Prometheus 6

There's a lot of hyperventilating over The Lieberman Loss. The substance of ALL of it is summed up quite nicely by this Washington Post headline.

Jury Out on Lieberman Effect
Independent Run Could Hurt, Help Democrats Seeking House

Lieberman looked a lot more important than he was for the last six years. The DLC constructed a profile of The Perfect Veep, custom designed to win elections . Lieberman fit the profile.

Progressives see this. Democrats are starting to. It is well past time for Mr. Lieberman to revert to his natural status level.

But in [TS] Party No. 3, David Brooks sees Mr. Lieberman as the harbinger of the restoration of American Politics, God help us.

The Democratic Party was represented by its rising force — Ned Lamont on a victory platform with the net roots exulting before him and Al Sharpton smiling just behind. The Republican Party was represented by its collapsing old guard — scandal-tainted Tom DeLay trying to get his name removed from the November ballot. And the McCain-Lieberman Party was represented by Joe Lieberman himself, giving a concession speech that explained why polarized primary voters shouldn’t be allowed to define the choices in American politics.

He constructs this McCain-Lieberman Party carefully.

The McCain-Lieberman Party begins with a rejection of the Sunni-Shiite style of politics itself. It rejects those whose emotional attachment to their party is so all-consuming it becomes a form of tribalism, and who believe the only way to get American voters to respond is through aggression and stridency.

By sticking that "and" in there he allows his own more subtle tribalism to pass muster.

He also attempts to attach one of the leading, and most clearly disgraced, figures in the Republican rise to power to Democrats.

But the experience of DeLay and the net-root DeLays in the Democratic Party amply demonstrates that means determine ends.

You have to keep in mind what DeLay did. There are no "net-root" DeLays in the Democratic Party

Mr. Brooks goes on to say how this McCain-Lieberman Party will be against the climate and approach enforced by those Mr. Brooks has spoken for over the last few years. THAT is what the public is rebelling against. And since these policies had enriched wealthy Republicans in ways our grandchildren will still be paying for (if things don't collapse by them), he must spin progressives as wealthy bastards

It is emerging because highly educated secular liberals are pulling the Democrats upscale and to the left. (Lamont’s voters are rich, and 65 percent call themselves liberals, compared with 30 percent of Democrats nationwide.)

...and the blue collar Republicans as the regressive force

It is emerging because social conservatives continue to pull the GOP rightward (look at how Representative Joe Schwarz, a moderate Republican, was defeated by a conservative rival in Michigan).

...when all the problems have come from decisions by wealthy Republican leadership to benefit the guys and institutions wealthy enough to count in their eyes.

And I haven't even gone into why McCain is an even worse choice for moderates (short form: he's a true Conservative but has hidden that fact for years, which basically makes him a liar and haven't we had enough of them?).

Anyway, there is a kernel of truth in the op-ed. A rectification of names in American politics would, indeed, shave off the far right entirely and align Sen. Lieberman with the Republican Party. That shaving won't land in a McCain-Lieberman Party. More likely it would be a Lou Dobbs/Pat Robertson Party.