Even beyond the fact that William Kristol thinks it’s a good idea, the problem for McCain is that the Christian right already distrusts him. Adding a pro-choice Orthodox Jew--even one who has gotten cozy with Hagee in the past--isn’t going to soothe what passes for their minds.

“The first rule of the conservative base is that they are born sheeple."-Amanda Marcotte

Now that’s a funny statement coming from the party that nominated the least experienced person for the job on either side of the aisle.  Obama continues to show that he’s no candidate for change rather the same old BS politician, kinda funny considering he began his race telling Liberal sheeple he was all about change.  Despite his failings as the guy for change, Obamites (sheeple) continue to follow him.

Obaaaaama 08’

Please let it be so!

I’d love to see an endless video loop of Lieberman stepping up to rescue McCain from his own blunder about Iran and al Qaeda. The message that McCain needs someone to look after him would be quite effective.

Now that’s a funny statement coming from the party that nominated the least experienced person for the job on either side of the aisle.

No, we dodged that bullet. Obama has nearly double Hillary’s experience in elected office.

Obama continues to show that he’s no candidate for change rather the same old BS politician, kinda funny considering he began his race telling Liberal sheeple he was all about change.

Yeah, I mean, how dare he run for office! That’s what the old politicians did! I thought he was the candidate for change!

I’m not sure anyone outside of political punditry even knows that Lieberman has some views that might be offensive to the base. I think if the average person on the street even knows of him, they’ll remember that he was the VP nominee 8 years ago, and that he’s a super duper pro-Israel hawk. In fact, I’d say his status as neo con par excellence over the past couple of years would be enough for him to overcome the base. RAR go Israel!!!

OH PLEASE let him pick Liebertool.

Maybe he can start holding hearings on violent video games and “immoral” music aain. I’m sure that’ll turn out the youth vote!

The big plus, were McCain to get Lieberman to run with him (aside from Holy Joe becoming a bit of bar trivia for the next fifty years as the only person to lose the VP race as a member of both parties) is that Harry Reid would have no other option than to shitcan Lieberman from his committees.

There was a joke about a conservative and a liberal walking down the street and coming upon a homeless man. The conservative hands him his business card invites him to come into his office to talk about a job, then he hands him twenty dollars. The liberal, not wanting to be outdone, points the man to the nearest welfare office and then hands him fifty dollars from the conservative’s pocket.

Joe Lieberman is a good guy who had to abandon the hate-america crowd, the D party has been taken over by the Daily Kos and other radical hate groups. He realized he could not be associated with the foul-mouthed punks.  He will be on the cabinet though, but not the VP.

No pro-abort should be on the Republican ticket. This would most certainly alienate the base.

I’m not sure anyone outside of political punditry even knows that Lieberman has some views that might be offensive to the base.

Yes, but one common feature of past presidential elections in the US has been at least one debate between the two VP candidates, as well as plenty of media access.  Not to mention lots of chances for the opposing side to inform voters via advertising and such what their opponents are all about.  We also have this thing called the “internet” where people can look up information about someone or something they’re curious about*.  If the GOP were going to announce Lieberman the day before the elections, sure, I don’t think the low-info voters would really know much about him.  But if the Democrats have more than 3 or 4 vertebrae between them, Republicans can’t fail to be informed of his whole sordid “librul” past by the time the elections roll around in a few months.

Personally, I’m wondering how the Jewish thing in and of itself would play with the base.  Most people are Republican for one of two reasons:  they’re rich and vote in their own financial interest, or they’re bigots.  Bigots tend to have a lot of underlying issues with Teh Jooz.  There is that whole “Yay Israel!  Bring on the Rapture!” meme, but in my experience the Religious Right types are able to hold both Israel boosterism and rabid anti-semitism in their puny brains at the same time with no problem.

*I realize most of the Republican base are utterly incurious about anything and everything, so it’s unlikely that this will happen in any real numbers.

Yeah, Joe Lieberman has been a brave man defending America from the threat of 2 Live Crew and Night Trap for the Sega CD.

