Jane!
Fitz!
Jeebus!

JANE!!

Thank God Joe is doing this for the good of the Democratic Party!!

Long may he run!

Please remind us of ways to communicate with the DSCC about this.

I just returned my recent DSCC request for funds with notes on their short list of those they will support: Where’s Lamont? Where’s Tester?

are they saying that it’s possible that, even though there may be a record dem turnout, each dem’s vote may only count as half of a vote since both lieberloser and lamont are running? and that’ll make it exciting?

twolf1 –

No, they are trying to counter the rather obvious inference that Joe Lieberman running as the de facto Republican is most likely to increase the Republican vote thereby sinking the chances of three key congressional Democratic challengers, which in turn sinks the chances of regaining the house.

Hence, I assume, the ostrich.

PS Love that “1″

Returning to the theme running through lots of recent threads . . .

And we’re paying these folks for this kind of thinking?

It sounds like the baseball coach who says “Yeah, I really like winning by just one run in the last inning, because it makes my team stronger.”

Sorry - even if you grant that the dems will turn out because the election is close, Joe’s candidacy will bring out the republicans, too, and that’s not a good thing if I’m running for the House down the ticket on the Democratic side.

Sounds like this would be a good email to forward to the CT House candidates, and see what they think of it. They might have a few choice words for the DCCC . . . except that if they win, they have to play with them. Talk about screwed! I guess that just leaves plain folks like us.

the DCCC doesnt seem to realize that SoreLoserman is running in an alliance with the GOP Congressional candidates against the Democrats…

peterr,

I remember mocking my cousin who (10 years younger than me) BOMBED the PSAT and afterwards said of his dismal score :

“That’s just where I was planning to be for my push on the SAT.”

No joke. Can’t make that shit up.

Punchline — Today that fellow works for the FBI.

Love the photo!

Just heard something appropos on TV.

“It’s not our job to make good TV, it’s our job to play a good game of poker.”

I think it was Phil Ivey who said it on Celebrity Poker. (Mr Bionic is channelling surfing so it’s lucky I heard a whole sentence.)

Does the DCCC consider this a spectator sport or a fight the Democratic Party must win?

The f**kheads are owned, lock stock and barrel, by A*PAC and various corporate interests — and they were bought cheap, too. I’m also thinking some creative blackmail may be keeping some of them, and the CM, in line. The next few years, especially if we make real gains in November, are going to be one hell of a fight.

I’d like to say something about last night.

I’ve been thinking about it a lot, and I’m actually beginning to consider it a good portent, believe it or not. We are an incredibly diverse group of people, and not just geographically: we’re all ethnic groups, all levels of education, all kinds of work experience. And when you think about it, that also means a bundle of different ways of expressing things, and dealing with conflict or difficult situations.

I understand totally where Pach is coming from: my father was an attorney back when that meant respecting the law, and he was Jesuit-educated and just about worshipped logic, reasons, fact. And since he didn’t have sons, he taught me to debate — our dinner-table conversation was Brown v. the Board, or abortion, and as soon as I really got going, he’d make me switch sides. So back when I had my brains, I could debate, argue or discuss with the best of them.

However, that didn’t necessarily win me big points when I grew up, because emotion, any emotion, will trump logic every time. Another lesson my father taught me, that’s taken me a lifetime to learn, is that you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar: and much as I dislike it, this is what we need with the Wal-Mart voters, and also country club Repubs, Independents and assorted recalcitrant Dems. And also, when things get intense, with each other.

So we have got to find ways of working together on this: not everyone has Ghostman’s wisdom, dedication and thick hide, and as the pressure builds towards Election Day, I think it’s really important that we, all of us, create a place where it’s safe for the strong-speakers to be so, and for those who don’t work that way to somehow still feel safe enough to add their piece. And I do not think this is merely the moderators’ responsibility: it’s all of ours.

Sermon over (stumbling down off soap-box)

That’s just stunning. I can’t believe anyone would call the Lamont-Lieberman race “bland.”

The DCCC called me up asking for money.

They caught me at a very bad time. I had just been reading blogs.

I let the nice lady go through her spiel, and then told her they and the DSCC would not get a friggin’ dime from me until Holy Joe “Senator-for-Life” Lieberman was stripped of his committee assignments - for undermining his own party, accepting aid and comfort and endorsements from Repugs, and for sabotaging, by soliciting Republican votes for his hypocritical and selfish “independent” campaign, the chances of three important Connecticut congressional candidates in his own state.

“The Democratic leadership - and yes, that includes your organization - has to call this turncoat to account for siding with the enemy against his own party. At least Ted Kennedy has stepped up to the plate and defended Ned Lamont,” I said.

She had no response, except to stammer that Kennedy could speak out the way he did because he wasn’t in danger of losing his own seat. I went ballistic.

