Digby: Why a "center-left" "moderate" is bad for the Democrats

[BurtWorm]

In response to Jonathan Chait's defense of Lieberman and railing against liberal bloggers, Digby replies:

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_07_01_digbysblog_archive.html#115247725985472800

It's the only way to go about building a majority that isn't a carbon copy of the other party. Liberals have been turned into pariahs not just in the country, but among certain center-left (I would argue center-right) politicians who have allowed the party to be unnecessarily dragged to the right out of a failed experiment in third-way politics while the Republicans were playing brute partisan politics. The proof is in the pudding. We are in the minority and have been for quite some time now. And this polarized 50/50 nation always seems to just tilt enough to the right that we get screwed. "Centrists" like Lieberman are the dupes who make that possible.


The rank and file accept that the Democratic coalition is going to have to include conservatives from red states and nobody is arguing that they are not allowed to have latitude in their voting patterns and even in their rhetoric. They represent conservative people. That's democracy at work. But I don't see Mary Landrieu or Blanche Lincoln or Ben Nelson writing op-eds in the Wall Street Journal telling dissenters that we are undermining national security by criticizing the war. Even they don't do that, and they could probably benefit sometimes from triangulating against the liberals. (And we'd grit our teeth and bear it, out of pragmatism.)

But why the fuck should we buckle under to a nationally known Blue State Democrat who votes for conservative right wing judges, supports the war, lectures about morals, compromises on basic human decency for rape victims and uses liberals as his favorite whipping boys and girls? Is it so surprising that the liberals of Connecticut have finally reached their limits?

The real joke in all this is the fact that I don't think anybody really thought that Lamont had a chance in the beginning and were just hoping to put some pressure on Lieberman to stop kissing Bush on the lips.

[Totally Committed]

1. I love Digby...

and this blog is a classic example of WHY.

TC

[redqueen]

2. Beauty!

:)

Thanks for sharing this!

[Warpy]

3. Digby is SO on target about this

Lieberman has always been sort of OK on a lot of issues, but he's been so seriously wrong on so many issues within the last four years that it's become obvious to nearly everyone that his time is now up. Either they'll choose a real GOPling or they want a change.

That Lieberman seems unable to shed his sense of entitlement to the job betrays his real conservatism, something that came out in full force in his debate against Lamont.

It's really too bad in many ways. Lieberman was so slightly right of center that he'd been quite tolerable for many years. Now that he finds himself in that conservative hole, he just can't stop digging.

[grasswire]

4. All DU-ers should read the Politics of Definition

....over at The American Prospect. It's a four-part paper that will knock your socks off, explain why Dems are perceived as without a message, and set out a plan for future strategy. I can't recommend it highly enough.

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11435

[BurtWorm]

6. Thanks for that.

I've got to print it all out and read it.
:toast:

[MisterP]

5. but doesn't he remember our ringing victory in 2002 due to the War vote

and the 2004 Southern success of those "moderates" we just needed to have???!!!

[Mr_Spock]

7. I agree

Lieberman really has to go.

[Stinky The Clown]

8. Away the triangulators .... the death of the left

PLEASE let some liberals stand up and just plain BE LIBERAL.

[mhatrw]

9. I can digby it. n/t

[BurtWorm]

10. Hee hee!

;)

[burythehatchet]

11. BA-DA-BING

[in_cog_ni_to]

12. NICE....couldn't have said it better myself!

:thumbsup: