schumer.jpg

Ryan Lizza’s new OH GET A ROOM article on Chuck Schumer is extremely enlightening.  As Matt Stoller says, "It’s a portrait of the most extreme version of a Reagan Democrat, a Senator whose core characteristic is a weird sort of intense and narcissistic cynicism."

As head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) it’s Schumer’s job to take back the majority in the Senate in November.  A worthy goal, and nobody is denying the necessity of much of the hard-nosed pragmatism Schumer has exercised in getting the job done.  But it is a goal he pursues by demanding ideological fealty to the middle and abandonment of progressives and progressive values. No doubt this is why he led a boycott of Feingold’s Judiciary Committee censure hearings.  He envisions a party that stands for almost nothing.

I’m sure grassroots opposition of Joe Lieberman vexes Schumer no end, and yet we continue.  In fact, I think Schumer owes us an answer.  Bush’s favorite Democrat got upset with Salon the other day when Walter Shapiro’s article indicated that he was ruling out a run as an independent.  He will not commit to support Ned Lamont in Connecticut if Ned wins the nomination.  

The DSCC needs to demand that Joe Lieberman commit to the party or cut him off.  No money, no polling, nada.  Zip.  Zilch.   It is inappropriate for the party — and Schumer –  to be giving Democratic  money to Lieberman who might well use it to run as an independent, or even a Republican.

I’ve left my own comment over on the DSCC blog regarding this matter and I urge anyone who shares my concern to do likewise.

I think Connecticut journalists should be asking this question of Holy Joe too — is George Bush’s favorite Democrat indeed a committed Democrat?

Hartford Courant LTE Webform
Connecticut Post LTE email
New Haven Register LTE email
Stamford Advocate LTE email

Sorry, Chuck.  I know how pesky the grassroots can be to your it’s-all-about-the-big-money strategy, but that’s how it goes.  We are the ones who, you know, vote. 

For those who would rather give to their Democratic candidates directly rather than trusting Chuck to hand the party money over to Lieberman, you can give to Ned Lamont here