IS LIEBERMAN CHANNELING KATHERINE HARRIS NOW? WES CLARK SHOWS REAL LEADERSHIP AND DRAWS A LINE

Although Lieberman was babbling some Beltwayese bullshit today about it being "irresponsible and inconsistent with my principles" to quit his less-than-one-day-old independent race for the U.S. Senate, he seems to have not found it irresponsible or inconsistent with any principles or lack thereof to fire his entire staff. With virtually every state and nationally prominent Democrat in America abandoning his egomaniacal jihad to hold onto power (and the lucrative arrangements with Big Business that flow out of that power) and announcing their support for primary winner Ned Lamont, Lieberman went running for comfort to his friends and collaborators on the other side of the aisle. But first he purged his campaign of all Democrats. (Jane's actually defending one of them over at FDL.) All he's got left is the slimy hack who worked as his Senate communications director, the odious Dan Gerstein, known primarily for writing Lieberman's stab-in-the-back speech denouncing President Clinton, the speech that gave Republicans the cover they needed to impeach him.

Today's big buzz in Lieberworld was that, according to George Stephanopoulos, Karl Rove "'reached out to the Lieberman camp with a message straight from the Oval Office: 'The boss wants to help. Whatever we can do, we will do.'" (He didn't mean the literal boss-- Cheney was unavailable for comment-- but was apparently talking about Bush, who had earlier told Larry King that an endorsement of Lieberman from him would be the kiss of death.) According to ABC News "the White House might help Lieberman by putting the kibosh on any move to replace the weak Republican candidate, Alan Schlesinger, with a stronger candidate. And it might be able to convince Schlesinger to drop out of the race and endorse Lieberman in the final week or two, when it's too late for another candidate to fill the GOP slot. A quiet White House effort to steer some money in Lieberman's direction is another possibility. This is a tricky dance for Lieberman. He needs to figure out a way to get the benefits of Bush support-- some votes from loyal Republicans-- without turning off the independents and moderate Democrats he needs to win."

Late this afternoon, the newly installed odious Gerstein claimed Rove's call to Holy Joe was "personal" and not about business. Ewww... that is so gross!

Meanwhile the list of Democrats rushing to endorse Ned is endless. I was out driving today and I heard Governor Brian Schweitzer of Montana, one of the Democratic Party's brightest stars, come out for Ned. It's a little more touchy for fellow senators. But Hillary got the ball rolling last night and she was quickly followed by former Lieberman supporter Barack Obama, each of whom wrote a $5,000 check to Ned's campaign. By the time Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer said the DSCC would "fully support" Ned, the floodgates were wide open.

It must have been tough for Lieberman's colleague, Connecticut's other senator, Chris Dodd, but he did the right thing. He announced that he and Connecticut's 2 Democratic House members, Rosa DeLauro and John Larson were supporting Ned. "I supported Joe Lieberman in the primary. Like many other Democrats, it was my view that Joe had compiled a strong record on Democratic priorities, like good jobs and a healthier environment. He’s a good friend, a good Senator, and a good Democrat. But now the voters of our party have spoken-- and I respect their decision. For that reason, I have congratulated Ned Lamont on his victory in the primary, and pledged to help in any way I can to secure his victory in the general election this fall. He has earned the right to represent our party and I believe he will be an outstanding candidate for the Senate. I hope Connecticut voters will support him on Election Day in November."

Liberal icon Barbara Boxer, who had gone to Connecticut to campaign for Lieberman, costing her a great deal of political capital, announced she would like to return to Connecticut and campaign for Ned. Ted Kennedy pledged his "enthusiastic support... Ned is fighting to take our country in a new direction, both at home and abroad. His victory last night was a clarion call for change. Connecticut voters turned out yesterday in record numbers to change a failed policy in Iraq, to call for health care for all Americans, to fight for a truly independent judiciary and much more. I believe that November will bring a tidal wave of change that will put this nation back on track so we can begin to build a stronger and safer future for all Americans."

Russ Feingold had already had it clear he would support whomever won the primary, strongly hinting that Lieberman wasn't who he would vote for if he lived in Connecticut. Today he pretty much echoed, strangely, word for word-- I guess Schumer's office was passin' 'em out-- exactly what all the other Democratic Senators were saying. Fine. Wes Clark, on the other hand, had no one telling him what to say. Never an admirer of the duplicitous and greasy Lieberman, Clark let his large base of loyal supporters know exactly where he stands, far more forcefully and forthrightly than any senators would ever dare:

On Tuesday, the message sent by Connecticut voters was loud and clear. They want change, and they want Ned Lamont to represent them in the U.S. Senate, voting for Ned by a 52% - 48% margin over Senator Joe Lieberman in the Democratic primary.

You see, despite what Joe Lieberman believes, invading Iraq and diverting our attention away from Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden is not being strong on national security. Blind allegiance to George W. Bush and his failed "stay the course" strategy is not being strong on national security. And no, Senator Lieberman, no matter how you demonize your opponents, there is no "antisecurity wing" of the Democratic Party.

Indeed, Connecticut Democrats recognized all of this, and yesterday they chose Ned Lamont as their nominee for the U.S. Senate. Now, I hope you'll join me in supporting Ned as he heads into the general election this November.

