Joementum Ain't Going to Cut It as An "Independent" Candidate

Equating Chia Pets with Joe Looneyman is hurtful to the poor Chia Pets!

A smile, in the midst of a world on fire. The people of Connecticut said NO to Senator Leiberman's support of President Bush and the Iraq War. I was fascinated by the rhetoric streaming from the various talk shows as pundits "analyzed" what a Lamont victory means. [Ed Rollins,](http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ed_Rollins) one of America’s most sought after Republican spokesmen and strategists, was interviewed on a Fox News Sirius radio show. Rollins claimed that Lieberman will win the Senate seat as an independent, because Republicans will see Lamont's stance as pushing the Democratic Party too far to "the left". Rollins added that he was reminded of the anti war movement that could't win with Eugene McCarthy in '68 or George McGovern in '72. He continued using the word "left" and "anti war" and "white flag" as closely aligned. Conversely, the phrases "right" and "stay the course" and "strong defense" used to describe the "other" point of view. Listening to Mr. Rollins categorize the thousands of passionate voters in Connecticut as either "left and anti war" or "right and strong defense" angered me. I'm so weary of simplistic categories that label and discrimate the complexity of our humanity, our logic and our emotions as individuals. What is "left" about understanding that our country was lied into a war? What is "right" about staying the course when it is the occupation itself that is driving the resistance? There is a middle ground. It's called "Reason and Moderation." I am staunchly against this war, as well as the lies and subterfuge that continue to this very day. How does that make me "left?" I believe that a living wage is a reasonable, moderate expectation, I believe that providing affordable housing, health care and food is a reasonable, moderate expectation. I believe that a secure border is a reasonable, moderate expectation. I believe that an alternative, national committment to transform our energy policy to sustainable sources is a reasonable, moderate expectation. I believe it's reasonable, and moderate to have clean drinking water. I believe it's reasonable, and moderate to provide Veterans with mental health and medical services promptly and efficiently. I believe it's reasonable to utilize science in policy decisions. I believe it's reasonable to take a look at the last 60 years of our foreign policy and discover why the Arab world is so angry at us. I believe it's reasonable to remind ourselves to read the Constitution and reign in a President who is illegally wiretapping his citizens, torturing captives, lying about Iraq War motives, and leading our country in bankruptcy with errant policies. Here's what is NOT reasonable: Spending 11 Billions dollars a week in a failed Iraq policy. Saving embryos that are going to be discarded. Spending Billions of dollars for weapons in space. Spending more billions to rebuild 10000 nuclear weapons Teaching abstience only programs and fighting to end abortion. There are so many more. But I'm running out of time. Yet, next time someone calls you "left", refuse the category. We are moderates, we are reasonable. We are Americans.

We won this one, folks.

No reason to kick Old Joe on his way to the rest home.

He served the party in his day, but that day is gone, and, for his sake, we hope he will preserve his dignity and reputation by doing what Ned Lamont would have done in his place--support the party that supported him, indeed honored him, and, even today, remembers him fondly for his many contributions.

We've got a guy worth AT LEAST $90 million running for CT Senate against a Republican named...how's that again? We've got a guy who upset a well-financed famous incumbent in a primary. The last time that happened was never.

Lieberman draws boocoo GOP votes. And as the Dems come home with a rush, that ratio is going up, not down. Like the Lieberman for President Campaign, the Lieberman (I) Campaign for Senate is on a fast track to Palookaville.

So here's what I say:

Think it over, Senator. Endorse Lamont, go get some sun, write your memoirs. You're not gonna win, no way in hell. You know I'm right.

Why be a chump?

It's time to switch gears. We already did to Lieberman the worst damage you can do a politician, so it's now safe, reasonable and decent to let up on the guy. His lame-ass independent ecandidacy hurts the Reps as much as hurts Lamont.

And it's past time to stop bitching and complaining about Reid, Schumer and the rest of the DC Democrats. The election's in November, right? A bird doesn't fly on one wing, so let's get our sh*t together and win big.