“In other words, we can only expect Democrats to behave like leaders when the coast is clear? Wonderful. That’s precisely why I’m not going to donate to you, or the DSCC, or the DNC. I’ll research races online and give my money directly to candidates who actually behave like Democrats instead of rewarding so-called loyal party members who support Holy Joe by their silence, or who play it safe when they should be speaking out against the criminal syndicate that currently runs our government.”

She said that she “understood my frustration,” and that sentiment had been echoed by others.

“Good. Tell your supervisors that they don’t hold all the cards anymore, and the party leadership will be held to account by people like me from now on unless they start acting like Democrats - and punishing those like Lieberman who don’t,” I said. “We don’t need the help of gutless middlemen who decide from on high who passes muster and who doesn’t, or who gets funded and who doesn’t, because progressives can now go online to the blogs and research and donate to candidates who will really represent the people. Lamont was just the beginning, and if the party brass doesn’t get behind him and throw Joe and other turncoats like him overboard, you will never get another dime from me.”

“But thank you for taking the time to call,” I added, and hung up.

(Taken from my original post on the subject at DailyKos.)

Dana Milbank says “there is some logic to what [Bush] is saying” about Iraq.

Tool.

Shorter DCCC:

“Calm down honey! We are smart, and you are just a stupid voter. We hate having to even talk to you people, and we prefer taking money from corporations, but we can’t just come out and tell you that, or you might go out and join another party. Now be a good girl and send us a check, and sit down and shut up!”

(N.B. yes *ilson I know corporations have to funnel their money through a PAC! hehe)

Yes,

A Lamont/Lieberman/Gambler race provides a better shot of pickups than a Lamont/Gambler head to head matchup.

That the Democratic messaging and overall chances are being helped by Joe’s fifth party candidacy?

Is that REALLY what they were trying to say?

Truly pathetic.

What happens if Lieberman wins and is then appointed Sec of Defence? Is the Govenor Republican or Democrat?

The primary reflected extraordinary, once in a generation Democratic activist turnout.

No way to repeat that just three months later. None. It’s a fantasy.

It seems more likely that Lieberman will prompt fierce, historic Republican turnout in November, lest Lamont squeak to victory. No, these voters won’t be supporting the Democratic congressional candidates challenging Republicans until recently thought vulnerable.

And if you look at this on a district by district basis, it appears Lamont’s victory has crossed three races off the DCCC’s list of 15 priority wins.

The netroots is just a bunch of suckers for the strategy and tactics of Karl Rove.

I really think the Democrats are going to prevail this year. It has nothing to do with the ‘our time has come’ bit. It’s that events are propelling the situation. I do think however, that Democrats need to unite around the Iraq issue and hammer it home.

snoboysdrift @ 18

What happens if Lieberman wins and is then appointed Sec of Defence? Is the Govenor Republican or Democrat?

Republican.

Actually, Kurt, I think the fact that anyone would not only refuse to donate but tie that non-action to the CT race rocked her back on her heels. She became a stammering, apologetic wreck. I actually felt sorry for her. After all, she was just a volunteer.

But I do hope she delivered my message to the appropriate parties (to coin a phrase).

dannyboy @ 12

From one preacher to another, well said.

neurophius @ 15

Dana Milbank says “there is some logic to what [Bush] is saying” about Iraq.

Oh, there is, as long as you don’t try to connect it to reality in any way.

That’s the definition of a “parallel” universe, isn’t it? The lines never cross?

Then again, the whole Joey-in-for-Rummy gambit might just be baseless rumor:

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/004787.html

Or was Joey the guy who turned it down?

Sharoney @ 14

Great call response! Polite in letting the spiel play out, and direct in responding to it!!!

About the only thing for the next person who gets that call to add would be to direct the caller to a couple of recent FDL threads for a bit more education.

neurophius @ 15

Dana Milbank says “there is some logic to what [Bush] is saying” about Iraq.

Tool.

There IS logic to what he’s saying. If chimpy’s assertion - that an Iranian state of Iraq is the unavoidable end result of withdrawal - is correct, we’re fucked. Because we certainly aren’t winning now, and it’s the only shot we have.

Of course, that’s why everybody said dont topple the regime. But Chimpy et al were too fucking determined to let reality get in the way. Now, it’s more of the same.

After the 2004 election, Joey Short Ride told Faux News that he would consider it, if the Preznit called on him to join the cabinet.

Since then, he’s pooh pooed the idea — kinda like his long lost new found criticism of the Preznit and Company.

Thank you, Peterr: coming from you, that’s high praise!

Sharoney @
14

The DCCC called me up asking for money. . . . Tell your supervisors that they don’t hold all the cards anymore, and the party leadership will be held to account by people like me from now on unless they start acting like Democrats - and punishing those like Lieberman who don’t,” I said. . . Lamont was just the beginning, and if the party brass doesn’t get behind him and throw Joe and other turncoats like him overboard, you will never get another dime from me.”