There was a joke about a conservative and a liberal walking down the street and coming upon a homeless man.

The really great thing about making shit up is that you can say whatever you want to. 

BTW every conservative I’ve ever talked to about homelessness has had a pretty uncharitable view, to use a wild understatement.  Seriously, you’ve never been walking along with a conservative, seen a homeless person, and had her/him say, “You know I heard a lot of these bums aren’t even really poor.  You can actually make quite a good living off pandhandling and welfare, if you want to.  But they have to look the part, of course...”?  Because that’s a staple of my Conversations With Conservatives.

I should so put out a book called that.  It would be full of all those jaw-droppingly ridiculous things conservatives have said to me.

I’d buy that book.

Personally, I’m wondering how the Jewish thing in and of itself would play with the base.

The PNACer neoCon wingnuts would get in line. Maybe even some of the Oil-Bitch neoCons.

But the Know-Nothings? Please. No matter what pro-Jeebus noises he may make about abortion and videogames, to them Droopy Dawg is just another Agent of Soros whose desire for Armageddon is wanting.

Lieberman’s pro-choice status will hurt him with the anti-choice nutters. 

Assuming, of course, that he doesn’t jettison it once it becomes a liability. 

I’d very much like a chance to vote against Lieberman, so I’m really hoping McCain picks him.  Or Romney, who would do a good job of suppressing the evangelical segment of the base.

I hope he picks Romney because Biden is like his complete opposite and perfect foil.

I agree with the logic of the prediction, but it leads me to another place.  There are two groups that need appeasing here: the wingnuts and the ones attracted to McCain’s “moderate” image.  I happen to think that the wingnuts (specifically the anti-choice ones), are more likely to demand that McCain’s choice actually represent their views, while for the other group the image of moderation will do just fine to convince them that moderate McCain is in there somewhere.  Floating all this Lieberman talk convinces them that he would pick someone like Lieberman if he could get away with it; it plays into the same kind of delusional thinking that makes people think that the “real” McCain is the one who cast himself as a reformer to convince people that he’d been born again after the Keating 5 scandal, and not the orthodox Republican he was before that or the one he is now. 

I think his camp will fuel Lieberman talk as much as possible and then announce an anti-choice VP in the end.  The people who wanted Lieberman (*shudder*) will think “Well, that’s realpolitik, but once he’s in office...” while the wingnuts will just think “We won again!”

I’d buy that book.

Well, good, because I’m headed home for a long Labor Day weekend, and if this (which happened less than 100 miles from my hometown) is any clue as to the level of discourse down there lately, I’m going to come back with reams of material.

Obama continues to show that he’s no candidate for change rather the same old BS politician, kinda funny considering he began his race telling Liberal sheeple he was all about change.

So what you are saying is the sheeple are so ready to defer to authority that he had to lie to them in order to garner their support?

Your grasp of logic is about as firm as your grasp of grammar Mr. “change rather the same”.

Ah, that sign brings back so many memories of my childhood and adolescence.

Of course it would be a 90s version. Something about Bill Clinton being a Communist or Hillary Clinton being a closeted lesbian.

Anyone who uses the phrase “sheeple” (in a non snarky way) needs to be throttled.

The worst part about picking Lieberman is that the media will turn him into Zell Miller 2.0. Endless chatting about how the Democratic Party of Truman and Scoop Jackson left him behind, which in turn will bring out all sorts of insane ex-Democrat neocons playing the national security card.

Yes, but one common feature of past presidential elections in the US has been at least one debate between the two VP candidates, as well as plenty of media access.  Not to mention lots of chances for the opposing side to inform voters via advertising and such what their opponents are all about.  We also have this thing called the “internet” where people can look up information about someone or something they’re curious about*.

Given how well the media created the memes in 2000 and 2004 that the Dems were unable to respond effectively to (Gore is a serial liar, Kerry is a flip flopper who was a phony vet), I’m not getting my hopes up.

