Now why would Hannity get behind Joe? Why would he say good things about Joe? It's easy. Joe is a reliable supporter for Bush and the Republican agenda. Joe is a Bush apologist who saves Bush and the senate from splitting strictly along partisan lines, so Republicans can say the extremist legislation they introduce and pass is bipartisan.
Joe is an enabler for right wing extremists to go further to the right.
Hannity talks warm and fuzzy about Joe Lieberman because Lieberman is buddy buddy with Sean, appearing on his show as an affable, agreeable guest, backing up the Republican talking points. Hannity gives Lieberman a pass, of course, and that way, Lieberman seems like a well trained, "good" democrat. Then, Hannity can go after Lieberman's detractors-- the rest of the Democratic party, all those disgusing liberals who are proceeding in the "Michael Moorization" of the Democratic party.
Lieberman says his opponent is asking people to vote against hiim because of one issue, his position on the Iraq war.
Fox news ran a panel on Lieberman.
Charles Krauthammer says, "it's the end of a certain kind of Democrat-- new deal, liberal, but hawkish on foreign affairs. Lieberman as a hawkish democrat is also on the way out."
So, we have an interesting situation. Bush will help Lieberman if he runs as an independent, by staying out of the state, making it easier on Lieberman. The Republican party will help Lieberman by not strongly funding the Republican candidate-- a weak one anyway, but still, REPUBLICANS are saying they will help Joe Lieberman.
We know people by their friends. It is time to get rid of Joe Lieberman-- not just because he has been a loyal supporter of Bush's position on the Iraq war, but because Lieberman has become a right winger. His claims to having been a progressive democrat may be true. But they are in the past and the reality on the ground now, in the senate, in Washington, is that Joe has to go. He's a right wing enabler and friend.
As write this, Lieberman and Lamont are debating. Lieberman starts off with a standard M.O.-- attacking Lamont for not having a plan, for flip-flopping. It's as though Lieberman used right wing, Republican spinmeister/writer to prepare for the debate.
Lieberman rails against Lamont-- "There you go again.." a famous Reagan line. He does a few more times-- very Reaganesque.
By the end of the debate, I'm feeling better than before about Lamont. He's not as polished as Lieberman, but he hasn't run for vice president or three times for senator before either. Overall, Lieberman came across as a bit desperate, getting nasty, repeating the same talking point too often, claiming pride in being an old school politician, pride in playing the political game that Lamont said it is time to get rid of.
In the debate, Lieberman asked, repeatedly, "Who is Ned Lamont." Lamont really didn't answer. He didn't have an answer and he should. it's not hard to do. An effective candidate will have stories from his life that define and portray who he is-- in a way that touches people's hearts.
Lamont has a WAY to go as a campaigner. He does need to more clearly define who he is. But we already know who Lieberman is, and it is TIME for Lieberman to go.
Next incumbent to dump-- Charles Schumer. (Well, not NEXT, but high on the list.)