> So
> sure, use Lamont as a protest vote or as a way to argue against the
> war (but hardly against U.S. imperialism or even against jingoism... )
> but don't think that electing Lamont is anything but electing another
> bastard.
I'm in a bit of a quandary about this.
Lieberman's long-time puppet masters don't seem to be willing to give him up without a fight. (I don't feel I know exactly who all those puppet-masters are, but the Israel lobby is certainly among them, which is just about enough for me.) Not that they care about him, as such, but I don't think they want the Helots of the Democratic Party getting the idea that they can defy the Spartiates' will. I'm starting to get the impression that in some influential quarters, at least, Connecticut is coming to be seen as a no-pasaran. These nobodies think they can deflect the Democratic Party from the course we have chosen for it? Think again, O foolish and presumptuous rabble. Now if the four-star Orcs of the Democratic Party Mordor have decided that Connecticut needs to be a decisive battle, something in me says that it would be nice if they lost it.
On the other hand, I have sworn a great and terrible oath, solemnized in a cypress grove at midnight in the dark of the moon and sealed with the blood of an albino jackass, never to vote for another Democrat (except under certain quite specific conditions which I cannot reveal). So I can hardly urge anybody else to do so either.
In one way, I would like to see the firm of Schumer, Rattner, From, Pelosi, Clinton and Reid, LLC, reassert control of the party and put an end to any delusions that it can be wrested from its masters. But there is a disagreeable whiff of the-worse-the-better about this.
Then of course the chagrin of Vile Joe if he fought the election with all kinds of Wall Street and Lobby muscle behind him, and still lost -- never deny yourself a pleasure needlessly.
I appeal to the collective wisdom of the list. Aid me in my perplexity.
--
Michael J. Smith
http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org