If you ever needed that one single piece of evidence that the U.S. Democratic Party is just as hideously worthless and self-serving as the Republicans, well, allow me to oblige (all emphasis added):
With his ruddy tan and dark gray suit, Ned Lamont is an antiwar liberal with a twist. Rather than targeting a Republican, the millionaire Greenwich businessman is challenging a fellow Democrat, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, one of President Bush's strongest supporters on the war in Iraq...
Now, Lamont has turned the Democratic primary into a horse race, giving Lieberman his first real test since he joined the Senate 18 years ago, according to Democratic operatives and analysts in Connecticut. Party leaders were so rattled by the challenge that Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) called Lamont asking him to back off.
"Some of the party brass said, 'Ned, don't jeopardize a safe seat,' " Lamont recently told students at Southern Connecticut State University, who gathered for a meet-and-greet session. "But you're not going to lose a senator. You're going to gain a Democrat."
So ... despite the fact that Democrats in general are furious with Lieberman for his sucking up to the Bush administration (to the point where Dems everywhere are referring to Lieberman as "Republican-lite"), the word from the top is to back off and leave him be. After all, he's a Democrat -- pay no attention to his perpetual back-stabbing of his Democratic colleagues and all that. Why take a stand on principles when there's a seat at risk?
In one sense, one can almost have more respect for the GOP than the Dems these days. Neither party has principles, but at least the GOP is direct enough to not even pretend anymore. In that sense, they're at least being honest, which is more than one can say for the Democrats.
AFTERSNARK: If the voters of Connecticut who are fed up with Lieberman want their say, it's not hard to do. They can make it clear that, if Lieberman is the Democratic candidate in November, they're going to vote for the Republican. What's to lose? Essentially, they'd be choosing between a fake Republican and a real one. Might as well have the real one.
OOOOOOH ... HOW TIMELY. I'm hoping I don't have to connect the dots for anyone here.