“US” would be misleading, since it wrongly implies it is mainstream American.

For 200 plus years there have been ebbs and flows in this nation. The GOP tilted too far right in the last 8 years and the culmination of “We're not going to take it anymore” was a profound and very convincing argument that going to war was wrong and that it was the far right, neocons, Christians who were spoiling for blood.

So they got a blood bath but its not the one they were planning on. It was their own bloodbath.

When George W. Bush announced his preemptive strike policy I about jumped out of my chair, turned to my wife and said “That is the end of the GOP”

What remains to be seen is what will become of the Democrats when they bury us under a mountain of taxes to pay for their social programs. Don't get me wrong I would love to have medical care for all but there must be ground work laid to get to that point. If they rush into it, they will collapse the economy and it will be just a few short years and they will once again be on the outside throwing temper tantrums and the GOP will be back in business.

The question is simply how long will it take for the American Public to grow tired of the Democrats in control. Perhaps one day their will be a congress full of Joe Liebermans. No democrats, no Republicans……just popular Americans who are serving their constituents.

Anyone with a sense of reason, of ability in foreign policy would do the best they could to avoid war, which means *shock* talking to the other side and trying to come to a reasonable solution to our differences. Going in and shooting up some other country to get ones way is dumb. And that what this president and all his supporters, including Lieberman, are, dumb.

They all claim that these people we fight are uncivilized barbarians. Well, those who support war over reason, fear over reason, hate over reason, stupidity over reason are just as uncivilized and barbaric. Just because they wear a suit and speak good doesn't make them civilized men.

I think he is caucasing with the D's only to take advantage of his seniority as that translates into committee chairmanships.

It's politics all around. Voters do what they think is best for them, and Lieberman is doing what is best for him. He would continue to do that, no matter which party label he wears for the moment.
That being so, it would be more honorable for Lieberman to leave the D causux, but, it's probably a wink-wink arrangement.

“Thirst for Iranian blood” is sheer idiocy. Of course, it allows you to evade to some extent the anticipation many of us who are awake and alert have, that Lieberman and others like Holly will get the [deceased far-right] Samuel Francis treatment if they show any positive views toward PC-terrorist-friendly-fad enemy Israel.

Lieberman doesn't share the nutty as well as dangerous tendencies many Dems have exhibited in the foreign policy realm. It's contemptible that he would be, of all things, attacked for such rationality.

Heh… like what? Unquestioning support for one of the biggest foreign policy in American history? Or maybe a thirst for Iranian blood?

Between now and then, Americans will rush to hand power back to the GOP if the Dems lunge too far to the left, or too quickly; but long term, the GOP's prospects are dim, not as dim in my opinion as Superdestroyer would have us believe, but close enough — without offering a positive alternative (admittedly, with a liberal media stacking the information deck, it's a challenge to present one that won't be reported ever as one, but dishonestly as something else), the GOP will be little more than a surly, token Opposition, not doing much more than complaining.

That's a frequent tendency, despite the failed effort at distraction by those same well-to-far-left Dems who present the gullible (and those of us who aren't in any way gullible, and in no way fooled) with the huge straw mountain-main, the lie that the GOP is taken over by the “far right,” “extreme right,” etc. How, ahem, ironic.

I think it is the democratic party that is being overtaken by the far left progressives that are inching farther and farther away from more mainstream democrats such as Lieberman.

The Democratic Party has left Lieberman on a tiny little issue known as foreign policy. Lieberman is an unapologetic neocon hawk, definitely not a mainstream position by any stretch.

I think it is the democratic party that is being overtaken by the far left progressives that are inching farther and farther away from more mainstream democrats such as Lieberman.

I think in the coming decade we are going to see an amazing transformation in which the gop embraces much that was the old Democrats/old conservatives and after 8-12 years of far left rule the people will be sick to death of extremism and the new gop will be set to once again take power.

Actually shifting his stated allegiance to the Republicans would be very bad juju on his part, I think. It's entirely possible he would end up being the only remaining Republican Senator from New England, a title that would itself be gone in '10, due either to his face-saving retirement, or an en-masse rejection by Connecticut voters, who certainly aren't getting any more Republican these days.

But it could be he's banking on a McCain win, and hoping for a hasty retreat from the Senate by gaining a cabinet position. It's exceptionally hard for me to believe he'd ever be selected for VP on a Republican ticket. His only “Republican strength” is as an Iraq/Iran war hawk, and McCain has that covered.

But such a hasty retreat might be the best for all concerned (if McCain pulls off a win) as Connecticut's voters could finally put a Democrat back in the abandoned seat, with a bit of luck!