I’d love to see a darkblack (or monk) take-off on the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party — called the Mad Insiders’ Pity Party — staring the DSCC, the DCCC, and the DLC.

Sharoney @ 14

The DCCC called me up asking for money.

They caught me at a very bad time. I had just been reading blogs.

I let the nice lady go through her spiel, and then told her they and the DSCC would not get a friggin’ dime from me until Holy Joe “Senator-for-Life” Lieberman was stripped of his committee assignments - for undermining his own party, accepting aid and comfort and endorsements from Repugs, and for sabotaging, by soliciting Republican votes for his hypocritical and selfish “independent” campaign, the chances of three important Connecticut congressional candidates in his own state.

“The Democratic leadership - and yes, that includes your organization - has to call this turncoat to account for siding with the enemy against his own party. At least Ted Kennedy has stepped up to the plate and defended Ned Lamont,” I said.

She had no response, except to stammer that Kennedy could speak out the way he did because he wasn’t in danger of losing his own seat. I went ballistic.

“In other words, we can only expect Democrats to behave like leaders when the coast is clear? Wonderful. That’s precisely why I’m not going to donate to you, or the DSCC, or the DNC. I’ll research races online and give my money directly to candidates who actually behave like Democrats instead of rewarding so-called loyal party members who support Holy Joe by their silence, or who play it safe when they should be speaking out against the criminal syndicate that currently runs our government.”

She said that she “understood my frustration,” and that sentiment had been echoed by others.

“Good. Tell your supervisors that they don’t hold all the cards anymore, and the party leadership will be held to account by people like me from now on unless they start acting like Democrats - and punishing those like Lieberman who don’t,” I said. “We don’t need the help of gutless middlemen who decide from on high who passes muster and who doesn’t, or who gets funded and who doesn’t, because progressives can now go online to the blogs and research and donate to candidates who will really represent the people. Lamont was just the beginning, and if the party brass doesn’t get behind him and throw Joe and other turncoats like him overboard, you will never get another dime from me.”

“But thank you for taking the time to call,” I added, and hung up.

(Taken from my original post on the subject at DailyKos.)

Nice off-the-cuff rant! Damn. I simply can’t do that. I can only be forceful and biting with people who have been personally nasty to me…that or Republicans. ;)

I got a call from them last week and told them I was all tapped out presently having given every spare dollar to the Lamont campaign.

The guy on the other end chuckled and said he was from Massachusetts and they’d been getting a kick out of watching the CT primary. He said “Good for you, I completely understand.”

Here’s a question: If the Joe-as-SecDef scenario plays out, would his Republican replacement serve out his entire 6-year term, or just until the next congressional election cycle in 2008?

Dana Milbank sometimes strikes me as being a bit odd. For the want of a better word. Though not always. But. He is usually predictably stupid.

Eli @ 32

Here’s a question: If the Joe-as-SecDef scenario plays out, would his Republican replacement serve out his entire 6-year term, or just until the next congressional election cycle in 2008?

the entire damn 6-year term

Yeah, the thing about some leaders…they think leadership consists of an ability to see a parade and nip to the front of it.

I don’t get wee little Joey. The Democrats are pissed at him and tossed him overboard at the polls. So he starts his own little party up and runs around screeching how much he hates Bush and Republicans and stuff. So he disses the Pugs and the Dems tossed him over. Anyone see a death spiral here, or am I missing something?

UP #27:

My personal belief is that Shiaism isn’t monolithic and that a Shia Iraq, while no longer presenting an immediate threat to Iran, wouldn’t necessarily roll over and play dead for Tehran.

But that’s just me. If we and the Iranins believe in an Iranian-dominated Shia Crescent, both countries will act accordingly. I don’t think that’ll be good for either side or anyone standing in between.

*ilson46201 @ 36

Eli @ 32

Here’s a question: If the Joe-as-SecDef scenario plays out, would his Republican replacement serve out his entire 6-year term, or just until the next congressional election cycle in 2008?

the entire damn 6-year term

Sonofabitch. I would say he would totally do it, except what does he do in 2008 if a Dem takes the White House?

(When is Dodd up again?)

Eli @ 38

*ilson46201 @ 36

Eli @ 32

the entire damn 6-year term

Sonofabitch. I would say he would totally do it, except what does he do in 2008 if a Dem takes the White House?

get fired and get a job as a lobbyist …

By the by, the DSCC website lists Selfish Joe as an “Independent.” There is an Independent Party in Connecticut, according a comment on the Lamont blog, and Joe ain’t a member.

I sent the DSCC an email calling their attention to the error and telling them to correct it. I also emailed the Lamont campaign site.

