Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Wednesday, August 09, 2006

Go Joe Go!

An otherwise liberal Democratic Senator who supports the war in Iraq was defeated Tuesday evening in the Connecticut primary. Red baby diaper dopers who are asserting their efforts to move the Democratic party as far left as it can go were succesful in their efforts to elect a millionaire with no political experience to the Democratic nomination.

Blogger Markos Moulitas - author of the left leaning Daily Kos - featured in a Time Magazine article - is not going to accept credit for boosting Lamont, especially if that leads to a loss in the Democratic column this fall. Though, Kos has posted a beautiful photo of Lamont's family on his site tonight and is calling for Democratic party retribution for Lieberman's defection to the I column.

Joe Lieberman, longtime centrist Democrat and Senate fixture, lost. Ned Lamont a political neophyte who made his millions in the cable TV business was victorious. As he made his victory speech, Lamont was surrounded by less than attractive white limousine liberal activists, as well as poverty pimps Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton (interesting to note that despite for the Reverends' support of Lamont, Lieberman still took the bulk of the African American vote).

Undaunted, and with the knowledge he would most likely beat Lamont as an independent in the November election, Lieberman announced his intentions to run as a non-partisan and will file petitions Wednesday to get on the ballot.

In good news, cop slapping Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney lost her primary race as well.


Blogger Walter Moore said:

The Twenty-First Century may be the end of the dominance of the Democratic and Republican parties. The trend in California is towards "decline to state." Maybe someone will push beyond the Ross Perot and Ralph Nader stage in the next 10 years.... But I won't hold my breath.

August 08, 2006 9:27 PM  

Blogger Joseph Mailander said:

You are both suffering inordinate myopia. Americans are tired of dying for causes they don't even understand. Michael, with all due respect, in two years of blogging you have said almost nothing about why Americans are dying abroad. No, not you neither, Walter. What is emerging right now is a party reinventing itself by means of the understanding that the war in Iraq has been a tragic, arrogant error of a few jerks who hijacked your Republican party for their own purposes, not for yours. You should try to deal with this reality, and take your party back---rather than speculate about what might be happening in the other party.

August 08, 2006 10:07 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Only in flatfooted, lacking-all-nuance bloggerland could Joe Lieberman be described as "otherwise liberal." Give me a fucking break.

August 08, 2006 10:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

August 08, 2006 10:10 PM,

You know?!?!!?

But this is what happens in a country that allows to polar opposites like Lieberman and McKinney to share the same political party. Call me whatever pejorative you like, but the notion of a two-party system in such a populous country (not to mention the world's most powerful country) is simply ridiculous.

I look forward to the day when the Democratic party splinters into separata centrist and socialist entities, and the GOP replicates it with a corporate, Christian conservative, and libertarian branches. Then we won't get shit done unless we form coalitions and learn to compromise. Can you imagine?

More likely, however, is that I will raise a couple million bucks, serve three terms as a member of the City Council, then watch as me and my staff fatten like cattle, a by-product of all the back-scratching those developers who will be ever so grateful that we approved ALL of their plans...

August 08, 2006 10:31 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Tonight Connecticut proved that being an incumbent does not mean that you get to waltz right back into your seat. I've been watching this blog for months - and everyone is always talking about "throwing the (local) bums out." How is this any different? This was CT's chance to show that they are not happy with their incumbent and they made it known at the polls. If only LA voters were as passionate about a candidate or cause - elections would be more exciting. Did you see the voter turnout numbers? It looks like they set the record for the highest primary voter turnout ever. Connecticut voters really cared about this race. And then they took the first set to throw the bum out.

August 08, 2006 10:35 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Not that silver spoon Lamont is much better, but I'm glad Lieberman lost the primary. His self righteousness is nauseating. He cheerleads for Bush's quagmire and tries to make it sound virtuous. He should have had the guts to leave his then cushy Senate seat when he ran as Gore's veep in 2000. Now he proclaims for the sake of "our state, our country and my party" he'll run as an independent. Gimme me a break Joe -- you mean for the sake of your own career and ego.

