No time for allegorical whimsy today.  I just read a comment posted to the above titled submission by Bill Faith.  This comment was written by a self-professed Conservative Republican by the name of Aakash Raut.  In his comment Mr. Raut makes the observations that “Ned Lamont is no more liberal than Sen. Lieberman.” and “I see you have anti-Murtha links… Congressman Murtha is actually more conservative than Senator Lieberman.”  Mr. Raut concludes his comment with, “The ‘right thing’ in this case, for Mr. Schlesinger to do, would be to take advantage of the Democrat divide (addressed in my recent entry) and WIN THIS SEAT for our party!”

Well, I took the bait and followed one of his many links back to his BLOG.  It was there that I discovered Mr. Raut is a conservative activist and student at a University in Illinois.  As I read Mr. Raut’s BLOG  I was absolutely floored to discover that I and other conservatives and Republicans have been duped – “due to a misunderstanding of the intricacies of political science and [even-recent] history – into thinking that these people (Zell Miller, Tony Blair and Joe Lieberman) are not liberal, or even that they are ‘conservatives’.”

That Mr. Raut is a conservative activist shows that he started out on the “right” foot in his academic pursuits, so I am left to assume that it is his “left” foot that fell out of his mouth.  Aakash, you are so wrong in so many ways, I don’t know where to begin, but I will try to categorize them for you.

Pragmatism:  While I do not live in Connecticut and must admit that I have no personal knowledge of Alan Schlesinger, I will accept from your right wing zealousness that he is by your definition a true conservative Republican.   On the other hand, I have read the polls.  In a poll of “likely voters” just released today, Joe Lieberman leads Ned Lamont 53% - 41%.  If you studied math between political rallies and blogging, you should come to the conclusion that there may be better battles to fight ahead. 

Murtha:  This is an issue you are not equipped to understand or address.  The anti-Murtha movement has nothing to do with liberal vs. conservative, or for taking an anti-war position.  This movement is about the disgraceful, slanderous libel that this “Gentleman from Pennsylvania” has vomited from his bloated face upon military personnel both past and present.  Perhaps after you grab an M-16 and stand post for a while, you might begin to grasp the intricacies of this situation. The bile in my stomach is rising, so enough said on this topic.

Party Line:  Aakash, first I would direct you to one of my posts on why a conservative might choose to support Lieberman.  You can find it at  "It's the Party Stupid" I would then contend that no one has been duped into thinking that Joe isn’t liberal or is in fact conservative.  Any conservative support for Lieberman will not result from a misunderstanding of the intricacies of political science and history.  It will more likely be founded in a very real understanding of American and World history that transcend beyond the dew meager years of your existence and will have nothing to do with conservatism or liberalism. 

Choosing candidates strictly on their party affiliation or their adherence to some narrowly defined concept of conservatism is no less folly than that practiced by the liberals.  There are some defining issues that should and do rise above partisanship.  Defending and protecting America is one of them.  I’ll take 99 more Liebermans in the Senate right now to ensure a strong and united front against a foreign threat that needs to be eliminated.  I’ll worry about their liberal and conservative views after we have taken care of the first order of business.

Finally, I read with concern your statement “the true conservative and ‘republican’ position is against the war.”  That you are anti-war, is your prerogative and that there are other individuals that consider themselves conservative who agree with you is fine as well.  However, it is your use of the phrase “true conservative” that is frightening. The use of words such as “true” or “pure” within this context sounds eerily like other historical party stalwarts.  Mao, Lenin, Stalin and Hitler come to mind. 

I am sorry to take such an opposing view against someone else that claims to be a conservative.  I would caution you to learn to discern the difference between a conservative philosophy and a party dogma.  Being a Kool-Aid drinker is still the same, no matter what the flavor.

Contributed by The Gray Dog on August 17, 2006 at 12:27 PM in Current Affairs, Joe Lieberman, Mad Jack Murtha, Ned Lamont, Politics, The Gray Dog | Permalink

Comments