Joe’s real campaign manager gives advice

get fired and get a job as a lobbyist …

He *really* likes being a Senator, though. I don’t think he’d trade 6 more years as a Senator for 2 more years as SecDef.

But I wouldn’t put it past him to run against Dodd.

If the DCCC (in the person of Rahm Emanual) has any brains, it is talking seriously with Chuck Schumer about the fact that his failure to play hardball with Joementum (i.e. taking him off the DSCC site, where it says he is a “Democrat running as an independent”, and directing serious resources into the Lamont campaign, and getting Reid et al. to agree to strip Joementum of his committee assignments, and helping to organize a parade of Democratic senators to go to Connecticut and campaign for Lamont…) is jeopardizing the three House seats that Rahm presumably cares more about than he does about the Senate seat. Or is it all about the cocktail weenies?

al-Scooter @ 37

UP #27:

My personal belief is that Shiaism isn’t monolithic and that a Shia Iraq, while no longer presenting an immediate threat to Iran, wouldn’t necessarily roll over and play dead for Tehran.

But that’s just me. If we and the Iranins believe in an Iranian-dominated Shia Crescent, both countries will act accordingly. I don’t think that’ll be good for either side or anyone standing in between.

while Shia may exist in both Persia and Mesopotamia, both areas have different histories and ethnicity (Persian and Arab)

Eli @ 42

get fired and get a job as a lobbyist …

He *really* likes being a Senator, though. I don’t think he’d trade 6 more years as a Senator for 2 more years as SecDef.

But I wouldn’t put it past him to run against Dodd.

If Lieberman were playing Everquest, he’d be a whiny ass Wood Elf Druid. He’d overnuke everything, die repeatedly, and then blame the group’s cleric hehe.

/em computer game geekery off!

Oilfieldguy @ 35

I don’t get wee little Joey. The Democrats are pissed at him and tossed him overboard at the polls. So he starts his own little party up and runs around screeching how much he hates Bush and Republicans and stuff. So he disses the Pugs and the Dems tossed him over. Anyone see a death spiral here, or am I missing something?

Yes, another interesting piece is that JL shows up on CNN’s Glen Beck show and agrees with everything Glen says, including that we’re already in WWIII. Part of the transcript is up on TPM Cafe.

Eli @ 38

*ilson46201 @ 36

Eli @ 32

the entire damn 6-year term

Sonofabitch. I would say he would totally do it, except what does he do in 2008 if a Dem takes the White House?

(When is Dodd up again?)

I think it’s only until the next federal election. Remember Jean Carnahan? Her dead husband defeated John Ashcroft, and she was appointed to fill his seat in 2000 — but she was defeated in 2002.

neurophius @ 15

Dana Milbank says “there is some logic to what [Bush] is saying” about Iraq.

Tool.

Hey, did you see Paul Hackett on Chris Matthews? Holy freakin’ crap he was on fire! I don’t even know who the hapless Repub running for Congress critter was, but between Hackett and Matthews they had the guy blubbering.

Matthews actually pressed it “So why are we at war with Iraq?” even after the guy tried to dismiss it with gibberish “talking points” about fighting the war on terror. Paul even said something to that effect in the background “nothing but talking points.”

I guarantee you that THAT will be a CrooksandLiars video. It was a sight to behold. I was actually laughing and clapping.

Oilfield guy says of Joey Low Road,

“Anyone see a death spiral here, or am I missing something?”

What you are missing is that by doing what he is doing, Joey is absolutely, without a doubt locking up the “Connecticut for Lieberman” Party nomination for President in 2008…

neurophius @ 49

Oilfield guy says of Joey Low Road,

“Anyone see a death spiral here, or am I missing something?”

What you are missing is that by doing what he is doing, Joey is absolutely, without a doubt locking up the “Connecticut for Lieberman” Party nomination for President in 2008…

Can someone else run in the CT for Lie party? if so, would they have to have a primary?

See, the problem is that the DCCC is still thinking about this race as though Lieberman were a Democrat, and that this is just a do-over of the primary. Apparently, they have forgotten that Republicans and unaffiliated voters can cross party lines to vote in the general, and that this “exciting” race is likely to bring out lots of GOP voters, too. Does the DCCC also think the Republican voters are only going to vote for Schlesinger?

I happened to be stuck in horrendous traffic leaving the office tonight, and was surfing through XM Radio for something to keep me from screaming, when I landed on Hardball, where Tweety was interviewing - again - Alan Schlesinger about the failure of the party to push his candidacy.

I was surprised to find out that Schlesinger may well be a joke, but he isn’t dumb. He knows exactly why the party isn’t coming out for him - because it works better for them to keep the focus on the “ultra-left wing” of the Democratic Party. Of course, Schlesinger also thinks that if he can get his numbers up into the 20’s, he has a real shot at…winning. It was good for a laugh, anyway.

