I wish I could agree with Mr. Greenwald's assessment of the impact that a Lieberman loss would have on both parties ("... a Lamont victory would deal a hard blow to the power of incumbency and the entitlement mindset it has spawned") but even if Lieberman loses BIG I think it'll be back to business as usual once the dust settles. The only thing that's going to deal a hard blow to the power of incumbency is to vote a crapload of these clowns out of office in November. If that happens then (and only then) might an optimist say that the remaining incumbents will become more responsive to their constituents. (A cynical pessimist like me will say that when that 98% incumbency rate drops the party machines will probably just kick their gerrymandering into high gear so that it will take an act of God or a scandal of immense proportions to replace an incumbent.)

What a pity that they didn't include term limits on senators and representatives when the 22nd amendment was proposed in 1947 and ultimately ratified back in 1951. While there may be a lot of good arguments against term limits, one need only look at the current Congress, without doubt the most "do nothing" Congress since 1948, to find one helluva good argument FOR term limits.

I watched Diane Sawyer interview Lieberman this morning on Good Morning America and, not surprisingly, Joe is STILL clueless, declaring that Democrats who aren't in the mainstream highjacked the CT primary and voted for Lamont. Sawyer's questions were softballs, to put it mildly, although she did ask him if he was in the race (as an Independent) to stay. His answer, of course, was a resounding YES... he's going to spend the next 3 months reaching out to the 93% of registered voters who didn't vote yesterday because they deserve a chance to vote for him. (AAARGH!!)

Sawyer barely touched on the issue of him dividing the Democratic vote by running as an independent and never even mentioned his refusal to withdraw as a candidate for the Senate back in 2000 when he accepted the VP slot with Al Gore (knowing that if Gore/Lieberman won, the Republican CT governor would appoint a Republican to replace him in the Senate). As usual (and didn't his "concession speech" prove it), it's all about JOE, and, as usual, Joe's first loyalty is to himself instead of to the people who elected him and to the Democratic Party that he's now abandoned. Here's hoping the DNC unites behind Lamont with everything it's got and here's hoping the people of Connecticut see Joe Lieberman for what he's become - a self-centered shill for George Bush and his divisive, imperial policies. As for me, I can't vote for Ned Lamont but this 58 year-old MAINSTREAM Democrat from Ohio just visited Lamont's website and contributed to his campaign.

If the "National" Democrats are serious about supporting Ned Lamont then every darned one of them should make at least one trip to Connecticut to campaign for Ned Lamont. And might we not take Lieberman's declaration this morning that he was going to run as an Independent as his official resignation from the Democratic Party?? Unless he changes his mind, I'd kick Joe Lieberman off every committee and subcommitee that he sits on. (See list below.) Joe Lieberman hasn't shown one shred of loyalty to his constituents or to the Democratic Party ... his constituents have returned the favor, now it's time for the Democratic Party to do the same!

• Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (Ranking Member and former Chairman)
• Environment and Public Works Committee
• Senate Armed Services Committee (Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on AirLand Forces AND member of the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities)
• Small Business Committee

This Ohio voter is devoutly hoping that it's NOT a close election. If there's any justice, J. Kenneth Blackwell, who's still in charge of Ohio elections even though he's running for governor, will get CLOBBERED by his Democratic opponent, Ken Strickland, and Sen. Mike DeWine will be sent packing by Sherrod Brown. Given what Blackwell was able to do as Secretary of State and chief elections officer in 2004 though, it may take a Democratic LANDSLIDE to actually pry any Republicans out of office in Ohio.

In addition to the expected problems with electronic voting machines in Ohio (availability and accuracy), expect provisional ballots to be a big problem/issue too since many Ohio voters may not be aware that they're now going to be required to present an ID before they'll be allowed to vote in November. It's my understanding that people who don't have a valid ID will be turned away and if there's discrepancies between your voting address and the address on your ID, you'll forced to cast a provisional ballot (something that usually flummoxes most Ohio poll workers!) There's every reason to believe that Blackwell will make sure there's not enough voting machines in Democratic precincts again this year, just as he did in 2004, and would anybody be surprised if the ID requirement was much more strictly enforced in Democratic precincts than in Republican precincts? That would be classic Blackwell!

Fortunately, I live in neighboring Summit county so my vote may not be as much at risk in November as voters in Cuyahoga county but I'm not taking any chances. In Ohio anyone can request a good old-fashioned paper absentee ballot and I plan on doing exactly that. Ken Blackwell or one of his minions may toss my ballot into the trash when it arrives but at least it won't be rattling around inside some corrupted Diebold voting machine.