By Michael J. Smith on Wednesday August 30, 2006 04:29 PM
Here's Markos Moulitsas, crowing like Peter Pan after Lamont's primary victory in Connecticut:
Rahm slams Lieberman. Hard.Fast-forward. Here's Rahm last week, on the subject of Lieberman's effect on the Connecticut House races:"This shows what blind loyalty to George Bush and being his love child means," said Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the leader of the Democratic House Congressional campaign. "This is not about the war. It's blind loyalty to Bush."Love child? Last time he commented on this race, a couple of days ago, he used "politically dangerous to life-threatening". I like "love child" much better, and quite the apt description of Lieberman. You can feel the disdain. No subtlety at all.I think we all like Rahm much better tonight, huh?
Rahm Emanuel, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, expressed confidence that Democratic turnout would be strong for the House races in Connecticut.Gotta love that Rahm. Guy makes Dr Pangloss look like H.L. Mencken. "Love-child" Lieberman is now a Democrat again, and it's all just great, really.“Explain to me how two Democrats running is bad,” Mr. Emanuel said in an interview. “Would I prefer it be simpler? Yeah. But everybody is hyperventilating, and my own view is that we have an energized base.”
Comments (4)
the one ...the only
rahmbo !!!!!!
Posted by js paine | August 30, 2006 10:08 PM
Posted on August 30, 2006 22:08
Rahm E.:
If I were running a pro-war party, that's how I'd spin the Liebs flop, too.
The Rahmocrats are badly positioned for the post-Iraq hangover. His new page-turner, The Plan: Big Ideas for America, declares terrorism to be "one of two wars America cannot afford to lose." So vital is this war against "terrorists out to destroy our way of life" that he'd pull America's youth away from MySpace for three full months of "universal citizen service": apparently, lots of rehearsing earthquake and anti-terror drills.
Vive la dime's worth of difference!
Posted by Reechard | August 30, 2006 11:20 PM
Posted on August 30, 2006 23:20
The muddled cluckers -- the "we broke it, we bought it" Democrats -- are nearly as bad and more likely to get the enduring blame, post bug out, when the wingnuts indulge their Dolchstoss frenzy.
Posted by J. Alva Scruggs | August 31, 2006 5:01 AM
Posted on August 31, 2006 05:01
Two democrats running? Holy John Hoyt! How many sides does this guy's face have, anyway? Being a major player in The Other War Party must be wearing the Rhamster down.
Posted by AlanSmithee | August 31, 2006 7:14 AM
Posted on August 31, 2006 07:14