As related by Tim Chapman (because who better understand the Democrats than a conservative columnist).
In a salute to the Connecticut senator's character, moral fiber and steadfast moderation, Al Gore chose him to be the party's vice presidential candidate.
In actuality, Lieberman was chosen to distance Gore from President Clinton, a mistake and possibly a fatal one for his campaign.
Lieberman's 2000 nomination proved that the Democratic party still understood that most Americans value moderation over far-left liberalism.
Not entirely true either, but the problem is more in what the Right considers moderation. In Lieberman's case it means agreeing with Republicans on pretty much everything except a few economic matters.
On Tuesday, the Democratic Party discarded that tired old notion by ousting the pro-war, strong-on-national-security Connecticut centrist in favor of an extreme liberal anti-war Democratic challenger: millionaire Connecticut businessman Ned Lamont.
Case in point - Lamont is actually fairly moderate or mainstream on most issues, and his position on the war is the same as the Majority of Americans. Being an extreme liberal is a matter of style, not substance. Lamont's style is that he is willing to stand up to President Bush and the Republicans. Lieberman's style is that he is willing to bend over backwards for them.
Lamont's candidacy was fueled by the most extreme elements of the Democratic party.
The most extreme elements of the Democratic party do things like raise money and participate in the political process. The most extreme elements of the Republican party do things like . . . well I'll stop there, but you can fill in the blanks yourself, I'm sure.
No comments:
Post a Comment