There is an important and larger point here, but first: why are you so surprised?

As for the notion that it is inconceivable that Lieberman can be permitted to have Democratic privileges wen he's hitting Obama so hard: cmon, Obama has been at the head of his party for just a few days, and the strategy for how to relate to Congress is not yet revealed, if even formulated. He should be smacked down in time, not because he is supporting John MacCain (politics ain't beanbag), but because he's not doing anything good for the issues that matter to Democrats. He's not blue-dog Democrat, he is a blue-and-white flag Democrat, with a very narrow worldview and little to say about the things that matter to most Democrats.

But the larger point here is to see if Obama's campaign comes to mean much more than just one traditional party taking power over another. What if the Hagels, Liebermans, and other independent-minded senators and reps can actually remain that way without taking loyalty oaths to their parties? Look at gridlock that is coming from doing what your President says (the global warming bill, new GI bill, etc). We need more than 50% plus one vote to fix the problems Obama is talking about, and the possibilities for real change mulitply when doctrinally narrow parties DO NOT control all of our elected officials behavior. I don't see 30 more seats in the House making possible this kind of change. It is only by loosening the strict Democratic control to come (with Congress and the Executive very visibly in power) that new coalitions can be built and big things accomplished. First step, of course, is to win, and win big. But when, I hope, Obama does, the campaign must end and real governing begin. And I think that independent-minded Congressmen and women will be a big part of it.

Posted at June 10, 2008 4:03 PM in response to Lieberman Camp To Obama: Back Off

There is an important and larger point here, but first: why are you so surprised?

As for the notion that it is inconceivable that Lieberman can be permitted to have Democratic privileges wen he's hitting Obama so hard: cmon, Obama has been at the head of his party for just a few days, and the strategy for how to relate to Congress is not yet revealed, if even formulated. He should be smacked down in time, not because he is supporting John MacCain (politics ain't beanbag), but because he's not doing anything good for the issues that matter to Democrats. He's not blue-dog Democrat, he is a blue-and-white flag Democrat, with a very narrow worldview and little to say about the things that matter to most Democrats.

But the larger point here is to see if Obama's campaign comes to mean much more than just one traditional party taking power over another. What if the Hagels, Liebermans, and other independent-minded senators and reps can actually remain that way without taking loyalty oaths to their parties? Look at gridlock that is coming from doing what your President says (the global warming bill, new GI bill, etc). We need more than 50% plus one vote to fix the problems Obama is talking about, and the possibilities for real change mulitply when doctrinally narrow parties control all of our elected officials behavior. I don't see 30 more seats in the House making possible this kind of change. It is only by loosening the strict Democratic control to come (with Congress and the Executive very visibly in power) that new coalitions can be built and big things accomplished. First step, of course, is to win, and win big. But when, I hope, Obama does, the campaign must end and real governing begin. And I think that independent-minded Congressmen and women will be a big part of it.

Posted at June 10, 2008 4:01 PM in response to Lieberman Camp To Obama: Back Off

And in other news, Hilary's chief fundraiser says unless Obama chooses her for point guard in his pickup game of hoops, he can't win.

Posted at May 23, 2008 2:40 PM in response to Hillary's Top Fundraising Official Says There's "Risk" Of Obama Loss If She Isn't Invited To Be Veep

Pretty pathetic, these trial balloons and bum rush attempts to hijack the agenda. My only question is whether the Clintons put this guy up to this empty threat or is he just reflecting the despair of a whole lot of moneyed interests that are seeing the candidate that they bought go off into oblivion.

Posted at May 23, 2008 2:36 PM in response to Hillary's Top Fundraising Official Says There's "Risk" Of Obama Loss If She Isn't Invited To Be Veep

Actually, I think it is more accurate to say that rank and file Democrats have concluded that, despite the hit job on Wilson through Plame ordered by Cheney and others, they are a test case that suffering is not ennobling--if you love your reflection more than your country. Their behavior since has shown them to be limelight-loving partisan hacks who have little of substance to say about the war and a great deal to say about themselves. Remember how Wilson jumped onto Kerry's campaign at the time when he was a key player in the Bush administration subverting our government. Instead, he gave the White House cover to call it all a partisan attack. I think the cover picture on Vanity Fair that appeared a few months later said it all....their incessant pursuit of celebrity says a lot about their sense of national service. Politics is show business for ugly people, and they are not quite pretty enough for Hollywood.

Posted at May 9, 2008 4:28 PM in response to New Hillary Ad Stars Joe Wilson And Valerie Plame

Citoyene92,

Actually, that telemarketer has a Raleigh call center too, according to the web site. I really doubt Lamont works there, but it is worth asking.

Posted at April 30, 2008 5:39 PM in response to Group Missed Oregon Primary Deadline, Too

Why does Josh Marshall's TPM post linked with this one say that on the face of it the robocalls were just a screwup? No callerID and the use of a phony-named, clearly African American man's voice on the call, and the lack of any reference to the general election? What does that have to do with women's voter registration? The history of investigations and reprimands in states all across the country? The clear and deep connection to Maggie Williams and other staffers from Hillaryland and Billostan? Those robocalls look a lot like a felony from here, not a mistake, and part of a clear pattern.

Posted at April 30, 2008 5:34 PM in response to Group Missed Oregon Primary Deadline, Too