-SH

If you think the Lamont supporters are worse than the Republican party and the Bush regime, you are not now, nor have you ever been, a Democrat. If you are blind to the harm that the Bush regime and their enablers, such as Lieberman, are doing to this country, you are not now, nor have you ever been, a Democrat. Expect to see many posts and letters to the editor between now and November by Republican activists pretending to be moderate Democrats. I suspect we'll be seeing a lot of this troll tactic. Republicans pretending to be Democrats writing shrill posts and letters making specious complaints about how the Democratic party has gone too far to the left. This is a peculiar claim in light of how far to the right the Republican party has gone. It also contradicts polling evidence that shows the American public supporting Democrats over Republicans by a large margin even on the issue of terrorism. My old job, now outsourced to the Philippines (thanks to the "free" trade policies supported by Lieberman), was as a newspaper reader for a press-clipping company. I've read every newspaper in two states. Every election cycle one sees hundreds of formulaic fake "I used to be a Democrat" letters to the editor written by Republican party activists, that predictably spout Republican talking points and false characterizations of Democrats. Democrats, don't let these shallow contrived Republican party tricks distract, unnerve or confuse you. You can always recognize these fake posts and letters to the editor by their shrill tone and use of Republican talking points. Expose them every time you see them.

I see this as a moment of truth for Hilary (and Bill) Clinton, who actively supported Lieberman in the primary election. If Hilary fails to renounce Joe's independent candidacy, she will be signaling to all Democrats that, in her heart, she is with Joe. And I'm talking about a forceful renunciation, not some sort of weak-assed statement like: "I wish he wouldn't run, but he has every right to do so." Although the MSM has already anoninted Hilary as the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008, the Party membership has yet to weigh-in on the matter. I believe that Hilary has far less support than is widely assumed, and if she is perceived to be "with Joe," she will deservedly share his fate.

Can we be sure this election wasn't "fixed"? What was the best outcome for the GOP Crime Family? A Lamont squeaker by 4% or less, so Holy Joe will run as an independent? Maybe so. A chance for the GOP candidate, a chance to make the DEMs in Conn look like they are in disarray? Maybe so. 52/48 is the magic number that seems to come out of the election-theft machine; check what happened in San Diego in replacing "Duke" Cunningham and Ohio '04.

Savor the moment then get back to work. The victory was sweet but as yet incomplete. The proof of the pudding will come in November. The backlash from the MSM/Demolosers was to be expected. Anything out of their pretentious comfort zone is both foreign and threatening. I wouldn’t put much stock in any overnight conversions by those who have supported the status quo. Their pragmatic or cowardly stances say more than any finger in the wind conversions. Expect nothing to change from those who have followed the wrong script by choice regardless of their expedient change of hearts. The issue of the War is the most visible aspect of a more serious underlying problem. U.S. Foreign Policy has been a series of disasters for 60 years. From allowing France to reoccupy Indochina after World War II or making nice with Saddam in the 1980s to the present set of catastrophic fiascos, our Foreign Policy has been one of total moral turpitude. America has paid a heavy price for the many questionable acts it has engaged in while the few reaped enormous profits. This will be the primary driving force for the foreseeable future. The decisions made in this area will dictate much of what can be accomplished domestically. If our resources are continually squandered on chest thumping, bull in the china shop Foreign Relations we will not be able to solve any domestic problems due to financial restrictions. The single imperative going forward is a complete reversal of recent and historic Foreign Policy dogma. This will also require a reevaluation of our relationship with the Israeli/Palestinian issues now exploding with our help.

Joe Lieberman was more than happy to accept the nomination and receive the support of the Democratic Party in his three previous runs for the Senate. Now that the party has chosen someone else, Joe acts as though the party has let him down, rather than the opposite. It's as though he feels a sense of royal entitlement to that Senate seat. It is now abundantly clear that Joe Lieberman is and always has been a self-serving SOB. The Democratic Party was nothing more than the platform upon which he stood to achieve his personal goals. Now that the platform has been pulled out from under him, Joe hangs on for dear life believing, no doubt like his good buddy W, that God wants him to remain steadfast in carrying out whatever holy mission he considers himself to be on. We can only hope that even those Democrats who supported him in the primary election will see what a fraud Joe Lieberman is and that they will get behind Ned Lamont as the true representative of the Party.

By running as an independent, Joe is helping Bush to elect a Republican. He won't win, but it appears that he'll do whatever it takes to defeat the Democrats' choice. tseving -Surviving Bush one day at a time

I wonder why the rethugs didn't just "fix" this one the way they did in 2000 & 2004? Maybe it'd be too obvious since they'll have to use it again in '06 & '08. My Question is this: Who's going to stop them, and how?

