Seriously.  Most people see Hillary or Pelosi as the key players, but in reality, Lieberman at this time is the person in DC with the most control and influence, not just of the Senate, but realistically of the Country as well.

Lieberman is a lifelong Democrat, with 18 years of Senate time.  He has also been a staunch supporter of the president and the war in Iraq, something that I admit surprised me..and pissed off a lot of liberals.  The Democrat’s 2000 nominee for the Vice Presidency was viciously attacked by the far left Soros inspired, Kos fueled Nutroots, who backed Ned Lamont in a primary election upset over Lieberman.  During that primary campaign he was snubbed harshly by the Democrats who feared the power of the Nutroots, who you can envision as the mob with torches and pitchforks in an old Frankenstein movie.  His former running mate¹ would not even endorse him.

Undaunted, Joe ran as an Independent, and amazingly, won.  I do not think it is wrong to assume that he had a lot of support from conservatives.

Let’s be honest, there are a million articles about how the democrats won and what it means, and I could take the next 2 hours and link them all in a massive round up.

And for what?  I doubt it would change anyone’s mind.

So here are a few of my scattered thoughts, linked to no where and honest.

Rumsfeld:

Ok so he resigned.  I don;t think this was a reactionary move, I think this was calculated.  Rumor says Gates was tapped over the weekend, which means they wanted the timing of this.

So the question is why?  A few bloggers suggests that timing acts to let Bush capture the issue quickly.  We know that the Dems are screaming for his head, and by doing so before the new congress goes into session Bush can take advantage fo this several ways:

• He captured the initiative and looks responsive.
• The Dems lose a talking point.
• He can control the replacement easier.

It makes sense.  And yes, I always look for a hidden agenda and hidden motive when dealing with politicians.  I am usually right.

The story from the NY Post today details what many have known for a while, that lurking beneath the cultured and urbane, proudly civilized tolerant surface of the Democratic Party is a hateful Anti-Semitic ugliness. Anyone who has perused Moveon.org or Daily Kos has seen this.

Now, this should not be assumed to be a plank in the Democratic Platform.  I would never assume that many liberals I know and respect are bigoted idiots.

But there is a farily vocal minority that is.

HATEFUL ‘MOVE’ VS. JOE– SITE’S ANTI-JEWISH SLURS

September 5, 2006 — A string of anti-Semitic rants about Sen. Joe Lieberman have popped up on the liberal MoveOn.org’s open forum Web site, drawing criticism from the Anti-Defamation League.

It’s the latest flap in the contentious race between Lieberman, who is running as an independent to keep his seat in Connecticut, and upstart Ned Lamont, the Democratic nominee.

Since Lieberman is Jewsih, the ADL is justifiably concerned:

"We recognize that Action Forum is an open forum intended to foster the free flow of ideas," ADL head Abraham Foxman said in a letter dated Aug. 31 to MoveOn, which supported Lamont in the Democratic primary against Lieberman.

The final word from the Burner campaign regarding their deceptive campaign video is….

NOTHING

Disappointing really,  I would have expected at least another standard denial, but despite repeated requests, they have elected to make no further response.

I have no choice but to assume it was deliberate.

So today on Goldy’s blog I saw a video displayed proudly that featured Ms Burner speaking at the DNC convention in Chicago.

Stefan at Sound Politics called it hysterical rantings.

See for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R81j3LjrTJc

Well that may be a little overboard, but I found little that was new or interesting in it.  At best she sounds like a typical democratic shill that has decided that all the problems of the world are:

George Bush’s fault
The Republican controlled Congress’s fault.
George Bush and the Republican controlled Congress’s fault

Oh.  And she needs money.

At worst she is a politician who is playing to her chosen base.

She invokes images of our war victories and national accomplishments, then characterizes the war as a potential defeat.