Oklahoma kiddo @
33

Dana Milbank sometimes strikes me as being a bit odd. For the want of a better word. Though not always. But. He is usually predictably stupid.

He was pretty funny, though, when he wore an orange hunting vest the day after Cheney shot the guy.

Eli @ 42

get fired and get a job as a lobbyist …

He *really* likes being a Senator, though. I don’t think he’d trade 6 more years as a Senator for 2 more years as SecDef.

But I wouldn’t put it past him to run against Dodd.

he could always enlist in the army and fight his beloved endless “global war on terra”

he could enlist as

1) a consummate liar
2) a torturer
3) a saboteur
4) a snake handler(code for snake oil salesman)
5) a propagandist
6) a traitor

i could go on and on.

#12: “So we have got to find ways of working together on this: not everyone has Ghostman’s wisdom, dedication and thick hide,”

DannyBoy! Please! Saying these kinds of nice things about me will only earn you MAJOR negative points here! And….I’m chuckling as I type this, and with a twinkle in my eye. Thanks.

Onward…these guys at DCCC ought to just write a book on how to always be losers. Have they ever actually had to compete at anything? Ever had to put it all out on the line? I continue to shake my head at these mamby-pambies. What a bunch of little babies.

TRex chants ATTACK! He’s got it right…and I’ll gladly lead the way.

Ghostman

brb

Sharon W — yes, Hackett was terrific. We are reminded of how the Dem leadership forced Hackett out of his race, and now the guy looks like the kind of candidate that would be blowing away the Repubs if he’d remained the candidate.

One wonders what those ostrich see from down under.

dannyboy @
12

Sermon over (stumbling down off soap-box)

Yes, indeed. I am simply pea-green with envy of your eloquence. And, I’d say that about sums it up. Thank you.

One wonders what those ostrich see from down under.

Harry Truman spinning in his grave, probably.

sorry — I was wrong about the replacement Senator thing — the 17th Amendment says

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

so Joey’s replacement would serve until 2008 (actually Jan.3, 2009)

Oilfieldguy @ 55

brb

Thanks for the head’s up. We’ll wait :)

just popped over to get a taste of the Glenn Greenwald that I’ve missed. His analysis of the reaction to the opinion on the NSA case is so good, I wish I could think and write like that. It’s so nice to be able to read these things easily again.

Early to bed tonight, pups, thanks for all your fine discussion. Be sweet.

Anne @ 51

See, the problem is that the DCCC is still thinking about this race as though Lieberman were a Democrat, and that this is just a do-over of the primary. Apparently, they have forgotten that Republicans and unaffiliated voters can cross party lines to vote in the general, and that this “exciting” race is likely to bring out lots of GOP voters, too. Does the DCCC also think the Republican voters are only going to vote for Schlesinger?

I happened to be stuck in horrendous traffic leaving the office tonight, and was surfing through XM Radio for something to keep me from screaming, when I landed on Hardball, where Tweety was interviewing - again - Alan Schlesinger about the failure of the party to push his candidacy.

I was surprised to find out that Schlesinger may well be a joke, but he isn’t dumb. He knows exactly why the party isn’t coming out for him - because it works better for them to keep the focus on the “ultra-left wing” of the Democratic Party. Of course, Schlesinger also thinks that if he can get his numbers up into the 20’s, he has a real shot at…winning. It was good for a laugh, anyway.

I saw the interview. You’re right. The guy is no dummy and was perfectly articulate. I’m almost rooting for him figuring any votes he gets are a steal from Lieberman. It was nice of Matthews to give him a do-over after the gambling interview. Sometimes I feel, in an odd way, that Matthews knows what he’s doing. I got the distinct sense that Matthews really liked Lamont.

Schlesinger is saying they’ll debate in a three-way, and then just watch his poll numbers. I don’t know if one is actually scheduled or that’s just his wishful dream, however, I think Lieberman would be the man in the middle being hammered from both sides.

twolf1 @ 50

neurophius @ 49

Oilfield guy says of Joey Low Road,

“Anyone see a death spiral here, or am I missing something?”

What you are missing is that by doing what he is doing, Joey is absolutely, without a doubt locking up the “Connecticut for Lieberman” Party nomination for President in 2008…

Can someone else run in the CT for Lie party? if so, would they have to have a primary?

It’s not really technically a party…it’s just a special named “line” on the ballot. By doing it that way, he gets to be listed above the other “independents” with no parties out there. That’s my take on how it’s been explained by people more versed in CT election law anyway hehe.

So no, no one else can run in the CT for Lie party…but I still think HoJo will be McCain’s VP pick in ‘ought 8′.

