Crowley Stares into Abyss, Picks Nose

Michael Crowley asks the right question…

People who think the national media are overly obsessed with the Lieberman-Lamont race often wonder why the press doesn’t pay as much attention to Rhode Island’s GOP Senate primary, where moderate incumbent Lincoln Chafee faces the conservative former Cranston Mayor Steve Laffey.

Then, after putzing around a bit in search of an answer, cites a reader making this argument…

The reason the press isn’t paying much attention to the [RI] race is because the GOP isn’t engaged in the self-destructive, cannibalistic, circular firing squad behavior like the Democrats in CT. Even though Chafee is a heretic among conservative and consistently takes positions more in line with John Kerry than Bush, the RNC, RSCC, Bush and the GOP rank and file have rallied around him so he survives the primary, because they know he’s their best chance in the general. Consider that we have THREE super-competitive House races in CT — Three legitimate pick up opportunities for Democrats this November, yet we’re spending all this time, money, effort and energy to fight each other, rather than attacking Republicans. Karl Rove is laughing.

…without pausing to note that it doesn’t make a damn bit of sense.

First, the reader somehow fails to have noticed that every major Democrat and Democratic organization that intervened in the race in any meaningful fashion supported Lieberman. Indeed, Marty Peretz seems to think that the national Dems supported him so much that he lost (!). Second, it’s pretty clear that the GOP “rank and file” AREN’T coming out in support of Chafee, since he’s ahead of his opponent by all of 1 point in the latest polls. Third, the idea that the Lamont challenge is more destructive to the Democrats than the Laffey challenge is to the GOP is absurd on its face, given that the Democrats are virtually a lock to hold Connecticut regardless of nominee (and will likely hold even with Lieberman as an independent), while Chafee is far more likely to win the general election that Laffey (although even that’s looking like an iffy proposition now).

Michael “I’m just here to post random reader e-mail, not to think about it” Crowley doesn’t bother to engage this argument, which leads me to conclude that the real answer is available in comments:

…the Chaffee race hasn’t gotten nearly as much attention as the Lieberman race is that the DC chattering classes adore Lieberman and they don’t care two figs about Chaffee. Or even one fig. Only Democratic party turncoats can be “courageous and independent thinker[s].”

Right. An isolated challenge to a moderate Senator in a safe Democratic state is a circular firing squad deserving of the gnashing of teeth and tearing of clothes, while a concerted (the Hair Club for Growth supports Laffey) conservative effort to defeat a moderate GOP incumbent in blue state barely merits notice.

…keatssycamore asks

Wait a minute now, I thought John McCain was the proof that you don’t have to be a Democrat to get labelled a “courageous and independent thinker” by the ‘DC chattering classes’.

The trick, I think, is that you have to be either a conservative Democrat or a conservative Republican to be called courageous and independent. Liberal Democrats and moderate Republicans need not apply, but McCain and Lieberman are welcome.