Thursday, July 20, 2006

Article in Roll Call

Mort Kondracke penned an article in today's Roll Call, of which he is executive editor, on the Connecticut Senate race. Here are some excerpts:

Lieberman, one of the last “liberal hawks” in the Democratic Party and a leader in efforts to find bipartisan solutions to America’s problems, is being targeted for defeat by an emergent new left that’s using savage, Internet-based attacks to push moderation out of politics.

If former Greenwich Selectman Ned Lamont beats Lieberman in the Democratic primary, it will represent a signal victory...for vicious name-calling as a political tactic...

Lieberman is a target primarily because he supports the Iraq war, but also because he rejects Bush-hatred and often cooperates with Republicans, even though he votes with his party 80 percent of the time...

To his credit, Lamont himself is not stooping as low as his supporters are, though he is distorting Lieberman’s record on the environment, energy and Social Security...

Lieberman is a rare remaining vestige of the assertive Democratic foreign policy typified by Presidents Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and John Kennedy. Though he’s accused of being Bush’s cheerleader on Iraq, Lieberman first called for toppling Saddam Hussein in 1993, before Bush was even governor of Texas.

Lieberman surely is out of his party’s force-averse post-Vietnam mainstream on foreign policy. But the party desperately needs his voice, and American politics also needs his willingness to cooperate with his political adversaries and to act independently.

“Hatred divides the country and blinds us to the fact that we are all in this together, particularly when it comes to national security,” Lieberman said. “You can have disagreement, but once you think the other side is evil — and there is a group in each party that thinks the other side is evil — we have a problem. The hatred of Bush among some Democrats mirrors the hatred of Bill Clinton among some Republicans in the 1990s. It’s destructive.”

And it’s now up to Connecticut voters to decide whether hatred-politics will prevail.

Kondracke is a well-known critic of the more intractable liberal elements of the Democratic Party, but he is certainly no conservative - the man had the honor of being on Richard Nixon's "Enemies List" along with Ted Kennedy, Walter Mondale, and Paul Newman.

It does bring up a pretty good point about the way this race will be perceived nationally. In the sheltered world of the blogosphere, it often seems as if a liberal groundswell is underway across the country. But the truth is that the blogosphere is about reinforcing the opinions that people already have, not about changing people's minds. The extremes on both sides dump on anyone who disagrees with them on a key issue, throwing red meat to keep their readers happy, but also making the moderates on both sides feel increasingly resentful.

They use the self-reinforcing posts on DailyKos as evidence of this supposed liberal groundswell, implicitly dismissing those who don't hold their views as part of a Washington insider, special interest-powered enclave - despite the fact that probably 75% of the country doesn't hold their views. They often use the term "people power" to describe their movement, and even to criticize the possibility of a independent bid by Lieberman - despite the fact that probably ten times as many voters (who are indeed people) will show up in November than will show up for the Democratic primary. In this context, the only "people power" that matters is the power of people who agree with them.

Kondracke is right on one major point - the Democrats are in a lot of trouble if what happens to Lieberman starts happening to other moderate Democrats. Liberals may well be on the ascendant, but they can't truly help the Democrats take back Washington unless they learn to ally themselves with moderates in the party, or at least learn to not hurl insults at them.

And yes, that even applies to Democrats who break with and criticize other Democrats on some key issues, because a party that refuses to tolerate dissent within its ranks risks exile to the political wilderness.


Note: At some point in the next day, I'll be doing a post which is critical of the Lieberman campaign. Try not to look too shocked!

19 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good catch.

Both articles are good analyses. The Democrats need to maintain their big tent and get those swing voters to win.

Now let's see how long it takes for liebermanforlieberman to get off topic.

7/20/2006 11:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm assuming that "good catch" was aimed at seedfreak, and I agree :).

7/20/2006 11:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This doesn't say anything about how this race will be seen nationally. Most people don't have subscriptions to Roll Call. If you want to see how it will play nationally, check out the AP (showing how it is playing in Wyoming):

Lieberman Losing Ground in Senate Race
HAMDEN, Conn. - Sen. Joe Lieberman, under fire from activists in his own party, has lost ground to his challenger and is narrowly trailing him for the first time in their race for the Democratic nomination, a new poll released Thursday shows.