No doubt he'll try to spin and pick off enough Connecticut independents and Republicans to slither his way into another term, but I hope they're not fooled. Lieberman gave a big kiss off to grass roots conservatives and ordinary Americans when he voted for the Senate amnesty bill for illegal aliens (S.2611). He supports open borders and does NOT deserve to be re-elected.

August 08, 2006 10:58 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Q: What is the true meaning of forgiveness? When I say, "I forgive," what am I saying?

A: If you ever had your feelings hurt and you forgave the person for it, and, inside of you, you allowed them the chance to hurt your feelings again, then you really did forgive them.

You entered into real, true forgiveness because you allowed them the opportunity to come back to you again. That's forgiveness. But if you remember who they were and what they said and what they did and the time they did it, and if you say you forgave them, you didn't.

We don't really forgive when we still have the feeling of the memory of the hurt.

August 08, 2006 11:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

“And if your friend does evil to you, say to him, ''I forgive you for what you did to me, but how can I forgive you for what you did to yourself?''”Friedrich Nietzsche

The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong. ~Mahatma Gandhi

Always forgive your enemies - nothing annoys them so much. ~Oscar Wilde

August 08, 2006 11:40 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

August 08, 2006 10:35 PM,

Although nowhere near the turnout percentages seen in CT today, LA voters enthusiastically threw out their bum Mayor in 2005.

Also, in CD14, voters enthusiastically denied a long-time bum the opportunity to reclaim a seat that he was dumped from two years before.

August 08, 2006 11:41 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Lieberman is no moderate.

He was for intervention in the Schiavo affair, is unapologetically pro-torture, and stood with Bill Bennett and the 700 Club in the culture wars against music and television that offended more delicate sensibilities. There's also Alito, killing HillaryCare in 94 (a failure which arguably gave us the GOP congress in the first place), being anti-affirmative action, the major co-sponsor of faith-based initiatives, and he campaigned against Kerry in Florida in 2004, saying Bush was "good for Israel."

He is a fundamentalist social conservative who happens to not be completely insane on environmental issues. He also does not have a single principle on which he can't be bought.

Ever since Gore picked him in 2000, he somehow has thought it was OK for him to run against the Democratic Party's overreaches of the 1960s (of which there were many), while ignoring the contemporary problems of the quite authoritarian wing of the national GOP. Basically, he stopped observing reality about a decade ago, and rightfully lost.

Plus, Joe's 2000 GOP opponent got 35% against him, and the guy received a 37 year prison for child molestation shortly thereafter. If Lieberman thinks he can count on GOP votes as a third-party candidate, he's nuts.

Time to go, Joe.

August 09, 2006 12:08 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Can this loss be construed as the "Mel Gibson Effect"?

Who's next? Antonio?

August 09, 2006 2:06 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Yeah, Antonio is next if this is open season on Jewish war hawk politicians. What a disgrace Antonio has become. His exact quote at hte museum of tolerance, "What kind of people would bomb women and children?" -- the same people who's ass you are kissing and who are sticking it up your ass - intolerant jews. Then he tries to play off this blunder as a staff scheduling error when the Muslims call him on the carpet. In his early years of activism, like every other Chicano activists, Antonio was sympathetic to the Palestinian cause because it mirrored the Chicano plight in the U.S.. - victims of an occupying force. But a Jewish consultant and a couple of jewish benefactors and walla - you got jew boy Tony's ass for the taking. Maybe he should become a Jew permanently, he's already mastered the hypocrisy, now he just needs to get snipped.

August 09, 2006 8:30 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey Walter...what political experience did you have when you ran for Mayor?

And LaMont actually DOES have some political experience...

August 09, 2006 9:10 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey Walter...what political experience did you have when you ran for Mayor?

And LaMont actually DOES have some political experience...

August 09, 2006 9:10 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

August 09, 2006 9:10 AM,

Don't ask him hurtful questions, or he'll recomend your post for deletion.

August 09, 2006 9:19 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I agree it's time for Joe to go!

Although he's hard to classify at times and is not as liberal as other Dems, Lieberman is no real friend of conservatives -- as evidenced by his 17% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union. He also voted in favor of the recent massive amnesty proposal for illegal aliens. And in terms of affirmative action, he boasted in 2000 that: "I have supported affirmative action, I do support affirmative action, and I will support affirmative action because history and current reality make it necessary."