As a Democrat, I respect the will of the Connecticut Democratic voters and their decision to make Ned Lamont their nominee. Even before the election results came in on Tuesday, Ned Lamont showed his respect for the voters by committing to abide by the Democratic primary result and support whoever won.

Joe Lieberman, on the other hand, began collecting petition signatures to run as an Independent several weeks ago while concurrently running in the Democratic primary. In short, he wanted to have his cake and eat it too.

Despite his efforts to appear on the November ballot as an Independent, I held out hope that Joe would withdraw from the Connecticut Senate race after the primary votes were counted. Unfortunately, Joe has announced his candidacy as an Independent candidate, running against
Ned, the Democratic nominee.

Today, I ask you to email Joe Lieberman. Urge him to respect the will of Connecticut Democrats and end his Independent candidacy for CT Senate.

In 2000, the presence of a third party candidate, Ralph Nader, no doubt played a role in the defeat of Vice President Gore and Joe Lieberman. Now Joe Lieberman is risking our party's claim on his Senate seat by running as a third party candidate himself. Recent news reports detail the GOP's interest in supporting such an effort. It's time to draw a line.

I committed myself to supporting the Democratic nominee for the US Senate in Connecticut, and I ask you to do likewise. Because too much is at stake with our troubles abroad and at home, we cannot play games this Election Day. That's why I call on all loyal Democrats to join me in urging Senator Lieberman to drop his bid for the Senate as an Independent and endorse the duly nominated Democrat.

We should thank him for his service and invite him to stay active, or even run again someday, but as a party we cannot let Joe Lieberman be this year's Ralph Nader.

Email Joe Lieberman. Encourage him to do the right thing, withdraw from the Connecticut Senate race, and focus his efforts on electing
Democrats across America.

The 2006 elections represent a real crossroads for America. We must unify our efforts to stop George Bush's radical agenda and end this one-party government. I hope Senator Lieberman will join us in this critical fight for our nation's future.

Kudos to General Clark! House members were not as circumspect as Joe's Senate colleagues. As right wing media celebrities, Karl Rove, and Ken Mehlman rushed to support Lieberman in any way they could, Congressman John Conyers spoke for most Democrats:

It is the day after a hotly contested primary in Connecticut. I did not endorse either candidate in that primary. As a general matter and with few exceptions, I don't get involved in primaries because I view them as a means for the Democrats in that state to determine their preference.

A lot of post-hoc analysis is going on today. Was this an anti-war vote? Was this a vote against an out-of-touch incumbent? Was it a vote against the President or those who ally too closely with him? And what does it mean for November.

I don't know the answers to those questions, but there is one thing about which we can be certain. Two Democrats squared off in an election and the voters spoke. Period.

This was not a low turnout non-event on a hot August day. It was a primary in which the Democratic electorate turned out in numbers far exceeding expectations for a primary. A substantial number of voters who supported and opposed the incumbent wanted to have their voices heard.

In the end, it was a decisive and historic victory. Ned Lamont won and Joe Lieberman lost.

I am already concerned that Senator Lieberman's independent bid seems destined to divide Democrats in the most insidious ways. His supporters have called Ned Lamont an "Al Sharpton Democrat" and this morning Lieberman stated on the Today Show that he was committed "to bringing the Democratic Party back from the extreme, back from Ned Lamont and Maxine Waters." It is not lost on me that both of these appeals seem designed to peel off support for Mr. Lamont by highlighting his support from prominent African Americans. This type of rhetoric degrades the political process and should not be tolerated.

Losing a campaign is tough. But for one who has carried the banner of the Democratic Party for thirty years, has been awarded the party's nomination to the Senate three times, and has been chosen to fill a Presidential ticket, now it is time to abide the wishes of his electorate and show the same support that the party has shown him over the full course of his career. Senator Lieberman should reject the bitterness of losing and the politics of division and bring the party together for November.

When primaries are over and Democrats in a state have made their choice, all Democratic elected officials, everywhere, have an obligation to coalesce around that choice. Now, the choice is Senator Lieberman's: will he do the right thing and respect the choice of his party or tarnish a respected career in public service?

AFTERTHOUGHT: WAPO COMES THROUGH

For anyone who has given up on the Washington Post as a place to turn to for thoughtful and clearminded journalism, let me suggest this piece on The Death of Triangulation by Eli Pariser in today's paper.


UPDATE: OOPS... I SPOKE TOO SOON. CHENEY IS IN THERE SWINGING FOR HIS STOOGE PAL LIEBERMAN ALREADY

Judd over at THINK PROGRESS e-mailed me that Cheney has come out from under his rock to slur Connecticut voters and back rubber stamp Joe and warning us all that al Qaeda will get us all if we don't keep Holy Joe in the Senate.


ANOTHER UPDATE: IF YOU MISSED THE DAILY SHOW... YOU MAY NOT KNOW WHAT JOE LIEBERMAN PROPAGANDIST HANNITY LIKES TO SUCK

This video will not just enlighten you as to what exactly Hannity likes to suck, but also puts Lieberman's defeat into context: Sorelooserman, Bush enabler and stalker.