Party of Entitlement

by Jason at 6:00 am on August 9th, 2006 in Politics

As you may have heard, primary elections yesterday provided a scenario that is rarely witnessed in today’s political world—that of an incumbent being shown the door. So, to Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) and Joe Schwarz (R-MI) we give a hearty virtual pat on the back and directions toward the exits.

What, you thought this post was going to be about Joe Lieberman?

Well, you’re right. But we thought it would be helpful to remind you that—despite Joementum’s unfortunate head-on collision with the brick wall of disappointed Connecticut Democrats—he’s not the only incumbent who wound up on the raw end of the voting results yesterday, even though no one bothered to frame those races as the kind of BIG DEAL that makes pundits start foaming at the mouth. A Lieberman loss, the pundits inferred, would result in mass anarchy among the Democratic party, driven by rabid überliberal hippy bloggers who would hold the party hostage and enjoy nothing more than driving the last decent, honest politician away from his life’s calling. When voters turn away from the shining beacon of light known as Joe Lieberman, all is lost!

But as of today, the only thing that’s proven to be lost is Lieberman’s attempts to win the primary election. Not that it matters, though—chances are he will pull the lever on his “do-over” and run as an independent. Obviously, the will of the majority of Connecticut Democrats are no match for Joe Lieberman’s capacity to ignore their wishes. It’s called being a bad loser. It’s called ego. His independent party of one may as well be called the Party of Entitlement.

Joe Lieberman got what he deserved. Not because of his positions on the Iraq war or the bankruptcy bill or the issue of access to morning-after contraceptives, but because no elected official in a democracy should assume that they are entitled to power just because they’ve been there a while. The people of Connecticut thought that Ned Lamont better represented their views, and that in itself should be enough to make a change. Lieberman, however, seems so convinced of his absolute right to be in the Senate that he is willing to ignore these results and run as an independent, no matter what damage it may do to the party that, up until about yesterday, he was so very loyal to.

But of course there will always be someone else to blame, such as bloggers, anti-war groups, the New York Times, or the Lamont campaign’s dirty tricks/vicious attack ads/mind control techniques/etc. It’s not Lieberman’s fault that he lost touch with the very people he is supposed to represent…don’t you know that this job is his birthright?

Comments

  1. SmokinJ wrote:

    I feel that the vast majority of federal politicians have “lost touch with the people they were supposed to represent”. In fact, we have cases like Mrs. Clinton, who decided that she could just move someplace she wasn’t from and represent people she knew nothing about, simply becauser it gave her a brighter stage from which to launch her presidential campaign. And the idiots in New York actually fell for it. While I am encouraged that the people in several cases decided they had had enough of the politics of their representatives, I have no hope that the status quo will change.

    Lieberman, in his desire to maintain power, will cause irreparable damage to the Democratic party in his state, practically handing a seat in the senate to either himself or a Republican (can anyone tell the difference?)

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*

*