Kraske Gets Paid Money for This?

I used to enjoy Steve Kraske's political columns, but they have really suffered lately, and today's was the worst ever. I guess the advantage of blogging over column-writing is that if I have a day without anything to say, I can simply not post. Unfortunately, the editors of McStar do not allow Kraske did that luxury, and this is the sad result.

Most of the column is a fluffy complaint that the local primaries are not interesting enough. It's a free-form, rambling, meatless piece of crap. It is like a food fight in marshmallow factory - nothing even approaches hard-hitting or even solid analysis. He mildly irks me with a foolish claim that Jim Talent "gets it", but the claim is so shallow and facially invalid (Talent deserves credit for holding positions opposite of McCaskill - but McCaskill apparently doesn't get credit for holding those opinions opposite of Talent) that it doesn't really warrant a reaction. A tale told by an idiot, signifying nothing, but it doesn't even have sound and fury to make it exciting.

Worst of all, he closes out his column with one of the most foolish pieces of "conventional wisdom" floating around on third-tier political blogs.

Today’s most important race of the year: The tough August primary battle in Connecticut where U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman is seeking re-election.

The issue: If a conservative Democrat like Lieberman can’t win, it’s a sign the Democrats are home to liberals only. And then Democrats will be the ones doomed in November.

First off, Lieberman has abandoned the party, and doesn't deserve a Democratic primary victory. From supporting Bush's optional war to the infamous sloppy man-kiss he shared with Bush, Lieberman is no more a Democrat than Bond is. If Lieberman can't win, it's a sign that Democrats are home to Democrats only.

Even if I were wrong on this, and I'm not, the conclusion he draws - that Lieberman's loss would mean that the Democrats are doomed in November - is half-assed beltway thinking. How in the world would Lieberman's loss have an effect outside of Connecticut? Will people somehow switch their votes from McCaskill to Talent because Lamont beats Lieberman? How exactly will that work, Steve?

Only in the deadline-driven world of Kraske would it be possible for a Lieberman loss to have some bizarre kind of negative coat-tails benefitting Republicans. If he really believes that the future of the Democrats rides on electing Bush's makeout partner to the Senate, he'd better hope that the rumored layoffs at the Star free him from further embarrassment soon.