Ah, that sign brings back so many memories of my childhood and adolescence.

Yup.  I think what gets me the most about it is that nothing like that would ever happen up here, even with the roles reversed.  It amazes me that people down there are so universally conservative that someone operating a franchise of a major national insurance company thinks its OK to add something like that to the sign in front of his business.  As advertising.  Because nobody that has State Farm insurance and might be driving through town could possibly be anything other than a devoted member of Teh Base.  That this guy wouldn’t think, “hey, this could lose me some customers...”, at all. 

Even here, where everyone is pretty much a Democrat or at least a liberal-leaning independent (if not an all-out leftist), you just wouldn’t see something like that.  The closest I can come up with is my neighborhood hardware store (independently owned, by a lefty black feminist, who is easily one of the top 5 coolest people in this zipcode) which has their storefront windows painted with “Give Peace A Chance” and “Support Our Troops: Bring Them Home!”

There’s one other element of McCain’s base that needs shoring up: Our Media Stars.

Sure, he’s got Mark “McCain’s not knowing how many houses he owns is good news for McCain” Halperin still in line, but even Cokie Roberts couldn’t buy that bullshit yesterday. The whole houses thing is actually being reported, occasionally. Maureen Dowd, for cryin’ out loud, is latest on the list telling him to give the POW line a rest.

He REALLY needs to get them back in line. And Lieberman does that. They all get to explain down their noses to their readers and viewers why it’s a “savvy” move. The Over/Under on “The Maverick Is Back” headlines is four solid days. “He’s REALLY reaching out, unlike that fusty, hidebound Obama” will be the line of the day. With “The Democrats are so far out there that their 2000 VP candidate is this year’s GOP p(r)ick” will run a close second.

Finally, McCain’s struggling desperately not to be seen as Bush III. He has no case on the merits, so he has to bamboozle people: “See? I picked a guy who RAN AGAINST BUSH!”

I suspect the pick has already been made. Lieberman’s been working way harder for McCain than he ever did for Gore.

The Opoponax-

Same in Richmond. Its a solidly Democratic city but I’ve only seen one store with a looney leftist sign--an independently owned music store that has truther posters up.

Whenever I want to remind myself what an island Richmond is I drive outside the city 30 miles and lo and behold, bumper stickers like WORK HARDER! MILLIONS OF WELFARE DEADBEATS DEPEND ON YOU! pop up. They dare not drive those trucks into the city, though.

Also, it completely blows my mind Virginia is actually a swing state this year.

Which is all well and good, Rick, but you can’t forget that there’s still 30% of the country that loves Bush, and McCain can’t win without them. McCain is well and truly fucked by that.

See, that’s the thing.  Bumper stickers, OK.  That’s a personal form of expression.  I may not like it, but it’s your car and you can use it to bray whatever idiocy you want. 

But putting directly partisan attacks on the sign in front of your business, which is a franchise of a huge corporation?  A huge Insurance Company?  So it’s not like it’s a Chick-Fil-A or something, where if you piss off the 20 liberals in town, well, they’re vegetarians anyway, and you still have 14,980 other people in the tri-county area to sell chicken sandwiches to.  Any client you have who is a democrat, even a moderate or reluctant democrat, is going to see that sign and be pissed off, and they may well take their (very long-term, very lucrative) business elsewhere.

You have to be damn confident that your party dominates the local discourse to do that.

Adding a pro-choice Orthodox Jew

How pro-choice is he? More than Romney?

The Christian Right Loooooooves Israel, so an orthodox Jew would probably be a plus.

The Opoponax-

Theres a local grocery store chain here called Ukrops owned by fundie baptists. At the front of every store when you walk in theres a big sign when you walk in LET US ALL PRAY TO OUR LORD AND SAVIOR THIS WEEK with a picture of a Baptist looking Church below it.

They actually sell more food in the suburbs than Wal Mart does.

They opened one store downtown. It folded.

Lieberman is a treasonous hawk.  He’d far rather see the US destroyed than have anybody so much as question the “right” of his Precious Israel to it’s aparteit regime or murderous military forays and extrajudicial executions.

