By Nathan Tabor
Thursday, august 10, 2006
I almost ignored anti-war Ned Lamont's win over pro-war Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut primary last night until I got a load of two of Lamont's cadre of celebrants. Directly behind a smiling Lamont were Jesse Jackson and al Sharpton — two of the most divisive, opportunistic, and race-baiting individuals that contemporary politics has spawned. Somewhere in the distance, I could almost hear the faint whisper of Jackson's "Hymietown" or Sharpton's fixation on New York "diamond merchants."
Welcome to the "new" 21st century Democratic Party, the political party that is starting to smell quite similar to the long-buried cadaver of the Democratic Party of the early 1970s — taken over at the time by the anti-Vietnam War McGovern Democrats. Last night has given us the neo-McGovernites.
Lamont's primary victory puts the old guard of Democrats on a very slippery slope. While Bill Clinton came out in the final days of the campaign to support Joe Lieberman, Chris Dodd has already come out and endorsed Lamont. Maxine Waters has backed Lamont from the beginning. Evan Bayh just signed on.
Who will follow? Kerry? Kennedy? Edwards? Feingold? Pelosi? Reid? Schumer? Rahm Emanuel? No doubt, all of them, and each time another prominent Democrat steps forward — under the banner of party unity — the Democratic Party will take one step further to the left. In an endorsement that might portend of things to come, Hillary has even thrown her (political) weight, plus $5,000, behind Lamont. With the neo-McGovernites already rallying against her and her (so far) pro-war stance, she's in a political pickle.
"Look at me. I'm for the war but I've endorsed an anti-war senatorial candidate!" This from a potential presidential candidate who has been trying so hard to move to the center, using the political playbook of her husband. and with each step to the left, the Democratic Party will clarify itself as the "cut-and-run" party.
Somewhere in D.C., Karl Rove must be drooling.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement