Mike McGavick has endorsed Sen. Joe Lieberman, now running for re-election as an independent candidate.
It is probably unusual for a Republican Senate candidate to back someone other than his fellow Republican in another Senate race. But in this case, I heartily agree with McGavick. The Republican in this particular contest is not a serious factor in the race. Lieberman is now an independent candidate running as the moderate centrist against the far-left nutroots Democrat Ned Lamont (now endorsed by Maria Cantwell)
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at August 10, 2006 11:54 AM | Email ThisI bet Tim over at the McGavick camp is fit to be tied. His number one rule is Republicans are number 1. And the number two rule is Republicans are number 1. Then you can be a conservative. But, you never forget one and two. Or something like that.
Posted by: swatter on August 10, 2006 11:52 AMLieberman's fellow democrats sold him out in a heartbeat. Since Lieberman will be re-elected, why shouldn't McGavick endorse him... and help turn him into another version of Zell Miller, particularly since it spotlight's Cantwell's idiotic endorsement of Lamont?
I'm pretty sure Tim's doing fine. Party politics should never mean blind loyalty.
In this instance, Mike did good.
Posted by: Hinton on August 10, 2006 12:00 PMSwatter has it right. And I believe, Stefan had a post that defined not supporting the Republican in the race (regardless of ideology), is the definition of a RINO. Not my definition, to be sure, but Stefan's and those who agreed with him.
I have no idea what the Republican is like in this race, but it is beside the point. And I too, am quite certain that Timmy is scratching his head on this one. If he isn't than he has lots of explaining to do.
Posted by: Michelle on August 10, 2006 12:15 PMPrediction: Lamont will go down in flames this November.
Enjoy your 15 minutes of fame, Ned.
It's great to see McGavick continue with his principled campaign.
Posted by: Jeff B. on August 10, 2006 12:19 PMDem = Eat our own, will send world a post card someday from out in the wilderness.
Posted by: Andy on August 10, 2006 12:22 PMThese liberal pie in the sky lunatics have got to go!
Thanks Joe Lieberman!
Posted by: Henri Kissinger on August 10, 2006 01:10 PMSeems like as a "Republican" Mr McGavick's best course of action would to be just shut the hell up rather than endorse and contribute financially to a left wing Dem. While there is no doubt that Lieberman is very much preferable to Lamont, make no mistake, he is no Zell Miller, he is a far left liberal who votes with the party 90%+ of the time.
This may give some independents a new reason to vote for Mr McGavick but it gives many of us yet another reason to not bother voting for him.
I see as usual RINO Eric either fails to, or more likely just chooses not to notice the real issue, that being what business does McGavick have insinuating himself into a Connecticut Senate race?
Is he (McGavick) going to provide the residents of every State the benefit of his superior knowledge and opinion as to whom they should elect? I can hardly wait, bet Lincoln Chaffee will be the only Republican on his list. Seems like he would do better to concentrate on his home state, hopeless as that might be.
Posted by: RINO Hunter on August 10, 2006 08:07 PMThe reason we need to vote for this guy, even if we disagree with him 80-95% of the time, is because it's better to have a Republican in Office. It certainly was with Slade Gorton and Dan Evans, even though they, collectively, established a voting record to the left of the center of the Democrat Party. Come on, at least they weren't Democrats!
McGavick may not have a legislative record of any kind, but he expressed greater admiration for Slade, for whom he served as chief of staff, than any other Washington politician and that helps us know what he'd be like. So we can look for that kind of leadership... that showed principled independence in refusing to confirm Reagan appointees, but graciously approved Clinton appointees, that held out an olive branch to Daniel Ortega by casting the deciding vote against the Freedom Fighters in Nicaragua, that wisely voted to acquit Clinton but reject Robert Bork, that voted against every dangerous measure protecting religious freedom that came before him. That set a "new tone" of cooperation by protecting Jamie Gorelick and her comrades for their culpability in 9/11.
Remember, it's better to have a Republican in office. Because a Republican in office will be able to build, politically, around himself. He will be able to fill the Party with McGavick look-alikes and loyalists. He'll be choosing our State Chairman and RNC representatives. Being loyal to McGavick will be an inside track to paid political jobs, right Timothy? Being friends with McGavick will be an inside track to County Chairmanships and State Committee positions. Think of the future! An entire Party of non-partisans! ...And the elephant shall lie down with the ass. (Isaiah, I think.)
***Brilliant strategy by Mike!
***This will appeal to many moderate democrats and also our Jewish friends who are understandably concerned with security.
***It also sends a clear 'I can be bi-partison' message from Mike!
***I predict that Lieberman and McGavick will have a good working relationship for many years to come.
***