I’d like to see him put on the spot about exactly where his allegences lie.

Let me just point something out.

Joe Liebermen is not “pro Israel”. Hes pro RIGHT WING Israeli. BIG freaking difference.

The Christian Right Loooooooves Israel, so an orthodox Jew would probably be a plus.

See, that’s the thing.  This has to be handled very delicately, because while the Christian Right love them some Iz-ree-uhl, they hate Teh Jooz.  At best, he has the ability to appeal to people in the mushy middle who will think it’s cute that he makes a big stink about taking Shabbos off. 

The real question for McCain is whether he can win this election without the base.  The choice of Lieberman would show that he thinks he can.

IOW, they don’t give a flying crap about American Jews (who they often demean as too soft) or the vast majority of the Israeli public. They only care about Israel’s version of 28%ers--nutso militant West Bank settlers.

All the strategy aside, lieberman is going to be just as disappointing veep pick this time, for mccain, as he was last time, for the dems.  It may be a great strategic move but practically speaking, he’s a dud.  A hack who would do or say anything to stay in power.

Say, where have I heard that before?

Maybe there is some kind of mystical synergy between mccain and lieberman.

At the front of every store when you walk in theres a big sign when you walk in LET US ALL PRAY TO OUR LORD AND SAVIOR THIS WEEK with a picture of a Baptist looking Church below it.

I think that’s a little less egregious, because even people who aren’t Baptist generally have a begrudging respect for “faith”, and won’t necessarily feel threatened by ostentatious displays of same.  I mean, I’m a lot less impressed by religiosity than most Virginia suburbanites, but I’m not turned off by the fact that the locally dominant photo equipment store is owned and run by Hasidic Jews who are by no means shy about that fact. 

A direct political attack is a little different, because it’s negative (even if you’re apolitical, you’ll recognize that mud is being flung), and because a lot of people are democrats.  Even in the deepest deep south, they exist.  And, in fact, in the south, local dems are likely to be well off enough to be in the market for insurance.  They’re your target fucking customers, asshole!

It’s funny to hear Jason bleating anti-Obama talking points he doesn’t really understand.  It’s like saying, “Just because I bah doesn’t make me a sheep.  So bah.”

The weirdest thing about that store, by far, is the fact they won’t sell alcohol or lottery tickets.

But tobacco? Of course!

So having a beer or getting a scratch ticket makes Baby Jesus cry, but you can smoke your lungs black and still be a good Christian.

But yeah, I’m surprised that sign on the insurance company got associated with a major chain. Usually its independently owned stores (or fundie Churches, remember the Obama/Osama “brothers” sign?) that do that stuff.

Lieberman’s been working way harder for McCain than he ever did for Gore.

I wonder how many will remember that he did in fact run with Gore, that they called him “Loserman” only a few years ago? It’s like the McCain ads wanting viewers to sympathize with Hilary Clinton. The same Hilary that’s been pilloried since 1992? The thing is, though, I wouldn’t be surprised if a number of them fall in line, just repeating talking points without noting the sudden about-face they’re being asked to do.

They only care about Israel’s version of 28%ers--nutso militant West Bank settlers.

And some of those who only care care just because there’s got to be an Israeli state in order for Jesus to return, or some such crap (IIRC, all Jews, according to this right-wing Christian viewpoint, need to be in Israel, where after Armageddon they will either be dead or will have converted to Christianity. I may have gotten a few details in this saga incorrect, but I really don’t feel like looking it all up).

annejumps, you have it right. They will either be forcibly converted or descend into hell. At which point, the neoconservative coalition collapses.

Joe Liebermen is not “pro Israel”. Hes pro RIGHT WING Israeli. BIG freaking difference.

Exactly. Supporting Likud and the Jewish fantasist settlers is the main requirement for PNACer neoCons, but they’re a small part of the GOP equation now that they’ve served their purpose (namely, “securing” a foothold in the Middle East for the Oil-Bitch neocons).