"If Schumer, who heads the Democratic Senate Re-election Campaign, doesn't come out of the gate and endorse Lamont, he will doom the Democratic Party to continuing to be a minority party in Congress." As head of the DSCC, Schumer is obligated to support Ned Lamont because Lamont is now the Democratic Candidate for Senate in CT, not Lieberman. If Schumer were to openly endorse Lieberman, or even do nothing to help Lamont win in November, Schumer would be guilty of malfeasance. Aside from that, since Lieberman is about to become an official Independent, Schumer, Reid and all other Democratic Senators, as well as Democratic citizens should all demand Lieberman resign from all committees in the Senate. All references to Lieberman should also carry an (I) after his name. So the only doomed Democrats are the ones who do not want to get with the new Democratic program that will win in November. The new Democratic party is best exemplified by Howard Dean, John Conyers, John Murtha, and others with spines and vocal cords. Next correction: "We have a continuing war because the people who began it aren't men enough to admit their mistakes." What mistakes? The reason we went to war was for war profiteering. Those people who began it, did not make any mistakes, and have in fact been wildly successful! Defense contractor overcharging (stealing from U.S. taxpayers) goes unchallenged, Halliburton's stock went from $9 a share to over $90 a share, plus there are over twenty billion dollars missing from Iraq! The war profiteers have been so successful financially, that they want to start a new war in Syria and Iran, which will be our October surprise. The way to stop it has been shown by John Conyers with his publication of "Constitution in Crisis". At least the Introduction and Summary should be read by everyone. But most people don't know about it, thanks to the corporate fascist MSM blackout. That's why it is up to us to email the links to the site to everyone in our email address book. Here is the link to the PDF, web and Word documents: Subject Line: Had Enough? 'The Constitution in Crisis; The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, and Coverups in the Iraq War, and Illegal Domestic Surveillance http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/iraqrept2.html Well? Start emailing...

ets
I watched portions of both ABC's "Good Morning America" and NBC's "Today." Both programs gave significant face time to loser Joe Lieberman, who basically said a vote for Lamont was a vote for the terrorists, mentioned Lamont almost in passing and characterized bloggers as peaceniks, kooks, fringe-dwellers and "out-of-touch-with-mainstream-America."

I flashed back to 1972 and the campaign of George McGovern, the first presidental in which I could vote. The MSM then portrayed the former South Dakota Senator, and decorated WWII B-24 pilot, as an appeaser and weak on Communism. He was ready to turn Vietnam over to Ho Chi Minh, they said.

The "liberal" media characterized McGovern's supporters as draft-dodgers, flag-burners and unwashed hippies.

McGovern's campaign was sabotaged from within the Democratic Party by the ambitious and bellicose war hawk Henry "Scoop" Jackson and his fledgling chickhawks, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle.

Of course the real "Et tu, Bute" moment was not the Tom Eagleton affair, but AFL-CIO president George Meany refusing to endorse McGovern's candidacy.

History need not repeat itself but the MSM is hoping it will.

I wouldn't get too excited about this one victory. The systemic problems with the take-over of our political process by the powers of defense contractors runs deep and long. We've created a monster that engulfs everything around it. Not one state can afford to eliminate the jobs created through defense spending. Last year alone defense profits increased 25%, with profits like this we'll see more wars. This same monster also controls much of the systems tools too, including the message (MSM), and the method of voting. (It's not those that vote that count - it's those that count the votes.- Stalin) Until we can find a way to replace the jobs lost if we were to cease being a war driven state one anti-Iraq war candidate victory doesn't mean much. Is it a start? Sure. It's one brick in a very thick wall.

Is there any reason to believe Schumer et al won't support Lamont? Seems like Lamont is the kind of candidate they dream about (e.g. Corzine, et al) who can pay for his campaign and win.

Of course, Holy Joe winning is better than the Republican winning, because he'd probably caucus with the Dems, but how likely is that? You can't win your own primary, you're going to win as an Independent?

True, the margin was thin, but how many incumbent senators have EVER lost a primary? Somebody else can count it up, but the number is very small.

Lieberman's so=called Independent campaign is on life-support before it begins; why woud Schumer or anyone else invest a nickel in it? Lieberman is a likeable, collegial man who had lots of friends--before yesterday.

