RNC website trashes Kos for opposing Lieberman

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

RNC seems to really want Lieberman re-elected. Look at this total garbage at the official RNC website.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=6508



How dare some blogger in Berkeley oppose their pal Lieberman?

[Nym90]

I didn't realize DailyKos was based in Berkeley. Have you actually met Zuninga, Jfern?

In any event, I don't care what the RNC has to say about anything, especially a Senate race between two Democrats.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I didn't realize DailyKos was based in Berkeley. Have you actually met Zuninga, Jfern?

In any event, I don't care what the RNC has to say about anything, especially a Senate race between two Democrats.

There's only one Democrat running in the CT Senate race. Lieberman is a member of the Connecticut for Lieberman party, and he is running with support from the Republican party.

[MODU]

I didn't realize DailyKos was based in Berkeley. Have you actually met Zuninga, Jfern?

In any event, I don't care what the RNC has to say about anything, especially a Senate race between two Democrats.

There's only one Democrat running in the CT Senate race. Lieberman is a member of the Connecticut for Lieberman party, and he is running with support from the Republican party.

That is just the name of the party created in order for him to run.  As he has announced multiple times, he is a democrat and will continue to vote as such when re-elected.  The republicans in that state would rather keep the devil they know, rather one they don't.  I can't blame them either.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I didn't realize DailyKos was based in Berkeley. Have you actually met Zuninga, Jfern?

In any event, I don't care what the RNC has to say about anything, especially a Senate race between two Democrats.

There's only one Democrat running in the CT Senate race. Lieberman is a member of the Connecticut for Lieberman party, and he is running with support from the Republican party.

That is just the name of the party created in order for him to run.  As he has announced multiple times, he is a democrat and will continue to vote as such when re-elected.  The republicans in that state would rather keep the devil they know, rather one they don't.  I can't blame them either.

So Lieberman is going to get 80% of the Republican vote and 30% of the Democratic vote, and then just remain a Democrat? Sounds fishy to me. This is Lieberman, he's been known to lie (quite a few times) before.

[MODU]

So Lieberman is going to get 80% of the Republican vote and 30% of the Democratic vote, and then just remain a Democrat?

Yup.

[Nym90]

Well if Lieberman becomes an actual Independent (or God forbid a Republican, although that would be pretty unlikely given how liberal he is on a lot of issues, albeit ones that are not currently high on the national agenda) in the Senate, I'd most definitely be for Lamont. At this time, I see him as doing us more good than harm overall by moderating our overall image, plus being a key ally on the economic issues I care about the most. If the war was the only thing that mattered, I'd be for Lamont, but there are other factors to consider, and I think overall Lieberman has been an excellent Senator even though I disagree with him strongly on Iraq, of course.

You do have to admit it's cool to see the Republican with 4 percent, however.

[MODU]

You do have to admit it's cool to see the Republican with 4 percent, however.

And people get on my case for wanting at least one more dominant party in our political system.    See how much more interesting it makes politics?

[nlm]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can not say I surf the ultra partisan worlds of the DNC and RNC web sites, but what sort of audience are they going after using terms like "nutroot", "hate-filled blog", and "defeatocrats" - I've heard 1st graders that spoke using less non-sense phrases. This is just immature babbling. Is this standard practice for the RNC site? Should I not be surprised?

[WalterMitty]

id imagine...

if john mccain lost a republican primary in az and decided to run as an indy, with only a sacrifical lamb democrat on the ballot, most dems would be supporting mccain (even though he is quite conservative)

[Rob]

Obviously the RNC feels that the war is the most important issue of the day

You do have to admit it's cool to see the Republican with 4 percent, however.

I think it's a disgrace that the Republicans have abandoned their candidate in favor of Holy Joe.

[WalterMitty]

Obviously the RNC feels that the war is the most important issue of the day

You do have to admit it's cool to see the Republican with 4 percent, however.