What’s more important in the electoral equations is that Holy Joe has never shown sufficient enthusiasm for the “Left Behind/Xtian Zionist” apoco-porn scenario, and that pretty much dooms him with the Xtian fantasist Know-Nothings.

IIRC, all Jews, according to this right-wing Christian viewpoint, need to be in Israel

I’m not sure whether or not this is part of the Dispensationalist narrative, but I have often thought that the reason social conservatives and right-wing Christians fall in line so easily on Israel is because it’s a handy place to stow all the Jooz when/if you want them all to go away. 

It’s also a nice way to make American Jews seem like foreigners even though most of them are 3rd or 4th generation by now.  The ability to tell someone whose great x3 grandparents emigrated from the Pale of Settlement in 1880 to “go back to [whatever foreign country] if you don’t like America, then!” is extremely valuable, what with the vast majority of American Jews being born in the USA, and the part of the world most of their ancestors actually came from is a vastly different place now than it was back then.  Besides which, most of the wingnuts couldn’t actually name European countries where Jews emigrated from if they tried.  They’d be all, “Oh, ummmmm, where did that whole Anne Frank thing go down?  Oh, right!  Go back to Amsterdam, then!  Or like Germany or whatever… Yeah!”

Theres also the fact it allows the right wing to demean and put down American Jews by comparing them to Israeli Jews.

“Why are you so soft? Why can’t you be brave like your cousin in Israel and go fight the Arabs? No wonder you vote for liberals! WIMP!”

There was an article about this, I’ll try to find it.

I think you’re right that that would be a very winnable fight.

Specific issues aside, however, the one awkard thing I note is that Lieberman is not just a “former Democrat” - he’s a former Democratic Vice Presidential nominee - one who was picked to run, in fact, by the Dems’s own last sitting VP, at a time when Biden was himself available as a candidate.

I see some pretty good GOP slogans in the offing:

“The Democrats knew he was the right choice then. What are they complaining about now?”

“Lieberman: The Democratic choice for Vice President”

“Lieberman: The one the Democrats preferred to Biden in 2000”

“Al Gore was right: Lieberman would make a better Vice President than Biden.”

(And of course the inevitable comeback: “Liberman: the only candidate to lose the Vice Presidency from both parties.")

McCain/Liebermann.  Hereafter known as the Hug and Kiss ticket.

Groan!! I think you’re right Amanda, but if true, it means Tim Pawlenty remains governor of Minnesota, where I live. Not that a McCain presidency is an acceptable price to rid us North Star folks of Pawlenty. If I see Lieberman at the demos, I’ll be sure to throw some invective his way.

Looking at what Kevin T. Keith said, I’m reflecting on the number of ways in which those who would support McCain are expected to reverse previous positions they’ve held: McCain is no longer supposed to be an unstable, too-liberal maverick POW and no one is supposed to talk about his “black child”; Hilary Clinton is to be sympathized with because of how Obama “treated” her; and now (assuming this goes through), Lieberman, former runningmate of the hated Gore and someone called a “far-left liberal Democrat” in one of the crazy religious emails Pam dissects, should be lauded. I just have to wonder how many unthinking about-faces they’ll be told to do before they balk.

I just have to wonder how many unthinking about-faces they’ll be told to do before they balk.

What’s another three or four at this point? Especially when you consider, what’s the definition of “balk”? Vote for Obama? Yeah right.

It’s Romney.

If McCain picks Lieberman, it won’t be because of any of the votes who might be swayed by a guy who has always essentially been a nonentity except for the spin points his existence generates. It will be for the same reasons that other macho “conservatives” with trophy wives go out and buy a Hummer. To feel more studly and to piss off supposed liberals.

no.

The McCain/Lieberman ticket was market tested during their european trip. McCain number didn’t budget, implode even. I don’t think they will go for it. (But who knows)

If they go, Obama has so much item to attack on.

oe Lieberman is a good guy who had to abandon the hate-america crowd, the D party has been taken over by the Daily Kos and other radical hate groups. He realized he could not be associated with the foul-mouthed punks.

