Here is a taste of just how bad it is going to be, no matter what happens, and some of the best writing that is currently being produced in response.
David Sirota on Lenny Davis:
But then, in Lanny Davis's cloistered world of wood-paneled offices and cocktail parties, no - Joe's embrace of the right-wing hate machine is labeled smart politics and anonymous blog posts from people who Ned Lamont has never met and has no control over is the real serious problem. Davis hilariously demands Lamont halt his campaign, and publicly repudiate anonymous blog posts everytime they are posted. Meanwhile, he doesn't ask Joe Lieberman to repudiate Pat Robertson or at the very least, stop appearing on the very television program Robertson has used to call for the bombing of the U.S. government and death of top U.S. government officials.
John Aravosis on Dan Balz:
Balz totally misconstrues what Lieberman said about the Democrats. Lieberman didn't warn us of anything. He accused us of endangering America's national security simply because we were speaking the truth about the wrong direction this country was his heading in. After 5 years of successful Republican efforts to stifle free speech and debate in America, to have one of our own adopt the Republican "dissenters are traitors" mantra simply broke the camel's back (and Lieberman reiterated the same thing yesterday). (To Balz's credit, the rest of his article points out the other reasons Connecticut voters are upset with Lieberman, but by then the damage from the article is done.)
What do I suggest the media do differently in its coverage? How about you ask us about what motivates us, rather than simply pull it out of your imagination. Interview the top bloggers. Interview the voters in Connecticut. Ask them what motivates them. Don't just assume, ASK us, ask THEM.
Digby on Marty Peretz:
Whether it's overly sensitive Democrats who have been traumatized by decades of "bug the liberal" taunts or just mainstream members of the old resentment tribe like Peret, those who feel such terror and revulsion at passionate liberalism are obviously in the grip of some sort of emotional tidal wave. I don't think there is any hope for the latter; they are a permanent fixture in American politics. But the first need to start questioning their assumptions if they want to keep up. Their knee jerk evocations of 1968 are no less anachronistic than are Peretz's throwbacks to McCarthyism. This is psychology at work not political analysis and the chattering classes need to take a good hard look in the mirror and recognize that.
You really can't read this histrionic classist, racist, red-baiting tirade without wondering why Peretz maintains the fiction that he is a Democrat --- or why Democrats should henceforth concern themselves with his opinion any more than they worry about William Kristol's.
Also,
Politics TV has video of a typical anti-netroots "smear" from Matthews. Can someone please explain to me why being able to work at home in your pajama's is a bad thing? Jealous much?
But all this in ancillary, and we can deal with it later on. I just received word of huge, nearly presidential level turnout in a nearby ward that we believe is favorable to Lamont. That is some good news.