Businessman Ned Lamont had support from 51 percent and Lieberman from 47 percent of likely Democratic voters in the latest Quinnipiac University poll _ a slight Lamont lead given the survey's sampling error margin of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Lieberman had led in a Quinnipiac poll last month, 55 percent to 40 percent.

"This is a surge for Lamont," said Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz. "It's rare to see such a big change in a race."


It might be nice that the Beltway crowd still like Joe, the problem is Connecticut voters.

7/20/2006 12:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You forgot to mention that the poll also has Lamont losing to Lieberman by a nearly 2-1 in a general election campaign. Or do only those Connecticut voters who hate Lieberman count?

Oh, and LieberDem - we're not surprised that you are willing to criticize the Lieberman campaign. You see, those of us who don't reflexively hate other Democrats are willing to see both sides of an issue. So it might not make sense to the Lieberhaters, but it makes sense to us!

7/20/2006 12:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

FWIW, while the poll is certainly troublesome if you are a Lieberman supporter (which I am although I'm not a Connecticut voter) it's probably best to wait until other polls come in although I suspect the news will not be good for us.

Lieberman unfortunately took the Dukakis route of not responding to the lies and smears of his opponent because he assumed that people would have sense enough not to fall for it. Unfortunately, that has never been the case.

7/20/2006 12:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

damn straight, l4l

7/20/2006 12:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reflexive hate...that's all you Lieberhaters have to offer.

Thank god you don't speak for the real Democrats.

7/20/2006 12:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually, despite all the lies and distortions of the Lieberhaters, he still leads Ned 2-1 among Connecticut voters.

Despite the name-calling and negativity of the Lamontista bloggers, which Kondracke is not alone in noticing, Lieberman still trounces Lamont among the people of CT.

Who woulda thunk?

7/20/2006 12:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'll agree that the Lamontistas make some cute videos, although my personal favorite commercials of this cycle are the "Big Guy" series being run by Mark Taylor in GA-Gov.

7/20/2006 1:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

wow - that is so sad..

7/20/2006 1:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the primary reason Joe is facing a tough challenge is because his supporters are reasonable, thoughtful and decent.
in short: too nice.
if they'd be as vicious, nasty, and shallow as Kos & kin, Lieberman wouldn't have to respond to the crazies.

7/20/2006 2:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

anon: that's no excuse. joe's supporters may be decent - but he has just shown is unworthy of their support. again.

7/20/2006 2:16 PM  
Blogger Mike M. said...

"And yes, that even applies to Democrats who break with and criticize other Democrats on some key issues, because a party that refuses to tolerate dissent within its ranks risks exile to the political wilderness."

So... "moderate Dems" can break with and criticize the liberals but the liberals can't break with or criticize the moderates?

7/20/2006 2:30 PM  
Blogger Mike M. said...

Oh, and LiebermanforLieberman, before this gets out of control: Halliburton is not the 3rd biggest position in Lieberman's portfolio. It is the third largest position in a mutual fund that is in Lieberman's portfolio. I don't think it was fair for Lieberman to pick on Lamont's stock holdings, but let's be fair about it on our end.

7/20/2006 2:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

seedfreek: why all the anger?

7/20/2006 2:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Biden is coming back to campaign for him. Or did that fact escape you in your search for lies?

7/20/2006 3:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why stop with Kondracke as an expert on Liberal Democrat policies,just go directly to Karl Rove or Fox. News

7/21/2006 10:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

" because a party that refuses to tolerate dissent within its ranks risks exile to the political wilderness."

Best argument against this claim; GOP

They have been enforcing Stalinist discipline for decades now and they control all 3 branches of govt. It is unthinkable that the GOP would tolerate a conservative bashing senator from Oklahoma. They can't even tolerate a moderate senator from Rhode Island, a true blue state.

And Morton Kondracke complaining about loss of civility is funny. He works for FOX "news", home to Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, various other uncivil screaming heads.

7/22/2006 6:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/17/131952/052

The Lamont supporter above lambastes Kondracke for appearing on Fox. However, he neglects to mention that the Leftist Blogosphere is full of Left Wing Rush Limbaughs and leftist Joe McCarthys. The Right Wing of the Republican Party, repugnant as it is, unfortunately does not have a monopoly on demagoguery and hatemongering. Want to see some more examples of Israel bashing from Kossacks? How about these?