Wow, I just totally maxed out my Wingnut Talking-Point Bingo card.

What’s more important in the electoral equations is that Holy Joe has never shown sufficient enthusiasm for the “Left Behind/Xtian Zionist” apoco-porn scenario, and that pretty much dooms him with the Xtian fantasist Know-Nothings.

He attends Pastor Hagee’s Armageddo-Con every year and makes a big speech. If that’s not enthusiasm, I don’t know what is.

I think Romney is more likely than Lieberman, although I think Romney is a pretty weak choice.  The right doesn’t like Mormons, and the middle distrusts him for his flip-flopping.

If Lieberman was a more popular figure, he’d be a potential choice.  As Harry Reid points out, Lieberman is a pretty solid Democrat about 90% of the time.  I don’t see how punishing moderates makes for a good strategy when trying to coalesce a national majority.

Also, Senate seats are not wisely thrown away when you are trying to hold a majority in the longer term.  If Lieberman is stripped of his committee assignments and he resigned from the Senate over it, the Republican governor would appoint his successor.  Given the significant advantages of running as an incumbent, such an event could effectively make Lieberman’s seat a Republican seat for the next couple of decades.

Remember: McCain needs cash, lots of it, and quickly, or he’s toast come November.
Romney has bags money and has shown the willingness to spend it to be a player. Lieberman, not so much.

Of course, McCain could always pick Schwarznegger.

Schwarzenegger is Constitutionally barred from being picked. The Vice President has to meet all the same qualifications the President does.

I’ll just echo what Neil said over at Ezra’s place:

If I have to bet, I’m probably with DivGuy on Pawlenty. But I’m really curious about what would happen if McCain did this. Where is the religious right’s breaking point? We’ve all wondered for a long time, and I want to see the answer.

I think Amanda and Ezra are right, and that Lieberman’s pro-choice voting record will be easily finessed away, just as Mitt Romney’s was. Of course, they will have to send one signal to the base ("No, Joe Lieberman is One Of Us now") and a different one to the low-info independent voters ("Behold the mavericky bipartisan awesomeness"), so I suppose there’s a chance to try drive a wedge in there. But remember how Dobson said he could never support McCain, and then turned right around to support McCain? I honestly don’t think there is a breking point for the religious right—they will fall in line because their entire existence is about falling in line.

He attends Pastor Hagee’s Armageddo-Con every year and makes a big speech. If that’s not enthusiasm, I don’t know what is.

I wasn’t aware of that. Yes, that would definitely attracts some of the more gullible (which is saying something) Know-Nothings. But a lot of the more “clever” ones will see Lieberman’s appearances for what they are: part of another grand ploy by those crafty Elders of Zion.

I so think you’re right, unfortunately, Amanda. My family is a case in point. They’re about as red state as they come, Southern Baptists, etc. and they loooooooove Lieberman. They don’t care that he’s pro-choice and they love his devoutness and piety.

“Also, Senate seats are not wisely thrown away when you are trying to hold a majority in the longer term.  If Lieberman is stripped of his committee assignments and he resigned from the Senate over it, the Republican governor would appoint his successor.  Given the significant advantages of running as an incumbent, such an event could effectively make Lieberman’s seat a Republican seat for the next couple of decades.”

...correct.  But this may be seen as a reason to choose Lieberman.  Win or lose, a real Republican takes his place.  If McCain wins, Lieberman will be a non-issue in governing.  And there is absolutely no danger either McCain or Lieberman runs again (or wins if they do) in 2012, leaving the field open for the next Bush.  Win/win for Rethugs, lose/lose for America…

On the other hand, knowing a little bit about CT politics, I heavily doubt that state would magically turn red because the Republican governor appointed a Republican for a few years.  Serving out the rest of someone’s term doesn’t make you much of an “incumbent”, and people will remember that this senator was appointed.  It’s unlikely that this person would hold their seat indefinitely unless they really fricking ROCKED it in the eyes of constituents.  And, again, Connecticut is a liberal-leaning state, despite the governor.

