Skip to main content

Paul Krugman strikes again with what I think is the perfect tone.  He gives Lieberman the smack down and reminds the Democratic party of a missed opportunity with the bancruptcy bill.

More below.

See the Op-Ed at:

(subscription required)

The smack:

"My guess is that Mr. Lieberman thought he was being centrist and bipartisan, reaching out to Republicans by showing that he shares their concerns. At a time when the Democrats can say, without exaggeration, that their opponents are making a dishonest case for policies that will increase the risks facing families, Mr. Lieberman gave the administration cover by endorsing its fake numbers."

The Pow:

"It isn't always bad politics to say things that aren't true and claim to support things you actually oppose: just look at who's running the country. But Democrats who engage in these tactics right now create big problems for a party that has been given a special chance - maybe its last chance - to remind the country of what Democrats stand for, and why."

Originally posted to Blech on Tue Mar 15, 2005 at 04:22 AM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Question (4.00)
    So you've guessed by now I'm not particularly good at this.  Can someone tell me how to make block quotes in the colored boxes?  Thanks.
  •  Thank you for bringing this article to my (none)
    attention.  I love Paul Krugman but I have little time for the MSM.  It would have been a shame if I had missed this article.  I hope Lieberman gets to read this as well.

    Progressive bloggers are today's Minutemen -- patriotic "first responders" defending fundamental American institutions and true American values. J. McDermott

    by Jill Lehnert on Tue Mar 15, 2005 at 04:50:12 AM PST

    •  He's one of the few (none)
      I avoid the MSM as much as possible, but Krugman is one of the few who doesn't mince words and has the right ideas. If the Left had more guys like him, we wouldn't have to worry about the damn corporate media whores.
  •  Why doesn't Joe (none)
    just go over to the Republican party?  We don't need people whose compromises are, in fact, Republican victories.  We need leaders who will stand up for us.

    If I can't dance, I don't want to be a part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman

    by AaronBa on Tue Mar 15, 2005 at 04:51:28 AM PST

  •  Are they doing the WMD Argument again? (none)
    Get misleading and unvetted data  (CIA smokestack)

    Scare people about it (WMD)

    Confuse people on fixing SS and personal accounts by using it alternately in the same sentence (War on Terror, Iraq War, 911)

    Why are some Dems being so naive?

    find your local dem group link:

    by timber on Tue Mar 15, 2005 at 04:54:58 AM PST

  •  Lieberman has got to go (none)
    This highlights one more reason why Lieberman has got to go. He continually undermines the party for his own political "benefit"...which, btw, I don't understand. It's not like this guy lives in Utah, he's in ultra-blue Connecticut.

    I want a strong primary challenge to Lieberman in '06. Whoever's running against Joementum, he's at least gonna get my cash, since I can't vote for him.

    •  More like ultra-RICH CT (none)
      Rich-get-richer schemes benefit wealthy CT people, particularly down by greed-is-good NYC.
      •  True (none)
        Southern CT towns like Stamford are full of Wall Street Republicans.

        Still, voting with the Repubs on certain issues would be forgivable if he didn't constatnly undermine the party with his statements. Not everyone is in lock-step with the party, and that is okay, because most of them still support the Dem leadership and don't undermine their efforts. Lieberman does. In reality, he's a moderate Republican.

        •  Yeah, the problem with being moderate (none)
          essentially means that certain aspects of the opposite party don't bother you so much (or you're willing to live with certain things). But these days, with the Republicans shoved so far to the right, it's hard to compromise when their platform is just so damned ugly. I wouldn't want to "give" them anything!
  •  Lieberman, and sometimes Clinton (4.00)
    believe that since bush is winning solely on a 'tough against terror' mantra, we need to act stronger on this idea.  Tough against terror is something I agree with, mostly.

    But simply verbally abusing arab countries, all the while ignoring America's troubles at home, will not make terror go away, but provide the terrorists furtile ground to plow.

    The Security of America should have a huge priority.  The fact is that Bush is NOT doing this.  It is his failings in protecting America, while sticking his finger in the eye of every country around the globe (that has oil mind you) so that he can get a Bush-clone leader in all oil-rich countries.  

    Lieberman and Clinton talk tough (Lieberman in his hawkish view of protecting Israel - take out neighboring countries) but should actually talk tough about border security, or not withdrawing from international treaties.  that will make a stronger America.  Even Bill Clinton in a link to his journal the other day, sounded gung-ho for going after Syria, by whatever means necessary.

    Talking mean to Syria does not make America a safer place.

    •  Our borders (none)
      We have so much talk about national security, and Bush keeps winning that issue.

      But our borders are totally unsecure. Our ports are unsecure. This is a matter of domestic security, and a gateway for terrorists.

      Bush is doing nothing about this. It's an issue the Dems could pick up on, rather than saying nothing and either a) going along with Bush, or b) looking like a bunch of pacifists who don't think terrorism is a problem.

  •  Check out the view from 10,000 feet (none)
    The Social Security frakis is serving as cover for the belance of the Cheney-Rove agenda to make the run for legislative acceptance.  This is the fog of war.  There isn't actually a need for the war.  The war was munfactured for the political value of effective cover.  There is a need for the fog.  As the Administration has started seeing some success, it can claim that lying to our citizens and killing untold thousands of innocents is justified by people in Egypt getting to "choose" at the ballot box.  To believe that the Cheny-Rove juggernaut can emerge from the fog as the Saviour's shiny vehicle of redemption for American Corporations is folly.  There are the remains of men, women and children in that vehicle's tracks.  Our jobs are sacrificed to toughen its hide.  Our bones are used to make the roadbed for this behemoth's advance.  The corporation has received an infusion that will see it through to the next generation and the trees and the air and our freedom and our America are being dismantled to make it so.

    "Life is short. Life is sweet." So she thought as she hit the street.

    by mccan on Tue Mar 15, 2005 at 06:54:15 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site