Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I haven't seen a lot of Ned Lamont, but what I've seen suggests that the guy would be seen as a perfectly decent candidate if it were an open election.
As for the relationship between Joe and the Democratic Party, doesn't it say it all that he's going to run as an independent if he doesn't win the primary? In his mind, he's bigger than the party, and has been for some time.
I think it's a good thing for the country that people can run as independents if they have popular support but not a lot of support within their party. It's good to have independents involved in the process. But if Joe's an independent now, he should stop pretending to be a Democrat.
|
Ty -
Lamont's main plank is massive troop withdrawal. That's not acceptable, whether you agree with the war or not.
I offer this will complete sincerity and no hyperbole - it is not rational to advocate a large scale withdrawal at this point. Whether you agree we should be there or not, the forces are needed to keep stability. The case that Iraq is able to stand alone is not strong, and based more on wishful thinking than hard evidence (from what I've read). Given all this, Lamont is not a reasonable candidate for office. He's a fringe player pushing for an impossible policy change. That's not an acceptable alternative to Lieberman, particularly where you're saying the only objection to Lieberman is his squabbles with his own party.
Call me nuts, but the unity of the Democratic Party doesn't trump the country following a sound policy in Iraq. The Democratic Party's regressive machine mentality, which lieberman is bucking, is exactly what's left the party so damn castrated and inconsequential.
But then... maybe it goes deeper than all that. My suspicion is the Democrats simply can't make a decision because they're overinformed on everything. They see both sides of every issue and vacilate and try to placate everybody, which leaves no one satisfied and everybody angry. They understand every side to an issue, but can't seem to grasp that govt is in the decision making business. Perhaps this explains their love for slow moving programs and byzantine hierarchies. They like soft decisions with little downside - hedges - protective measures. Maybe this is why the Democrats are so favored by lawyers. No pain...
And no gain.
Bush is arguably reckless and overly ambitious, but he has made decisions.
SD