Though I have to admit I don’t like the idea of losing the Dem majority in the senate, especially if there’s any real possibility that McCain would actually win. 

Are we really assuming that the Dems won’t net a single additional senate seat this year?  Or am I being stupid and there are no senators up for reelection that are even remotely contested?

Given the significant advantages of running as an incumbent, such an event could effectively make Lieberman’s seat a Republican seat for the next couple of decades.

Have you seen what’s been happening to incumbent Republicans all across the Northeast? Have you seen Lieberman’s current approval rating in Connecticut? He was only re-elected in 2006 because he manged to bamboozle voters with that “Independent Democrat” crap.  There is no chance that CT voters will vote for an actual Republican for sentate in the forseeable futre, governor-appointed incubent or not.

Especially when you consider, what’s the definition of “balk”? Vote for Obama? Yeah right.

Nothing that severe. Staying home, I think. There are not many people who are enthusiastic about McCain, himself, to begin wtih.

Are we really assuming that the Dems won’t net a single additional senate seat this year?

Of course not—Dems are expected to pick up 5-7 Senate seats.

I think Romney is more likely than Lieberman, although I think Romney is a pretty weak choice.  The right doesn’t like Mormons, and the middle distrusts him for his flip-flopping.

Wait, the party that is nominating John McCain, and seriously considering ex-Dem Lieberman for veep, distrusts Mitt Romney for his flip-flopping?  Have you thought that one through?

The neocon movement does not love Israel.

They love having an important strategic alliance against TEH MOOSLIMS right in the middle of the most oil-rich part of the world.  They love oil, and Israel is nothing more than a means to an end.

Put Israel in the middle of southeast Asia and the neocons would not give two shits about them.

<blockquote>Have you seen Lieberman’s current approval rating in Connecticut? He was only re-elected in 2006 because he manged to bamboozle voters with that “Independent Democrat” crap.  There is no chance that CT voters will vote for an actual Republican for sentate in the forseeable futre, governor-appointed incubent or not.<blockquote>

Bamboozle is one word for it. Blatantly lied is the phrase I prefer. In the general he said: a)He wanted to make sure a Democrat was elected President in ‘08 and b) No one wanted the troops home more than him.

Also, Jodi Rell is a complete milquetoast Republican. She maintains her popularity because she’s mastered the Zen art of doing nothing while giving off the appearance of accomplishing things. In CT, simply not fucking up is an easy way to get re-elected.
That being said, she has to get re-elected in 2010, and whoever she selects would reflect upon her. Appointing John Q. Wingnut to the Senate would mean a Democratic governor in 2010 and a Democratic senator in 2012.

Hey Opoponax, did you live in Mandeville?

My ultra-conservative Catholic brother and sister-in-law and their 7 homeschooled kids live down there, right near I-12 and HWY 59… I think I drove by Douchey McDoucherson’s insurance office in the picture the last time I was there a couple years ago.

Small world.

I am in complete agreement with Amanda and Ezra.  Remember when the base hated McCain and Anne Coulter and Rush Limbaugh were going to vote for Hillary?  The Sheeple will come around for Joe.

No, as I said, i grew up about 100 miles from there (or more realistically, maybe 75, 80?).  I would rather not say the town, because I feel like I overshare a lot here and it’s a pretty small town.  But in the same basic corner of the world, yep. 

I think there are a couple more South Louisianians lurking around Pandagon - usually they come out of the woodwork when it’s time to bitch about Bobby Jindal and his excorcism hobby.

I think there are a couple more South Louisianians lurking around Pandagon - usually they come out of the woodwork when it’s time to bitch about Bobby Jindal and his excorcism hobby.

Yeah, he’s a kook from what I hear… I’m not actually from that area, though I’ve visited there about a hundred times since 1982 (when my brother started college down there), and I lived in NOLA for my first two years of college (I was going to Loyola) back in the mid-90s.

