I don't see anything wrong with Liberals trying to get rid of Lieberman. Conservatives wanted Arlen Specter gone as well. I don't see the difference here.

The difference, Michael, is that the donks seem to think that "winning" will only work if they use different words to say the same thing, which is why they've hired Lackoff (rhymes with...) to help them "re-word" or "re-package" their message. They really and truly believe Americans are so stupid they will fall for their message if it is couched in just the right words! Ridiculous.

I understand that, DagneyT, but to criticize the Democrats simply for wanting a DINO out of the Senate is not any different than Republicans wanting a RINO out of the Senate (such as Specter). Granted, in this case, the reason the Dems want Lieberman gone is because of his stance on the War on Terror. THAT is to be criticized. The story is that they want their Party to be represented by people who are anti-Republican, no matter the harm done of those stances to the American people. That is reprehensible.

For both parties to push moderates out of the party is a bad thing. But we live in a conservative nation, so the Republicans can afford to go right while the Democrats can't afford to go left.

The day that a person like Joe Lieberman has no place within the Democratic Party is a sad day for us all, but especially for the Democrats. They should be following him not ousting him.

Michael,

My worry is not that the left wants to put pressure on (and remove, if possible) a centrist Democrat - its the reason why they want to do it; they seem convinced that America is ready for overt leftism and if the Democrats would be 100% united behind a loud and strong leftwing ideology, then they'll win. Even that is not the particular problem; the problem (or, strictly speaking) worry is that when this pipe dream goes up in smoke, what will the leftwing Democrats do?

We're seeing an increasing radicalization on the left; they become more overtly anti-American both in word and deed every day. My worry is that some of them, at least, will join America's armed enemies when they see their last political hopes disappear.

If Lieberman goes, then their will be very little credibility left to the Democratic Party. He use to be my Senator awhile back (when I lived in CT) and he is an excellent spokeman to the people of faith towards Democrats and Republicans.

If a campaign is launched against him, I would probably lend my blog resources (which may be few) in order to support him from down here. Lieberman is one of the few Democrats left with an open mind, and if the party continues to perecute people like him within their party, they will find themselves in a history book along with the whigs as major parties that affected America's past (with the Communistic Green or Libertarians replacing them).

I hope they do make the strong turn to the left. It will reduce their numbers in both houses, and hopefully get around the filibuster problem, and it will make it very very difficult for Hillary to veer to the center.

And maybe Joe will decide to become a Republican.

I have great respect for Joe Lieberman, I don't agree with him on a lot of issues but I do on some and I have never doubted his integrity or his loyalty to this country. That is a lot more than I can say for several members of his party.

I too have great respect for Joe Lieberman. He does have a great inegrity, and puts what's best for the country before partisan politics.

Here's to Joe winning his primary.

There is so much good news in this article, I don't know where to start. OK, we can look at the "Lieberman" problem first. Assume the donks decide to dump him in 2006. He comes from a donk region so a donk will replace him. Said replacement will have to be radically more left than Ol' Joe in order to get the support of the donk party. This will push the party even further to the left, maybe far enough that people like Michael Moore will start to look like mainstream donks. All the while, democracy takes hold in country after country in the Middle East. Syria and Iran toss out their dictators. The economy booms. Israel and Palestine reach their first real peace agreement and the new Palestinian state rises from the rubble of Arafat's compound. The UN gets rid of the corrupt Annan and cleans house, getting rid of all those who nearly destroyed it. The Dow reaches record highs. Unemployment goes to record lows. How does this hurt the Republicans? With every step to the left the donks go, they lose an exponential number of non-radical members to the Republicans. This process is only sped up by centrist donks finally realizing things aren't so bad after all. So, with great energy and verve, I say, Lieberman Must Go! Lieberman MUST Go! LIEBERMAN must Go!

Now if Joe is too moderate to be supported by the party (and who is in charge of the party?), what will they think of any centrist donk trying to get ahead? Hillary - toast. Richardson - toast. Only people like Kucinich need apply for national office. Real adherents to the mantra and tin foil hat wearers. The Republicans could run a statue of Reagan and get it elected against anything the far-left donks could field.

But I do have another scenario, which I think (and hope) might happen. Due to the strong push to the left led by Howlin' Howie, the donks suffer a disastrous defeat in 2006, giving Republicans 60 seats in the Senate and making it filibuster-proof. The solid Republican majority in the House is padded by another 10 seats or more. Two or three more governorships go to Republicans giving them over 30 states. This fiasco is blamed on none other than the abortionist from Vermont - Howard Dean. He resigns in anger and shortly afterward decides to start up a new, liberal political party. This fractures the Democrats with about 25 percent defecting to the new left-wing organization led by Dean. Now the Democrats cannot win anything. 2008 is a Republican landslide for the next President, George Allen from Virginia.

So, what do you all think?

"Now if Joe is too moderate to be supported by the party (and who is in charge of the party?), what will they think of any centrist donk trying to get ahead? Hillary - toast."

I think you underestimate the ABR part of the Democrats. ("Anyone But Repulicans") As we all know, there was a very small part of the 2004 electorate which actually voted for John Kerry. Most were ABB voters. And they, along with the liberal media, gave John Kerry a pass on any centrist/conservative/religious view he took, knowing that he was only taking that position to gain Conservative/Republican votes. I see the same thing happening with Hillary or any other centrist-appearing Democrat that is put out there. The Democrat base which simply hates Conservatives will give the Dem nominee a pass on any Conservatives views they speak of and will allow them to appear centrist, all the while criticizing Republicans for the very same things. Just like they did with President Bush. President Bush could not talk about religion, but when Kerry did it, it was so wonderful. President Bush could not talk about supporting the troops, but when Kerry did it, he was a war hero. Or when Kerry said anything, they knew he really didn't mean it. I feel the same thing will happen with Hillary. They know she doesn't mean most of what she says, unless she is talking about her socialist ideas.

I hope Scaramonga is right and things play out as he forecasts, but it is going to take a lot of hard work in the Grassroots once again in getting the truth out to the people. As we have a huge fight on our hands with the angry liberal media who refuse to get over the fact that they are dead wrong on pretty much everything.

I think you underestimate the ABR part of the Democrats.

Maybe, but you may be missing a larger point. Dean is in charge of the donks. He is not an ABR guy. He is a purist. He was the first donk after the last election that told donks to shut up about that "moderation" talk. Plus, he holds the Clintons directly responsible for his loss to Kerry in Iowa. And his is right about that. McAuliffe was Clinton's man - they pulled the strings and Howie was sent packing. He won't forget that so Hillary won't get much help from him. I'll also bet you he is the one behind getting rid of Lieberman. Dean is trying to purge the donks of any "Republican Lites' he can find. And at the same time, Hillary is bending like a pretzel to become more "moderate." Dean won't like that and he will not support it. Without his support (read dollars), Hill is history. Mark my words.

Very interesting scenario Scaromanga, but it sounds too good to be true. As Michael in MI said, it's gonna take alot of hard grassroots work.