I say DC drops Holy Joe like a bad habit. That's just the kind of guys they are.

SH

An independent candidacy gives the R's two chances to prevail: Joe splits the vote and the R candidate wins; Joe splits the vote and Joe wins - and for 6 years he is beholding to no party and he will simply continue his contrarian ways without any need to follow a reconstituted Democrat majority.

A massive snail-mail appeal to Joe to change his position and support the Democrat nominee coupled with a high position in the DLC might, just might, bring Joe's party loyalty to the fore. Alternately, if Joe follows his stated path and loses the election - it doesn't matter who wins where Joe failed in his independent campaign - then Joe has to be shut out of politics for the rest of his days.

Running as an independent is purely an act of hubris.

"In the part of this universe that we know there is great injustice, and often the good suffer, and often the wicked prosper, and one hardly knows which of those is the more annoying."
- Bertrand Russell -

...is like a visit to another universe. And I thought the funny color sky there was because I have an old tv.

According to them all those wild crazy "Liberal Bloggers", who are best buddies of Osama, if not outright puppets, only succeeded because most of them live in wildly liberal Connecticut.

And even then what with only a third of Connecticut folk registered Democrat (putting the lie to above) and a terribly low (but above average?) turnout, only 6% of men, women, children, illegal aliens, and talking dogs (taken as a total group) actually voted for Lamont, and obviously the rest are Liberpuppet supporters who were too lazy or fiendishly prevented from voting for him (like all the registered Republicans who feel bad because their guy is even more lame than Joe)

It is weird enough to be at some event and see it misrepresented on the air, but unlike an event that only the actual people there could actually have first hand info, if there is something on the Internet, anyone everywhere can have first hand info, even after they report it!

I can understand that those beyond the digital divide might be very confused, but the rest have no excuse.

See ya, you sick Bush kissin' arrogant little throw-in-the-towel-in-2000 jerk. The repugs were right about you, you are a looserman. Democratic party, either wake up or you'll lose even me.

Mr. Conyers has provided the Democratic Party with a detailed account of the laws broken by this Administration and anyone who has supported it. Republicans are famous for "talking points." In an act of patriotism, courage, and hard work, Mr. Conyers(and his staff) have provided Democrats with the most detailed, powerful "talking points" they could ever hope to find. USE THEM !!! Lamont's victory was much, much more than a protest against the War in Iraq.. The voters in Connecticut screamed to the ethers they are outraged that their beloved Constitution and everything it stands for has been defiled by these Neocon(neofascists). The leadership of the Democratic Party had better listen. Jeff Valencia, CA

Do the leaders of the Democratic Party believe in democracy, or is that too quaint a notion for the elitist club of senators? A great question, and within it contain the seeds of its own answer. I've often referred to the Senate with marked disapproval, and with good reason. That millionaires country club, still at work protecting the super rich and their banking friends, is hard at work protecting "Democracy" by allowing the President to invade Iraq on the one hand, who now criticize him for having done so. Am I defending King George? Absolutely not, but he too is the product of his environment, which, namely, consisted of living off his mama's tit and his daddy's connections and wealth. Typical spoiled lazy rich kid. The only problem is, he's in the Oval Office. Settling his rich daddy's scores on behalf his backers, posing a world theatre of a trial against a dictator whom we put into power years ago, citing "humanitarian concerns" while filling concentration camps with "terrorists." So, no, while GWB has rightly earned not only my condemnation, but that of the court of eternal history, the Senate, that bloated maggot infested cow of an organization, can't muster enough votes to impeach the most criminal president in the history of the United States. All this in the name of "centrism," which is in actuality "corporatism" which began to take hold when JFK's brains were blown out by a single bullet which had better turning capability than the finest automobile in the world. Senate of the United States: You make me sick, and you make whatever is left of any free-thinking of average-intelligence human being sick as well. You Democrats sold out years ago, you spread your legs, and now you're getting plowed. Where the hell is Ted Kennedy? Silent. Why? I can't say that I blame him: With a family whose members have the life expectancy of the housefly, it's no wonder he remains (largely) silent. As for the rest? Harry Reid? Diane Feinstein? Hillary Clinton? Phony bullshit. ****************************************** "All truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed; Second, it is violently opposed, and Third, it is accepted as self-evident."--Schopenhauer