I’ve never seen a bigger dichotomy between the urban mindest versus the rural mindest as is the case in Louisiana, where you’ve got New Orleans, and then the rest of the state looks like a Klan Rally… It’s similar here in Missouri (I’m in St. Louis), and most states (rural vs. urban dichotomy), but it seems really extreme down there.

Yep.  I have a lot of family in NOLA, but grew up mainly in other parts of the state.  We used to drive into NOLA a lot to see family, hang out, etc. and everyone else I knew was SCANDALIZED by this.  They thought that A) this made us some brand of communists, and/or B) we were courting death and would probably get murdered if we kept doing that all the time.  Seriously, I think people thought my parents were child abusers due to the simple fact that they used to take us to the French Quarter.

the Republican governor would appoint his successor

I would like to echo The Opoponax, DJA and Juan Stoppable’s replied to this comment as applies to CT
But more broadly, I hear this kind of thing a lot and it never makes sense.  If a Republican state with a Democratic Gov elects a Republican Senator who leaves office, the Dem Gov would be putting his own career at risk by appointing a Dem replacement.  Multiply by a thousand if it means flipping control of the Senate
The same applies for a Democratic state and Senator and a Rep Gov

All politicians are risk adverse, and those that manage to get elected in the opposite party’s state are the least likely to try any bold moves like that

Besides, who says Lieberman will resign the Senate to run as McCain’s VP?  He didn’t in 2000

The neocon movement does not love Israel.
DTG in STL on 08/25 at 06:57 PM

That’s a bit like saying the Michigan militia does not love America. Or Hannity does not love America.

Neocon entire activity is about Israel. In another era it’s called zionism.

Sure, Ben D, but I hear Trader Joe’s is about to open their first Richmond store, so I couldn’t be happier to see Ukrops get some good left-of-center secularist competition.  I plan to send my mother a TJ’s gift card for opening day, want her to develop that habit early and often. 

* Yeah, I’m still counting Short Pump as Richmond, despite the recent vote.

<blockquote>Now that’s a funny statement coming from the party that nominated the least experienced person for the job on either side of the aisle.  <blockquote>

Yeah, but you made an even dumber one.

Who would you want at the plate, Game 7 of the World Series, one run down, one man on? A rookie, Josh Hamilton? Or a veteran, say, Miguel Cairo? Experience doesn’t beat talent…

The 3rd group is the wild card, and Ezra thinks that Lieberman’s pro-choice status will hurt him with the anti-choice nutters.  I’m actually in disagreement.  I think it can totally be finessed.  It’s true that a lot of people are anti-abortion, but not hard core anti-choicers, but those people tend to vote on other issues anyway.  We’re talking mainly about the hard core anti-choicers, who might boycott if they perceive both tickets as too soft on sluts.  But because the hard core people are mainly motivated by misogyny and a depraved fear of sex---and because they have a long history of willingness to grab at straws---I think they’ll easily be finessed by highlighting Lieberman’s vicious statements about rape victims who wish not to become pregnant by their rapists.

I would go a couple more steps, Amanda, and say that Lieberman’s pro-choice status can be finessed with the social conservatives because of the power structures and hierarchical relationships in the social conservative world. While rank-and-filers may not like Lieberman, they will vote for whomever their authority figures tell them to vote for. The James Dobsons and Tony Perkinses and Rod Parsleys and John Hagees of the world need Republicans holding at least one of the Executive or Legislative branches of government in order to retain their political clout.

We’ve already seen Hagee, Parsley and Dobson sell out for McCain. The rest of the social conservative leadership structure will dance for their dinners in due time. That is the dynamic that is crucial...the movement leaders need to remain relevant and they’re obviously not going to do that in the Legislative Branch in 2008. Therefore they’re already primed to spin any veep pick as good enough to get their support.

No matter if it’s Lieberman or Ridge or Giuliani, the social conservative leadership will put on a mighty fine spectacle of finding the spin-able nuggets of social conservatism in any of them.