In 2006, the long-time Democratic Senator, Joe Lieberman, lost the nomination to the liberal Democratic candidate Ned Lamont. Lieberman then changed party affiliation to "Independent Democrat," and then won the election by gathering support from CT Republicans. The tally was Lieberman 50%, Lamont 40%. The Republican candidate, Alan Schlesinger, garnered a mere 10% of the vote.

Was Lieberman's a "move toward the center?" Or simply a selling of his soul?

Instead of commenting @ UT, you will buy us Shea stadium bleacher seats?

Sometimes you remind readers of a dachshund honey bear, or better. hon.

You talk like a flatlander.

Try not to scare 0-Rove up into one of your backyard banana trees. Banality.

Rove etc.,

o, hellbent.

o, tenement.

o, safty pins.

o, diaper boy.

not you, miss P.

You call folk honey.

http://www.npr.org/about/press/061024_rove.html

All Things Considered, October 24, 2006

[...]

ROBERT SIEGEL: I'm looking at all the same polls that you are looking at.

KARL ROVE: No, you are not. I'm looking at 68 polls a week for candidates for the US House and US Senate, and Governor and you may be looking at 4-5 public polls a week that talk attitudes nationally.

SIEGEL: I don't want to have you to call races...

ROVE: I'm looking at all of these Robert and adding them up.
I add up to a Republican Senate and Republican House.
You may end up with a different math but you are entitled to your math and I'm entitled to THE math.

SIEGEL: I don't know if we're entitled to a different math but your...

ROVE: I said THE math.

- - Karl Rove on NPR 10/24/2006

* * *

http://nytimes.com/2008/06/29/opinion/29rich.html

[...] Among the only durable legacies of the Bush presidency are the twin fears that Mr. Rove relentlessly pushed on his client’s behalf: fear of terrorism and fear of gays. But these pillars are disintegrating too. They’re propped up mainly by [...] Washington insiders who are still in Mr. Rove’s sway and are still refighting the last political war.

That the old Rove mojo still commands any respect is rather amazing given how blindsided he was by 2006. Two weeks before that year’s midterms, he condescendingly lectured an NPR interviewer about how he devoured “68 polls a week” — not a mere 67, mind you — and predicted unequivocally that Election Day would yield “a Republican Senate and a Republican House.” These nights you can still find Mr. Rove hawking his numbers [...]

- - Frank Rich 06/29/2008

Voting is not a zero-sum game. Your offset argument is nonsense. My vote is not a chess piece. My non-vote does not wind up in McCain's column; it's simply a vote that Obama has lost.

As to your conception of our Constitutional rights: The courts have held that all of us have a reasonable expectation of privacy in our phone calls, even when calling outside the country. Do you not agree?

And even if you don't agree and are willing to relinquish your Constitutional rights, I guess I'm wondering why. Don't you see the possibility for abuse there? Read some of my other posts for a hypothetical that might change your mind.

And if you're still not convinced, then at least tell me what is so onerous about requiring the government to obtain a warrant under the current FISA scheme for tapping those calls? Enlighten me.

I must have missed that.

” These nights you can still find Mr. Rove hawking his numbers [...]

- - Frank Rich 06/29/2008

-- sysprog

Shooter just told us that being "arrogant pricks" is not the way to win elections. If Shooter was thinking of Karl Rove when he wrote that I'd agree. But, of course, he wasn't.

Are either of you involved in community gardens and if so, would you have any contacts in Decatur, IL and Norfolk, VA? I'm doing a national study (on equity and social capital) and am having difficulty locating community gardens in those two cities.

Cheers.

P.S. GC--Where is Surfdog today?

The homophobic pastisanship in 2006 happened when the republicans ran Foley out of office

Not a chance. The leadership was blamed for protecting Foley not pushing him out....
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/30/foley-coverup-timeline/

And the racism you mention above came straight from a Republican horse's ass....er 'mouth'.

Still no chance. Allen said "macaca", YOU'RE the one saying it's racist. There's a huge difference.

Pedinska. I am begging that you don't kiss any of those guys nic`lame, fake cowboys, labled, Hay!

Hay, 'Tex' ...

No on the lips!

One kiss from you and the heart might cease ticking. In the old days a Lady would go after those politico's who lied.

If people died from lies?

over 4,000 plus millions?

remember the M.E. victim.

The Ladies would go bite.

They'd bite into a face lip.

One kiss. Beads. O Sweat.

You even call folk, `Sweet.

At autumn? O dear pumpkin.

While I agree with Glenn, what I think Obama is doing is taking out an insurance policy. As detailed by Frank Rich today, the Republicans -- if not hoping for -- certainly believe that a terrorist attack will help them win the election. And, so Obama is supporting this ridiculous bill so they can't say -- this attack could have been stopped by FISA which Obama opposed or if an attack is stopped, they will lie and say, this attack was stopped by eavesdropping which Obama opposed.

Well done, Glenn. Obama isn't required to drift in the direction he's going for the voters. So, it's reasonable to wonder who he has in mind as he marches right. I hope it doesn't wind up costing him the election. Should he lose, any number of tired arguments will be dragged out of mothballs, but I won't believe 'em when they try to tell me it was race, 527 attack campaigns, or a fear of taxes.

Personally, I supported Edwards. Still do. When I look back over the primary results and take another look at the map drawn by The Political Compass, I have to wonder if Hillary wasn't fundamentally more honest in her campaign. No way to know, and it's pointless to speculate, I suspect.

Politically, the center seemed have been defined between Bill Richards and John McCain, rather than between, say, Edwards and Kucinich. Of course, that's the way our more "viable" Primary candidates saw it. But who defined "viable," I wonder? I don't think it was the American people who decided. The majority of the primary candidates sat securely in the Authoritarian Right.

If I wanted to quip, I'd argue that the political center of the country is located somewhere between Flagstaff, AZ and Albuquerque, NM.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/usprimaries2008