Assuming that Lamont's win doesn't split the Democratic party, resulting in a republican win in November, and... If the Democrats take over Congress in November, and.. If they then impeach the criminals in the White House and Congress in January, and... Then put them on trial for crimes against the nation, and... If they then make REAL changes in the election system of our country that allow people to have an actual voice in our government... THEN I will believe that America is a democracy and not merely a wholy owned subsidiary of corporations powered by the religious fanaticism of dupes of Fox News

I hate to pour water on the fire, but we still have the voting fraud issues to deal with this November as well as the possibility that dumbya will give us another "october suprise" and declare martial law. I fully expect that dumbya will not leave willingly. I have said for more than 5 years his departure from the WWH (White Whore House) will look more like the warden scene from the Shawshank Redemption. Time will tell, and I will be more than happy to say I was wrong. KJ Lovell

And I haven't been this excited about anything politico for a long time. Screw Lieberbushman, he had to go, what with all his suck-up's to Team Bush and his grand disaster in Iraq, exactly the kind of thing true Democrats don't need, we HATE this administration, for everything they touch they make it worse than it was before... I wish he would just switch sides and get it over with, let the real love affair begin between him and ol' Dubya, hey, maybe Jeff Gannon can really make it a party! Seriously though, great victory for the people of Connecticut, I like Ned Lamont, I think he'll do a hekuvajob, for real. The most important thing, as is pointed out, this is a wake up call to DEM incumbents who think they're sittin' pretty on Cap Hill... the people are speaking,and they're saying "grow some cajones" challenge this contemptible administration, and do something to counteract the Faux News which props them up, distorting every piece of information disseminated, leaving our populace dim-witted and misinformed. Go on the ATTACK already you spineless bastards, these guys are ready to start dropping like flies, as long as we don't self-implode! And let ol'sneaky Rove frame every issue, of course, that's just gotta end!Be First, BE STRONG! Take over the Hill! Finally, some hope, halle-frikkin-luja

I'm going to have to quote the late, great Bill Hicks in this situation. He was talking about Bush Sr. losing in 1992, but I think it sums up most of our feelings towards Lieberman: "You f---er, you f---, you're dead, dead, dead! We hate you! Now do you know it? Now do you feel it? Feel the f---in' hate!!!" - Bill Hicks (Arizona Bay) Thanks to the Connecticut voters for getting the message across to that bootlicker. Now you've got to really pour some salt in his wounds so he drops out of his fantasy independent run.

The creeps of the GOP and the Democrats who've compromised their integrity and duties in the name of insant access to power, money and fame by placating special interests (lobby groups like AIPAC) above American public interests cannot backtrack at this point, they're done. Little Joey has been taken down, next is Hillary. Eat the Elite

I've read that the was a"Sore Loser" law that prohibits a person who loses a bid for party nomination from seeking independent status to run in the same election. Doesn't this law apply across all states? If not, why not? I would seem that a lot of the problems that occur during an election are brought about because the laws are not standardized. Kranky Canuck

A blazin' editorial. The great Indian poet Rabindranath Tagore also struck your spiritual point like a tuning fork:---------"Truth comes as a conqueror / only to those who have lost the art / of receiving it as a friend"-----------Praise Bushelzebubba & Damn the Electorate--i.e., Sow the Spin, Reap the Whirlwind.

gamd In the advent of Lamont's victory, it would be wise and useful if candidates for congress were to clarify some points with respect to the US posture regarding its defense: -The US is not at war with anyone or any one country. There is no legal basis to continue fighting the people of Iraq with whom we have no quarrel and never did. We should make reparations for the devastation we caused and those guilty of crimes against the peace should be tried. This is not controversial and should be put forth by candidates for congress as the coherent position for the US to adopt. -Terrorism, which is the killing of innocents to engender fear, should be seen for what it is, namely a tactic borne of desparation to exact revenge in some cases, or else borne out of a sense of sadism in other cases. In the case of the US and Israel, they engage in terrorism routinely out of sadism. In the case of outraged arab populations it is used to exact revenge for real or perceived persecution. Some recognition of this obvious fact is needed so as to rein in the penchant for wreaking havoc in the world by the US. This will go a long way in reducing the extent of terrorism as a tactic.

If the democratic party does not institute an instant smackdown of loserman after he files for an independent bid, the democratic party will end as a party of decency.