KO on Countdown just repeated (and updated) his list of all of the Bush/Admin terror alerts and how they all closely followed and stepped on some bad news for the Administration. I liked the one where the AG says they have “specific” credible information of an imminent attack, but they don’t bother to bring in the head of Home Security or raise the alert/color level.

Well, a Republican replacement for two years would be less bad than six years, but still pretty bad, especially if it’s the difference between majority and minority.

Even more especially if Justice Stevens can’t hang in any longer (I wouldn’t be surprised if he *really* wants to retire but is afraid to, bless his heart).

A veritable pack of Wiley Coyote’s- “Super Geniuses”.

Appointed Senators have to run in the first federal election following the appointment - that would be 2008.

The scenario is scarier. Repubs play Joe like a fiddle, and get him elected. Rumsfeld has to resign for health reasons (or to spend more time with Andy Card’s children) and Lieberman is named SoD. Once re-elected, he has proven his point, and can go back to being front man for the administration.

Look, we all know Lieberman is 99% EGO, 1% human. SoD would feed that ego big-time. (pun intended) Not to mention the defense jobs for his asking in 2 years.

R governor appoints new R Senator. If it comes from the R sitting Congresscritters (don’t know the relationship between Shays, Johnson and Simmons and Rell) then she gets to put a new R in the Congress — someone people are not yet exasperated with.

IMHO, I think this is a perfect set-up for Nancy Johnson — who wouldn’t give up her seat to try for Senate.

Given this scenario, then Ned runs against Johnson in 2008 on the backdrop of a presidential election and no incumbent anywhere.

Boy, those Rs saw Lieberman coming, didn’t they?

Sharoney @ 14

The DCCC called me up asking for money.

then told her they and the DSCC would not get a friggin’ dime from me until Holy Joe “Senator-for-Life” Lieberman was stripped of his committee assignments …

My 76 year old mother, God love her, just responded in a simlar way to the DSCC fundraising letter she received, saying she was sending her contribution directly to Lamont.

I have a feeling they are getting similar feedback about sending money directly to the candidate of choice from all over the country.

Kurt says,

“So no, no one else can run in the CT for Lie party…but I still think HoJo will be McCain’s VP pick in ‘ought 8′.”

Joey talks a lot about how he bases his decisions and actions on his “principles.” [as if that makes supporting an immoral war, etc. somehow OK].

If he would accept a VP nomination from John McCain as well as from Al Gore, I wonder just what principles he can claim to be serving…

Well, this is just a bunch of twaddle from the DCCC.

And, dannyboy, I too have been thinking about the differing ways that people discuss things. I particularly was reminded of the “types” analysis- E/I N/S F/T P/J spectrum.

Source: http://keirsey.com/
“If I do not want what you want, please try not to tell me that my want is wrong.
“Or if I believe other than you, at least pause before you correct my view.
“Or if my emotion is less than yours, or more, given the same circumstances, try not to ask me to feel more strongly or weakly.
“Or yet if I act, or fail to act, in the manner of your design for action, let me be.
“I do not, for the moment at least, ask you to understand me. That will come only when you are willing to give up changing me into a copy of you.”

http://www.knowyourtype.com/
I have edited the list available above, to contrast how people may arrive at decisions. For example, some FDL commenters were definately “S” in their initial judgements as to the decision to go to war in Iraq:

People who prefer sensing may:
* solve problems by working through things thoroughly for a precise understanding
* be pragmatic and look to the “bottom line”

On the other hand, others, myself included, “knew” from the get go with about 5 minutes of thought that invading Iraq would be a really really bad idea.

People who prefer intuition may:
* solve problems through quick insight and through making leaps
* place great trust in insights, symbols, and metaphors and less in what is literally experienced

immanentize @
8

peterr,

I remember mocking my cousin who (10 years younger than me) BOMBED the PSAT and afterwards said of his dismal score :

“That’s just where I was planning to be for my push on the SAT.”

No joke. Can’t make that shit up.

Punchline — Today that fellow works for the FBI.

Good for him! Of course, he only tanked on *one* test, not a bunch of them in sucession.

VG #70: Any other INFPs in the house?

A vote for Ned is a vote for you!

A vote for Lieberman is a vote against you!

When you realize that “Joseph” is probably really pronounced “Joe-Self,” you understand that the only principles that matter are the ones he read about in a book that was probably titled, “Principles of Winning.”

Too bad that book is out of print, and out of date…

Or is Lieberman trying to set himself up for this?

His choice of words on CNN this afternoon certainly echoes those found there.

al-Scooter @ 72

VG #70: Any other INFPs in the house?

Count me in!!! Luv ya!

al-Scooter- or did you figure that out already and were already counting me in? ;)

There seems to be something missing from the DCCC and DSCC — democracy.