Perhaps with these kinds of opinions-- (42+ / 0-)

--"It's clear that in the Middle East, no one is sick of the fighting"--it's best that Kos doesn't post on the Middle East. These kinds of tired (and obviously false) "reasons" obscure the truth of why the Middle East is perpetually aflame. (My note: The author of this comment apparently believes that these are not the "real" reasons that Kos refuses to post on Israel.)

Perhaps you should pay more attention to resources and geopolitical strategy than foolish, nearly racist (are people of Middle Eastern origins--Muslim, Jew, or Christian--genetically programmed with "war love"?) throwaway statements that do nothing but enable American detachment from a situation our government has much to do with. It's far more complicated than that.

I respect many of Kos's opinions on domestic realpolitik, but clearly, in international policy he's being wise by staying mum. (My note: The Blogger assumes that Kos is staying "mum" so as not to offend Jews.)

By the way, can anyone name the one nation in the world whose foreign policy is absolutely off-limits for rational discussion (let alone criticism) in the US? One hint: it's not the US. (My note: The country is, of course, Israel. Israel, our traditional ally, need not expect any support from this blogger or the 42 Kossacks who endorsed his sentiments.)

Okay, I've said my piece. Let the character assassination begin! (The Blogger need not have worried. Many of the succeeding Bloggers agreed and nobody took him to task.)

by Mr Clue on Mon Jul 17, 2006 at 11:12:09 AM PDT

[ Parent ]



KOS fiddles while Beirut Burns (0 / 0)
"...troubling that someone like Kos, whom I respect immensely, would just throw off a bunch of blatantly false, but oft repeated trivialities like, "they have centuries of grudges to resolve"..." SO "I won't write about Israel..." THUS.

KOS is not an "independent", he's a DEMOCRAT. This is not an independent NETROOTS BBS ~ this is a Democratic Party NETROOTS BBS.

Most American Jews vote Democrat; ie., few people here, or elected Democratic political leaders in the American government will address this issue with anything like reason : and they are likely to put forth excuses similar to KOS to explain their failure to acknowledge "The Jewish Problem". (My note: Note the ominous use of the phrase "Jewish Problem.")

ISRAEL = a Theocracy; Zionism = Racisim, etc... these realities are among the most divisive in American culture, politics. i would rank it up there with Abortion/Sexual Rights and Racism/Immigration Rights.

The Jewish Problem is therefore a godsend for BushCo, Rove et al : the saddest thing, perhaps ~ is that few Democrats (KOS included) apparently have even now yet to see that they have just been finessed, entirely blindsided by The Jewish Problem ~ and have once again been DIVIDED and CONQUERED with but a whimper of protest from the few courageous, independent progressives (like you) WHO KNOW BETTER :-/

nous sommes celui qui nous feignons pour etre

by MonsieurGonzo on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 09:25:20 AM PDT

[ Parent ]

250 million plus 100 million < 2.5 billion (1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:vets74
follow the money

our government wants israel killing arabs with our weapons

You will lie to your grandchildren when they ask what you did to prevent climate change.

by Peter Pan on Mon Jul 17, 2006 at 09:32:44 PM PDT

[ Parent ]


Not all Kossacks express such an extreme anti-Isreali bias. However, these sentiments are very common. Note the assumption of the posters that Markos Moulitas Zuniga, or Kos, understands the nature of the "Jewish Problem," but does not lay out the "facts," because he does not want to alienate Jewish Democratis and the "Jewish Lobby." The use of the phrase "Jewish Problem" is rather troubling to me. Troubling to anybody else? Sometimes the Kossacks, the most ardent bastion of support for Lamont, remind me of the right wing conspiracists of my youth. These were the John Birchers and Goldwaterites who believed that every problem was the making of the "Jewish moneychangers" in New York. As I say, too bad that Jewish voters and pro-Israel Democrats in Connecticut aren't reading the views of some of Lamonts most rabid backers. If you look through the threads on DAILY KOS, you will see this extremism is not limited to Israel and the present conflict raging in Palestine and the Levant that pits Israel against Hizbollah and HAMAS, two terrorist organizations.

7/23/2006 8:01 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home