California Conservative

Just when Democrats looked like they were sorta getting their stuff together, at least as much as that’s possible with them, they revert to their old ways and the facade fades to oblivion. Take, for instance, Russ Feingold’s stunt today on the Senate floor on censuring President Bush on the NSA intercept program. It was obvious that BDS had stricken him mightily. When he introduced his censure resolution on the Senate floor, though, Democrats ran away from him like Feingold was selling fire.

Even as he spoke, Democratic leaders maneuvered to hold off the immediate vote that Majority Leader Bill Frist requested. Throughout the day, Feingold’s fellow Democrats said they understood his frustration but they held back overt support for the resolution. Several said they wanted first to see the Senate Intelligence Committee finish an investigation of the warrantless wiretapping program that Bush authorized as part of his war on terrorism.
Asked at a news conference whether he would vote for the censure resolution, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada declined to endorse it and said he hadn’t read it.

As if that doesn’t cast Dem’s in a bad enough light, then having someone named Ned Lamont announce he’s challenging Joe Lieberman in the upcoming Democratic primary should do the trick. Lieberman has drawn the Kossacks’ ire all along because he’s supported the Iraq war unconditionally from Day One. They’ve been jaw-jacking about running someone against him for at least 6 months. Now it’s official.

This should paint Democrats into quite a corner. One of their far left senators introduces a censure resolution and Democrats run from him like he’s spreading the plague, then another far left nutcase challenges possibly the only sane Democrat left in the Senate.

A recent Quinnipiac poll found that 68 percent of registered Democrats said they would vote for Lieberman, while 13 percent said they would back Lamont. “I can’t see how he can upset Lieberman,” Schwartz said. “Even if he wins all of the people who are unhappy with Lieberman’s support of the war, that’s still not enough to win the primary.”

For all their huffing and puffing and all their influence, the best the Kossacks’ candidate can do is lose badly to Lieberman. And their guy in the Senate is treated like he’s radioactive when he accuses the President of breaking the law.

Not to be lost in all of this is the fact that this essentially brings the Democrats’ dovish nature back into focus. Trying to defeat their staunchest Iraq war supporter in the Senate while they throw a hissy fit on whether the President broke the law while doing his utmost to protect us from further terrorist attacks isn’t the way to sound hawkish. If their goal was to sound dovish, incoherent and nutty, then they hit the trifecta.

This shows their tactical stupidity, too. They’re doing this while they’re trying to convince people that our ports aren’t secure enough and there’s enemies like Iran still lurking out there for us to deal with. In what would be a great time to sound hawkish, they’re sounding dovish by sounding the civil rights siren. Even though they don’t have proof that anyone’s civil rights have been violated.

That’s what passes fof logic in today’s Democratic Party.

Cross-post at LetFreedomRing

This entry was posted on Monday, March 13th, 2006 at 5:37 pm and is filed under Author: Gary Gross, Election 2008, Elections, Homeland Security, Liberals. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.