Who are these people? Who died and made them king? I’ve been a supporter of Democratic Party candidates since 1968, when I went door to door for McCarthy, and never once have I been offered an opportunity to nominate, vote, or even discuss membership in these groups. Are DSC and DCCC members appointed? Elected? Named by Representatives and Senators? Or, perhaps, do they rise like Venus on the half-shell, pristine as wind blown foam?

VG #76: I knew it!! You rock!

The response Jane quoted speaks for itself. I should point out, though, that it actually represents an individual response to my first outraged shriek in which I asked what sort of party would tolerate someone not playing by the rules of his own party?

The first response to me was so over-the-top it left me shaken. I had written to both the DCCC and the DSCC concerning the Ct. senatorial race, articulating my concern that the failure of the Democratic party to attack Lieberman and force him to withdraw (or render him a worthless candidate) made much more difficult the task to securing three new Congressional seats this year for the Dems in Ct. alone.

The DSCC hasn’t bothered to respond. The DCCC first responded by saying it was policy not to comment on Senatorial races since they were the Congressional candidates organization.

That was the response that left me dumbfounded with anger and despair. I vented a bit more and received the reply Jane quoted. I think it was meant to empathize with and reassure me.

I’m grateful someone took the effort to respond. I’m equally sure whoever it may have been was constrained by policy from saying more.

What a terrible shame.

immanentize -

“No, they are trying to counter the rather obvious inference that Joe Lieberman running as the de facto Republican is most likely to increase the Republican vote thereby sinking the chances of three key congressional Democratic challengers, which in turn sinks the chances of regaining the house.”

AARRGGHH!!!

there is a slim chance some of them actually believe it - though this little commenter can smell the cya stench here in Texas

proffering up dreck about an exciting and dynamic race that will energize Connedicut dems tells me they still have their foot nailed to the floor . . . and are perfectly willing to lose those 3 seats rather than admit error

“This crap will take years to untangle”
- Jane Hamsher

al-Scooter @ 72

VG #70: Any other INFPs in the house?

I think that is where I ended up the last time I looked into it. I know for sure on the N and the P, tend to swing I and E depending on circumstances. Not sure about the F, but folks who know me have said “What do you mean you’re not F?”

so count me in too!

And, I think I can name at least one ISTJ!!!

Re Lieberman following Rumsfeld . . .

I’m rooting for Ned, big time, but if Joe does win and then Rummy resigns and Bush wants Holy Joe in the cabinet, it’s not a slam dunk. To be more specific, Joe would have to get through the Senate confirmation process.

Hmmm . . . Senate Armed Services committee . . . Do you think Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd might have a few rather pointed questions to ask? How about Hillary? Maybe a new Democratic member of the senate (Claire McCaskill?) might be on the committee, and want to ask Joe about his thoughts regarding torture, secret rendition, warrantless wiretapping, Gitmo, . . .

Like I said, I don’t want to see Ned lose, but seeing Joe turning on a spit during a nomination would be a thing to behold. If he stiffs the party and screws up the efforts of the Dem House candidates in CT to win, that hypothetical confirmation hearing would be bloody. Someone might even mount a fillibuster . . .

al-Scooter- do you realize what a minority “party” we are? It is really painful sometimes!!!!

hah, Keith Olberman, just had to hand off to Rita Cosby, who is subbing for Scarborough. The contempt was palpable.

KO just smiled as RC gave her breathless Jon-Benet update. Priceless.

Scott Darroch @ 78

There seems to be something missing from the DCCC and DSCC — democracy.

Who are these people? Who died and made them king? I’ve been a supporter of Democratic Party candidates since 1968, when I went door to door for McCarthy, and never once have I been offered an opportunity to nominate, vote, or even discuss membership in these groups. Are DSC and DCCC members appointed? Elected? Named by Representatives and Senators? Or, perhaps, do they rise like Venus on the half-shell, pristine as wind blown foam?

Elected Democratic Senators are the ‘members’ of the DSCC —- elected Democratic Representatives are the ‘members’ of the DCCC. They run each organization.

I just have to say that any Democrat who airs a campaign ad for public consumption yet cannot identify themselves as a Democrat is a total coward. No amount of ambiguity on that score is worth our attention or trust.

Valley Girl @ 85

al-Scooter- do you realize what a minority “party” we are? It is really painful sometimes!!!!

I was glad to see y’all speaking up on the emotional issues - it was getting difficult to read some of the comments.

Here is a copy of my e-mail to the DCCC:

“When is the DCCC going to throw its support behind Ned Lamont instead of protecting turncoat Lieberman?

Is this yet another case of the Democratic Party leadership Good Old Boys’ syndrome?