I think it's a disgrace that the Republicans have abandoned their candidate in favor of Holy Joe.

i beleive joe scared away any potential serious republican challengers months ago, when it appeared lieberman would coast to the nomination and victory.

id bet a dollar that if republicans had thought there was any possibility of joe losing the primary, more serious republican candidates would have entered the race.

[DanielX]

As if the RNC needed an excuse to trash Kos. He's a loonie with lots of gravitas among the more radical members of the Left.

[TheresNoMoney]

As if the RNC needed an excuse to trash Kos.

They wouldn't be trashing him if they didn't fear him.

[Citizen James]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can not say I surf the ultra partisan worlds of the DNC and RNC web sites, but what sort of audience are they going after using terms like "nutroot", "hate-filled blog", and "defeatocrats" - I've heard 1st graders that spoke using less non-sense phrases. This is just immature babbling. Is this standard practice for the RNC site? Should I not be surprised?

Hang on.  Is that the actual website of the national RNC?  (the link from wiki would seem to indicate so).

I mean I would expect such childish rhetoric from partisan knockoffs like democrats.com (which is supportive of but not  affiliated with the national Democratic party), but the national face of the national party???

I'd be cringing if I were still a Republican.  I mean has the party really fallen this far since the days of Ronald Wilson Reagan, or have they simply been so taken with old times that they don't take their internet presence seriously and leave their sites management the third rate hacks?

I could go on another rant about how the reform LPers are closer to the party of Reagan, Bush I, Nixon, and even Goldwater than today's GOP - but I don't really fell like going over it again.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Yes, that's the actual RNC website. When your party controls every branch of the federal government, and has been running this once great country into the ground, you have to base your campaign on going after some dude with a website.

[J. J.]

id imagine...

if john mccain lost a republican primary in az and decided to run as an indy, with only a sacrifical lamb democrat on the ballot, most dems would be supporting mccain (even though he is quite conservative)

Obviously.

[Rob]

He's a loonie with lots of gravitas among the more radical members of the Left.

Um... Kos isn't particularly "leftist"- he's actually been known to ban members who are too left-wing. The site is more about Democratic partisanship than liberalism, which is why the vast majority of its users support people like Harold Ford.

[??????????]

Um... Kos isn't particularly "leftist"-

*dies laughin*

[Rob]

States, you don't know what you're talking about. I think we established this in the thread where you called it the "DailyKommunist" and refused to believe that kos gets accurate polling information before it's released.

Anyone who has actually been to the site will tell you that the focus is partisan, not ideological.

[??????????]

States, you don't know what you're talking about. I think we established this in the thread where you called it the "DailyKommunist" and refused to believe that kos gets accurate polling information before it's released.

Anyone who has actually been to the site will tell you that the focus is partisan, not ideological.

And I'm sure that regulars at FreeRepublic will tell me that's a credible source as well.

[riceowl]

States, you don't know what you're talking about. I think we established this in the thread where you called it the "DailyKommunist" and refused to believe that kos gets accurate polling information before it's released.

Anyone who has actually been to the site will tell you that the focus is partisan, not ideological.

eh...member here.  and I frequent the site.

Can't say it's not leftist.  It may be based more on supporting a Democratic party agenda, but it's still a leftist site.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's more sectarian (as in; sects of a Party rather than sects of a Religion) than anything else.

[MODU]

It's more sectarian (as in; sects of a Party rather than sects of a Religion) than anything else.

No, just primarily immature.  There is a ton of swearing and character assasination on that site.  By far an inferrior site compared to the Atlas. 

[Rob]

Can't say it's not leftist.  It may be based more on supporting a Democratic party agenda, but it's still a leftist site.

The great majority of members are liberals, of course. But those that are too extreme (like the "9/11 tin-foil hatters") meet a grisly end. Just today someone wrote a diary attacking Harold Ford and urging Kossacks to vote Green. He was troll-rated and met with comments like "this is a Democratic blog, not a liberal blog". That's why it's frustrating when blatantly uninformed people say DK is a socialist website, or whatever.

Do you actually post there, btw?