Lieberman-Kyl

You know, it's not so much that the United States is sliding into war with Iran that bothers me. I mean, it DOES bother me, don't get me wrong, as there's little chance that a "surgical" air war would either work, or even be remotely related to what the idiot political appointees in the Pentagon who back this sort of thing actually want. But still, that isn't the real kicker.

No, what really bothers me is that the Democrats seem bound and determined to follow a man who has pretty much rejected them off the cliff.

Seriously, does Joe Lieberman have embarrassing pictures of these people or something? He was one of the chief cheerleaders of the last retarded embarrassment; why on earth support him on THIS one?

Oh, and of course, they've voting to condemn MoveOn. Because keeping the OTHER guy's base happy is far more important than not completely alienating your own. I guess they figured that as long as the Republicans are completely odious, they can count on the base supporting them as being a little less so. Normally, I'd say that was a fair analysis... but when you're voting like a Republican, why shouldn't the base treat you like one?

Ah well. What this really says is that the progressives need to execute a few of the bastards at the primary, with no "independent democrat" wriggling like with Warleadin' Joe. Get some real progressives (or, just for laffs, even self-professed "liberals") to come up to the show with a "D" beside their names, instead of an "R" with a spelling problem.

Edit: Ah, it looks like the worst language was taken out- the stuff about "using all instruments in support of the policy" and "containing/rolling back the violent activities and destabilizing influence of Iran". Problem is, they left that door WIDE open by leaving inside the main point of the amendment: labelling a good chunk of the Iranian military a "terrorist organization".

Well, I can predict one short-term thing that'll come out of this: more sales of the Mearsheimer/Walt book.