Will Lamont Stump for Hillary? What About Cynthia McKinney?

The liberal blog-o-sphere is giddy over millionaire businessman Ned Lamont's victory over middle-right Democrat Joe Lieberman. But it seems that the Democrats took a step forward and a step backward, because while the darling of the pro-Democrat-anti-war contingent won in Connecticut, a great anti-war woman of color lost in Georgia.

It was a decent victory for the liberal wing within the Democratic party for Lamont to win. A small victory for everyone opposed to the war in Iraq sick of listening to Hillary Clinton's opposition to Bush's war minus any support for an actual pullout of troops. Although note that Lamont's position isn't super-fantastic - there is this from his website:

Ned supports proposals by Congressman Murtha and Lawrence Korb for phasing out of America’s front-line involvement in Iraq.

“Our troops are making their country proud with their service,” said Ned. “But this war is not making us any safer. It’s time for US troops to move to the background and let the Iraqi people step forward and take responsibility for their own destiny.”

The big fear is that this single victory could further wed the anti-war left to the Democrats at a time when it is critical for the anti-war left to be fiercely independent and fight for their issues over any political party. It may depend, in part, on what the blog-o-liberals decide when the choice is between someone like a Dianne Feinstein versus a Green Party candidate - or maybe a Green Party run with a chance to make a dent against a presidential bid by Hillary. It may also depend on what Lamont does if he makes it into the Senate after all. Will he stump for Hillary Clinton if she gets the Democratic nomination for president? How will the anti-war left react to this?

Then there is Cynthia McKinney's loss. She is described by many as an "embarassment." And while once or twice she may have gone out on a limb - claming publicly that Bush may have had prior knowledge of 9-11 was probably unwise, even if you think it is within the realm of possibility - she has not said or done anything anywhere near as controversial as, say, former Senator Jessie Helms or Texas Congressman Tom DeLay. Yet the media, and many mainstream Democrats, treat her as if she is as controversial if not more so than either of those nutcases. She is an outspoken, African-American, woman and that is enough to make anyone an embarassment to the upstate New York-San Francisco Pac Heights-Aspen-liberal Democrats.

Here is what McKinney had to say about the war in Iraq: "This is an immoral and illegal war and we need to bring our troops home now." Compare that to what her victorious Democratic opponent says on his website:

When should we leave?

* As soon as is possible, sensible, and ethical.
* To set a hard date for a pullout would be imprudent and risk further endangering our troops.
* To leave a devastated country in civil war would be immoral.
* When our military experts advise that Iraq is a more stable and viable state, we should begin to disengage and bring our men and women home as quickly as possible.