We interrupt this blog to talk politics for a moment. My sincere apologies.
It was interesting to follow the Lieberman-Lamont Senate campaign from a distance. (If I were in Boston I'd be getting more of the local angle) Instead, I got most of my information from CNN and Salon, which almost balanced each other out. My impression of Lamont is none too positive- like Corzine with better hair- but I'm glad he won. If you're a progressive Democrat, this now becomes THE most important race of the year- if Lamont loses, I think it shows that the left is nothing but a political niche capable of being stomped by the Republicans anytime they want.
However, I think one can overstate Lieberman's loss. Glenn Greenwald is filling in at War Room this week, and I think he nailed it:
"It cannot be argued in good faith that Democrats are intolerant of any elected official who supported the war in Iraq or that such support is some sort of "litmus test." There are scores of pro-war Democrats who are not being ejected from the party or even being challenged electorally. Lieberman went far beyond mere support for the war, and repeatedly adopted the most demonizing and extremist rhetoric used by Bush's supporters to equate opposition to the Bush administration's foreign policies with anti-Americanism and support for America's enemies. It should surprise nobody if the people whom Lieberman has been attacking and demonizing in this manner decide that they would like to have a different senator. "
I think the Dems need to be mch more raucous, and much more creative, in their efforts to push Bush and cronies fully onto the defensive this fall. Lamont could be a step in the right direction. In my mind the jury's still out.
And, to attempt fair and balanced, there is now a politically conservative jazz blog on the web,