberman is a liberal, and he will likely continue to vote as he always has. His sticking point--the one thing that sticks in the caucus's craw--is the war. And on that issue Joe Lieberman will not budge.
Carper, who like Lieberman often works across the aisle with Republicans, is one of a handful of Democratic centrists who have continued to support Lieberman since his primary defeat. The others include Sen. Ken Salazar (Colo.), Mark Pryor (Ark.), Ben Nelson (Neb.) and Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii).
Bill Ghent, Carper’s spokesman, said that Jones “has been on vacation the last week and a half and has not been out there advocating what anyone should do regarding the Connecticut election.”
The view that Lieberman should lose his seniority is likely to become more ingrained among Democrats if Lieberman continues to align himself with Republicans, as he has in the last few days. Lieberman took a call from senior White House political strategist Karl Rove on the day of his primary election. And since losing, he has adopted rhetoric echoing Republican talking points.
“If we pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England,” Lieberman said about U.S. troops in Iraq and the recently foiled terrorism scheme. “It will strengthen them, and they will strike again.”
In June, 38 Democrats and Sen. James Jeffords (I-Vt.) voted for a resolution sponsored by Sen. Levin that called for Bush to take several steps to change the “open ended commitment” of U.S. forces.
On the same day, 12 Democrats and Jeffords voted for another resolution requiring the redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq.
Sen. Russ Feingold (Wis.), a Democrat who voted for both resolutions, called Lieberman’s statement “regrettable” and said Lieberman “doesn’t get it.”
Excuse me? Senator Lieberman does not get it? I think the Democrats need to do some serious soul-searching on this one. Our enemies are licking their lips, once again, over the division in this nation caused by one of its central political parties. Much like the North Vietnamese during the Vietnam war, the Islamofascists are hoping that the Democrats can break the morale and resolve of the nation. And these are the same Democrats who championed Judge Anna Taylor's utterly retarded decision yesterday declaring the NSA program "unconstitutional." This is the same party who announced they had "killed the Patriot Act" at the end of last year on the day the Act expired. And this is the same party who continually tries to hogtie the president when it comes to prosecuting this war. If anyone does not get this war, and the situation we are in, it is the Democrat Party.
Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean has likened Lieberman’s recent statements to the rhetoric coming from Vice President Dick Cheney and Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman.
Asked yesterday about the race, Dean said, “Ned will win,” adding that Democratic turnout for Lamont will help the party in other Connecticut races.
Lieberman is expected to make a hard sell to Republican voters. Sean Smith, who stepped down as Lieberman’s campaign manager after the primary, told Lieberman as he was resigning that the candidate would have to pursue Republican voters in order to win the general election, said sources familiar with the conversation.
Lieberman said he agreed with the analysis, according to the sources.
The majority of Connecticut's registered voters are Independents. He will appeal to them. And courting the Republicans there will help him more than it is helping Alam Schlesinger--the current GOP nominee. Mr. Schlesinger is polling at 4% compared to Lieberman with 53% and Lamont with 41%. Lieberman will end up taking from both of them in the win.
So far, at least 26 Democratic senators have said they are supporting Lamont, including Reid, according to a survey conducted by The Hill. Reid spokesman Jim Manley said Democratic leaders would make no decisions about committees until after the election.
The simple fact of the matter is that the Democrats are desperate to stop Senator Lieberman. This is why they are issuing statements like this about how he will be treated should he win. They do not think he will, but the polls are not lying in this race. Furthermore, all of the prognosticators are stating that Lmont does not have a chance. His virulent rhetoric during the primary has sent the message to Connecticut voters that he comes form the McGovern camp of the Democrat Party.
McGovern's firm stance against the Vietnam war cost him dearly in his presidential bid against incumbant Richard Nixon in 1972. And now the Democrats are drawing on their past, hoping that this time such a platform will propel them into controlling the House and the Senate this year, and will lead them to the White House in 2008. The problem the party has it that it has seriously underestimated the support of the president and the nation's soldiers abroad.
I believe that the Democrats have bought into their phony polls for far too long. They did it in 2002, when the mid-terms showed that the GOP was going to lose seats in both Houses of Congress. They believed their polling--including the over-inflated exit polling on election day--in 2004. And now they are buying the hype again. This is a party that is seriously out of touch with America. They sit in their offices, in their skyscraper fortresses, away from anyone with any sort of common sense, and click their tongues at their intellect. Their worldview is one where they are the people in control, and people do their bidding when they snap their fingers.
The reality is that they are not the ones in control. They keep losing at the ballot box, and it confounds them after the election is done as to why they did not win. First, you need a plan, then a platform. And the problem they have with that is their platform does not resonante with America. It is a radical agenda that America has never embraced. It is one of weakness and capitualtion to others in the world, such as John Kerry's affinity for the United Nations.
Joe Lieberman knows that when it comes to defense and national security his party has no clue what to do. And it is a shame that his party has turned their backs on seemingly the only man who can help them understand those points. For the Democrats, doing the right thing for national security only comes around when it is politically expedient to them. If it is not, then they do not care anymore. And that will be the tragic epilogue written on November 8th.
Marcie
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 10:38 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home