JeffLieber is famous.
Whoopee.
He also gets more diaries on the Rec list than anyone I've seen.
Today he's defending Joe Lieberman and establishment Dems from the mad raving partisans here on Kos, because he doesn't want us to become like Bush and the Republican base. That's intellectual garbage, but I don't need to waste time telling the rest of you that.
If we can't hold Lieberman accountable, then maybe we can hold JeffLieber accountable. If he's not representative of the DK community, that's his decision and we can't do anything about it but ignore his unsubstantial, unresearched diaries from now on.
This is why JeffLieber deserves to spend some time in the doghouse Lieberman should be residing in.
wouldn't you find a Republican party that demanded fealty to its base (which would like nothing more than to make Chuck Hagel the equivalent of a Republican castrati)... well... out of touch with an American people who have, despite everything that's happened, has stayed mostly divided (53/46%) for the past twelve years?
So JeffLieber is warning Dems against enacting the wishes of the Progressive base so they don't become like Bush and Republicans.
That's some truly stupid shit for a Progressive to be spouting.
Can I ask an honest question:
For far too many D.C. Democrats, collegiality and business as usual trumps not only the will of the people, but political advantage itself.
What will of the people has been trumped?
...but, again, let us at least realize that this is not about subverting "the will of the people".
Let me go one step further... (0+ / 0-)
...my guess is that if we had a national election on whether or not Joe Lieberman should have kept his gavel, he'd WIN that election by MORE than Barack Obama won the national election.
The WILL of the people is not the issue.
The WILL of the progressive caucus, maybe, but that's not what Barack Obama has been elected to serve... especially since we saw what happens when a President serves only the "base" of his party.
by JeffLieber on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 02:27:09 PM PST
[ Parent | Reply to This | Recommend ]
i don't think he would (0+ / 0-)
I really don't. I think if there were a national election on Joe Lieberman, he'd lose resoundingly.
by thereisnospoon on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 02:40:37 PM PST
[ Parent | Reply to This | Recommend ]
He'll lose in Conecticut in 2012... (0+ / 0-)
...but NATIONALLY, in a vote on this particular issue, he'd win in a landslide.
IMHO, the "people" see this as the very kind of political side-show that they elected Obama to end.
by JeffLieber on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 02:43:21 PM PST
[ Parent | Reply to This | Recommend ]
So Obama and Democrats in general were elected to let anybody off the hook in their party who could muster 51% nationally when you include Republican votes?
Fail.
but my guess is that most politicians have a very hard time with activists because activists are good at pushing a message and [not] very [good] at governing.
How would you know, Jeff? What do you know about it?
And quite frankly, Obama was a community organizer. He was an activist.
If anybody has comments by any of the Liebers in our community that piss them off, Jeff, men, or otherwise, feel free to post them in this diary.