Soros vs. Reason

Normally I try to discuss issues pertinent to the events of the week. However, due to popular demand, I will make a few comments on Joe Lieberman's Senate primary loss last Tuesday.

Many people who casually follow politics are not sure why the country was captivated by a primary race in one corner of the nation. There were several factors that thrust this race under the microscope, but political observers mainly wanted to see if Connecticut Democrats would really oust Lieberman. This contest was viewed as a likely predictor of two things: 1. the direction that the Democratic party is headed; and 2. the probable outcome of the November midterm elections.

This race featured a George Soros/moveon.org backed antiwar millionaire, Ned Lamont, versus the slightly-left-of-center three term incumbent, Joe Lieberman. In the past two decades, Lieberman has been one of the most universally respected actors in American politics. His honesty, integrity, and willingness to reach across the aisle to solve problems has earned high praise from Democrats and Republicans alike. Now, whenever the waaay lefties act up publicly, Democrats always claim that they do not represent the meat and taters of their party - that they are simply fringe allies.

And so the stage was set. Would the antiwar leftists hijack the Democratic party and oust one of its most respected politicians? Or would the more reasonable Dems rise to the challenge and crush Soros and the moveon.org wing of the party?

Unfortunately, we now know that the new base of the Democratic party won the day. The importance of an established three term incumbent losing in a primary cannot be overstated. This shows the power and influence that the "fringe" of the blues now has over the Democratic party.

Lieberman immediately announced that he would run in the general election as an independent, and local polls show that he is in the lead as such. He will undoubtedly pick up a large portion of the Republican vote, and I believe that he has a good chance of winning re-election as an Independent.

As a result of this primary, I expect the following to happen:

1. The Democrats were primed for a big win in November. Thanks to the foiled terror plot a mere day after the results were announced, they have never looked more weak on national defense. They might pick up some seats in the midterm elections, but will not take over the government.

2. The Democratic party is one at crossroads. The struggle between the old party moderates and the new socialist base will rage for quite a while. I would not be surprised in the least to see a third party, or maybe just a serious third party candidate for president, emerge from this in the coming decade. I think the old party faithful are disgusted by Soros and his cronies and would not be surprised to see some effort at a break.

Random Thoughts on the matter:

The day after the results were made public, VP Dick Cheney said that Lieberman's defeat was a "victory for the al Qaeda types." Naturally, he was chastised and accused of being a cheap shot artist. Normally I would agree. I actually got sick to my stomach reading an Ann Coulter book this past week. However, in this case, he is right. Any way that you dice it, AQI (al Qaeda in Iraq) and their insurgency has had a major impact on our domestic political landscape. Mission accomplished. Would they rather have a Lieberman or Lamont?

The "big money Republican candidate" stereotype is no longer fair game for Democratic challengers. Billionaires like George Soros and his PACs are buying leftist candidates exposure - and then ultimately elections.
The first step in recapturing the party of Jefferson will be the reelection of Lieberman...ironically...as an Independent.