August 09, 2006 9:23 AM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

To Joseph Mailander:

You're right. This is not about third parties. This is a referendum on the war, and the Democrats in Connecticut have said, simply, "no more war." Point taken.

Plus, as you know from our interview, I believe we should withdraw our troops immediately. We do not have a strategic interest in giving the middle east a "democracy makeover." If the people living there want it, they can fight and die for it, the way our founding fathers did. If they do not want it bad enough to do so, well, how can it be more important to us than to them?

We've established there are no WMD, Saddam is out of power, let's declare victory and get our brave soldiers out of harm's way.

To 9:10:
I had no prior experience running for or holding public office -- which, frankly, I think is a "plus" given the results we get from career politicians. I do, however, have relevant education and experience, as detailed at my website (MooreIsBetter.com).

August 09, 2006 9:28 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Now Walter:
You say that you want to end pay-to-play and that this time you WILL be asking for money for your next campaign.

Do you REALLY think that you'll be getting anything close to the MILLIONS of dollars needed for advertisement in LA?

You're a washed-up lawyer, not a politician. And please explain what relevant experience you have for running a city of 3 million people?

August 09, 2006 9:36 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Housing Bond and Term Limits Extension [SHAM] Measures Assigned Letters

The LA City Council approved the letter designations for the above measures that will appear Nov. 7:

PROPOSITION H is the flawed billion dollar bond measure for "afforable housing" (i.e., developer payoffs). This would force the average property owner to pay an additional $14.46 annually per each $100,000 of assessed value.

PROPOSITION R is the heinous measure that will ask voters to reward the incompetence and arrogance of the current LA City Council by extending their term limits.


August 09, 2006 9:51 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Mayor Sam, while we are on the topic of ethics, how much is your site worth? the reason is ask is that you have turned it over to Wacko Walter Moore so he can run his campaign from it. Which I would think would be considered a political contribution. has this been reported? I noticed that you did not do the same for other candidates you were supporting in other races. Jim Alger is one that comes to mind. he answered some of the postings occasionally but never really blogged here. so why the preferential treatment of Wacko? why have you given your blog over to him entirely so he can use it to campaign from? has this been reported? what is the city contribution limit-- $500 I think? does anyone know someone who can tell us what the law says about this?

August 09, 2006 10:07 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What government body should we report this blog as a political contribution to Walto's campaign?

August 09, 2006 10:12 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

There is only ONE issue in the upcoming local and national elections...and it's NOT Iraq!

The ONLY issue is illegal immigration and enforcement of the existing laws!

If there is any honest, decent, viable candidate who will enforce our existing immigration laws, build a fence, and run on an anti-illegal immigrant platform...he or she will win in a nanosecond!

August 09, 2006 10:46 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Voters elect representatives to reflect their views, not the representatives own views. Leiberman was a good and obvious example of someone with selfish motives. It is a "trend" that can be seen in many places. And, apparently voters are tired of it.
Here in LA, Mayor Villaraigosa is another example of self-interest before party. Instead of leading the Democratic party and endorsing Angelides, he is acting as Schwarzenegger's "poodle" at every opportunity.
How long before people start thinking of Villaraigosa as the "Latino Leiberman?"

August 09, 2006 11:05 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Wacko Walter pontificating on Mayor Sam is no different than when Ronnie Reagan did his radio commentaries after he lost the 76 presidential race, before he ran for president in 80. Everyone said that Ronnie had no chance, that he was a washed up actor, and look what happened.

Don't be so stupid as to count Wacko out. Who would have thought that Dick Riordan would have become Mayor?

August 09, 2006 11:58 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

You are wrong that Lieberman took the majority of Black votes. Exit polls have Lamont winning the Black vote 55 to 41.

August 09, 2006 1:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Or 11:58, WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT that Antonio Villaraigosa would become a mini-Riordan?

It was shocking that Riordan got elected many years ago and then again, but it was easy to believe since he ran on the idea of only being paid a dollar a year instead of the full salary. As IF that measly $200K was the least bit important. But it was more shocking to have Villaraigosa model his administration after the dysfunctional Riordan administration.

August 10, 2006 12:01 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home