In addition to the increasingly unhinged charges of anti-Semitism against Ned Lamont by Mark “El Guapo” Levin (his uncle was a pacifist in WWII, and so must have been objectively Nazi! Jesse Jackson supports him, so he must hate Jews, too!), the NROniks have gone into overdrive to not only endorse Lieberman (I guess the Republican candidate can just stay home!) but wail and gnash their teeth as much as possible over the terrible, terrible thing that was Connecticut democracy.  Once again, we see that “democracy” for these folks means a narrow range of positions dictated by the “consensus” elite, not any sort of political representation or expression of popular sentiment.  Once again, we see their devotion to “democracy” is only real when it serves the interests of the “consensus” positions. 

Here are some choice selections, starting with the rather odd bump Gary Anders sees in this for the GOP:

How does this impact Speaker Hastert? It’s all about the math. Democrats would have to beat all three vulnerable Connecticut Republican Reps. — Chris Shays, Rob Simmons, and Nancy Johnson — to take back the House. As one Democrat told me, “If we can’t win two out of three of those races, the chances of winning the House majority goes way down.” Chris Shays has already endorsed Lieberman. Simmons and Johnson might do the same. If Shays, Simmons, and Johnson pick up their traditional Republican base voters, plus significant numbers from “non-Lamont/pro-Lieberman Democrats,” that could be enough to safely return all three incumbents to the House.

This begs the question how many pro-Lieberman Democrats there will be to support his independent campaign.  There will be many voters who, like many of the politicians who have now started switching their endorsements, liked Joe well enough to give him another chance but will stay with their party’s man in the general.  If there is a GOP candidate who stays in the race till the end, it is not clear why Lieberman will pick up a lot of Republican votes.  It is also not clear why allying yourself with the most famous failed politician in the state during the middle of his tailspin is a recipe for GOP success.  If Shays et al. are aligning themselves with Lieberman, it will be driving home the message that a vote for the GOP is a vote for Lieberman is a vote for the war, a war which virtually no Connecticut Democrats and independents support.  This is the kind of strategic genius that inspired the GOP drive for Hispanic voters by keeping open the sluices of immigration.

Next, and more obnoxious, was the contribution of Charles Kesler of (where else?) Claremont-McKenna:

It was almost an Oxford Union moment.

In 1933, the famous debating society at Oxford resolved that under no conditions would it fight for king and country. Observers around the world, including the Nazis, took notice of the vote as an indication of British decadence, or at least of the country’s lingering revulsion to the bloody fiasco of the First World War. The student pacifists at Oxford resolved that the way to avoid another War to End All Wars was to end all wars by refusing to fight, whoever the foe might be. How could there be a war if nobody, at least on our side, showed up to fight?

Senator Lieberman’s loss to his antiwar opponent might have been such a defining moment, when the Democratic party’s decadence, its self-righteous moralism, angry desperation, and cold hunger for power, might have been revealed for all to see. But Lamont’s victory was by such a narrow margin as to give hope to Lieberman and the pro-defense Democrats. Lamont’s slim victory suggested that there was nothing fundamentally wrong with the party, that a tweak here or there — a few more days to campaign, stronger ads, a better news cycle from the Middle East — might have produced a Lieberman win, after all. 

Do these people have any idea how crazy what they are saying sounds to those who are not hopelessly inured to the war in Iraq?  Do they really believe that withdrawing from Iraq equals pacifism in the face of the rise of the Nazis?  And the NROniks think the Democrats have gone off the deep end?This is a laughable claim, but I suppose it does explain their bizarre love-fest for Joe Lieberman. 

Then there was this comic line from McLaughlin:

The political descendents of George McGovern are excommunicating the heirs to Scoop Jackson.  

Most of the “heirs of Scoop Jackson” are in the GOP now anyway, but if this is the case it is not before time.