Lieberman is the de facto candidate of the Republican party. His campaign has hired GOP fundraisers. The Veteran for Freedom group (Swiftboarders reincarnated) is running ads for him. He has been endorsed by unsavoury characters like Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity. Just this morning, he was on Glenn Beck talkshow, agreeing with everything Beck said. Beck is a radical right-winger, a racist, and a war-monger. Lieberman is being praised by Dick Cheney and Karl Rove.

Lieberman had the nerve to equate a vote for Lamont to a vote for terrorists. His campaign is using race-baiting (the appearance of Jesse Helm and Al Sharpton with Ned Lamont).

Lieberman’s decision to run as an Independent after he lost the nomination, is an affront to the Democratic voters of CT, the Democratic Party, and the voting process in general.

Lieberman is endangering three Congressional races in CT, thus endangering the Democrats’ chances of regaining the House.

You have seen with Ned Lamont what a fed-up and angry public can do when it mobilizes.

If you refuse to repudiate Lieberman, you will be putting party above country. If the Democrats fail to regain control of the House because of their kid-glove treatment of Lieberman, you will have in effect condemned Americans to many more years of reckless, insane, and costly policies.

And you will pay for it dearly in 2008. We are in a fight for our lives in the face of a monstruous government. I can assure you that we will be pushing for a third-party candidate, and that we will throw all our money and our efforts behind that candidate.

Your spineless policy of caving to the Bush Administration over the past six years has caused untold hardship for millions of Americans. You owe us.”

I am so angry.

VG #77:

I could tell from your “relationship” to/with your magnum opus over the last few months plus the way you’d agonize over moderation quality (You were ‘way hard on yourself trying to do the right thing by everybody.).

Anyway, you’re not alone.

astralplame- the E/I thing doesn’t have to do with how you comport yourself- it has to do with where you get your energy. Can’t remember the exact def. now, but do you feel energized when you get to spend time alone to reflect (I) or do you feel energized when you meet with others (E).

ENTP

I’ll….disagree/offer alternative view…to the idea that BushCo would put HoJo in as SecDef. I think the WH views HoJo as a useful tool…nothing less and nothing more. And, I believe that this is still a “control-freak” WH. They wouldn’t trust a loose cannon such as HoJo, full of his own ego, to enter the inner circle.

For HoJo, I think his fate is simple. Either he wins in Nov., or else he gets a job as a lobby guy or think-tanker.

Ghostman

Valley Girl @ 91

astralplame- the E/I thing doesn’t have to do with how you comport yourself- it has to do with where you get your energy. Can’t remember the exact def. now, but do you feel energized when you get to spend time alone to reflect (I) or do you feel energized when you meet with others (E).

for the most part, dealing with other people is going to make me tired. there is a narrow range of topics where I get quite energized when talking with other people, but for the most part, I stay clear of parties and bars.

al-Scooter- oh, you are so very sweet. And, yes I did agonize about moderation and that ultimately did me in- or, at least I realized that I couldn’t spent so much time and agony. xxooo.

Scott Darroch @ 78

There seems to be something missing from the DCCC and DSCC — democracy.

Who are these people? Who died and made them king? I’ve been a supporter of Democratic Party candidates since 1968, when I went door to door for McCarthy, and never once have I been offered an opportunity to nominate, vote, or even discuss membership in these groups. Are DSC and DCCC members appointed? Elected? Named by Representatives and Senators? Or, perhaps, do they rise like Venus on the half-shell, pristine as wind blown foam?

Ditto - my first involvement in Dem politics was in 1968 for McCarthy. I can’t believe what has happened to our party in the past 20 years.

immanentize @ 92

ENTP

imm- are you sure about the T part? Somehow I just don’t see you defending those Texas death row people with a T- F I would have guessed, for justice.

VG #91:

Exactly right - Extroverts gain energy from interactions with others; Introverts have energy drained by those interactions.

astralplame, now I understand the name!

dab from CT @ 96

Scott Darroch @ 78

There seems to be something missing from the DCCC and DSCC — democracy.

Who are these people? Who died and made them king? I’ve been a supporter of Democratic Party candidates since 1968, when I went door to door for McCarthy, and never once have I been offered an opportunity to nominate, vote, or even discuss membership in these groups. Are DSC and DCCC members appointed? Elected? Named by Representatives and Senators? Or, perhaps, do they rise like Venus on the half-shell, pristine as wind blown foam?

Ditto - my first involvement in Dem politics was in 1968 for McCarthy. I can’t believe what has happened to our party in the past 20 years.

Not to be picky, but that’s almost FORTY years. ;)

*ilson46201 @ 87 — many thanks for the information. I’ll be communicating my thought on the DSCC and DCCC’s unbelievable arrogance and stupidity to my Representative and Senator starting right now…

al-Scooter @ 98

VG #91:

Exactly right - Extroverts gain energy from interactions with others; Introverts have energy drained by those interactions.

astralplame, now I understand the name!

the name is funny - “astral” is not the sort of thi