Ned Lamont On Jane Hamsher - Cut And Run

Ned Lamont may make a great politico after all, since he seems to have already mastered a key part of the job - when in trouble, lie.  Here he is in the WaPo ducking the Lieberman-blackface debacle caused by blogger Jane Hamsher:

Lamont brushed past reporters Wednesday night in Bridgeport, saying: "I don't know anything about the blogs. I'm not responsible for those. I have no comment on them."

Michelle Malkin hangs a No Sale on this - here is a Hartford Courant story about Jane and Ned's excellent adventure with the Steve Colbert show:

Lamont arrived with an entourage: His wife, Annie; their campaign driver, Marc Bradley; a blogger, Jane Hamsher; and Bill Hillsman, the creator of his offbeat ads, one of which was played weeks earlier on `The Colbert Report.'

Not a large entourage at all - one might think Ned would have had a chance to chat with Jane on the ride to the studio and learn about blogs.  Or perhaps, since Ms. Hamsher is a Hollywood producer, he was getting the benefit of her media experience.

If you would prefer something visual that is not too abysmal, here is Jane putting those Hollywood skills to work by directing Ned in a commercial.  Gee, did she introduce herself and mention what she was doing for the campaign, or just start ordering him around?

Look, Lamont knows darn well who Jane Hamsher is, and has been working with her closely.  One wonders whether the press will give him a pass on that little fib.

Lamont spokeswoman Liz Dupont-Diehl  was not exactly Ms. Credibility either:

But Dupont-Diehl said the campaign will not bow to the Lieberman campaign's demand that Lamont cut any ties with Hamsher. "She's not part of the campaign staff," Dupont-Diehl said. "She's an independent blogger covering the race."

"Covering" the race?  How was directing a commercial "covering" the race?  Try running that past the reporters who are really covering the race, and let's see the result.

MORE:  Can anyone forget Lamont's first ad, with the Mighty Kos himself peering through the Lamont's living room window before bursting inside to meet the candidate himself?  Good news - apparently, it can be forgotten, since Ned Lamont now knows nothing about the blogs.

Tim Blair has what might be a transcription of the ad.

Let me help the lefty bloggers spin the fact that Lamont is now pitching them under the bus - it just shows his comittment to a "cut and run" strategy, right?

PILING ON:  If Ned Lamont really doesn't "know anything about the blogs", maybe he could make a few minutes for Tim Tagaris, who is on his own staff:

Lamont's staffers recognized the value of the blogs early. They realized they can't control them, but they can feed them information and make use of their energy and independent video reporting and commentary. The campaign's full-time blog coordinator, Tim Tagaris, the young guy who was speeding behind us in his own car up I-91, works the bloggers the way traditional press staffers work the pencil and camera reporters.

"Nobody," Hamsher declared, more than once, "interfaces with the blogs like the Lamont people."

You have to love these Libs: blackface - someone else's problem; lying about his relationship with the blogs - waddya gonna do?  Hey, they're against the war, so their hearts are pure.

I CAN STOP ANYTIME (But not now...):  We are blogging on tape delay from inside the head of Ned Lamont, who was wondering, "Who is this woman and why is she waving a microphone in my face?" -   Jane Hamsher plays softball with Ned Lamont.  Metaphorically.

TNR JOINS IN:  Jason Zengerle (who has his own quarrel with the Nutroots) adds another piece of the puzzle and makes an excellent point about the possible long-range implications of this.

The puzzle-piece - Lamont sure knew about the blogs when he agreed to match, dollar for dollar, any funds raised for him on Blogosphere Day.

And his analysis - Ned's image as calm and likeable may be tarnished if he is judged by the company he has been keeping:

After all, the secret of Lamont's success, in my opinion, is that he appears to be an eminently reasonable, moderate, likable guy. In other words, while he may not excite voters, he's also not likely to turn them off enough to prevent them from casting an anti-Lieberman vote for him (and according to the same Quinnipiac poll, 65 percent of Lamont's supporters say their vote is mainly against Lieberman). But some of Lamont's online supporters aren't nearly so benign. And I wonder what will happen if Connecticut's voters--many of whom presumably don't read blogs--start to get a better sense of Lamont's online supporters via the mainstream media. Will voting for Lamont in order to register displeasure with Lieberman still seem "safe"?

OVERLOAD:  The firedoglake site seems to be down.  Excessive traffic, or is it the heat?  And how does one overheat a firedog?  More mysteries...

Comments

[Bob]

Personally I hope New wins. It'll give the moveon.org crowd something to crow about. Lieberman will still win the election, but the primary win for Ned will only tighten the noose around the neck of the Democrat Party come 2008. The proof is Clinton coming out for Joe. We all know this was simply to help out the Hilda Beast. The Clinton's know they can't win the primary with the moonbats running the show. And this win by New will give them way too much say in the democrat primary.

Sit back and enjoy the show!

[Bob]

"New" = Ned
...was that a fraudian slip doah! I meant Freudian!

[Jane]

Racism and Anti-semiticsm - gee Howard Dean should adopt that as part of his 50 state strategy.

I wonder if it is all too much inside basesball to make a difference.

[Terrye]

It is interesting that one stupid and very ugly tirade on the part of Mel Gibson might very well end his career, but a deliberate {and sober} decision to use an image like black face in an ad for a Democratic Senator wannabe is not seen as any big deal. I hear the black caucas is not going to support Lieberman. I wonder if they support this little antic? Someone should ask them what they think of it.

[Semanticleo]

If ever there were a reason to shit-can Holy Joe, it is the Malkin/Maguire/College Republicans Campaign for a Democrat(?)

"---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 18:52:09 -0400
From: "[windows-1252] College Republicans"
Reply-To: College Republicans
To: collegerepublicans@PRINCETON.EDU
Subject: Unconventional Primary Campaign Opportunity (LIEBERMAN)

Republicans,

I hope everyone is enjoying their summer. In June, I informed you all of a campaign opportunity for State Senator Tom Kean race for U.S. Senate in NJ. Continuing the tradition of letting you about summer campaign opportunities here is a much more unconventional option:

Incumbent Senator Joe Lieberman (Democratic Primary)
Lieberman is facing a tough primary fight versus far-left anti war activist Ned Lamont.
----------------------------------------------------------------
August 4-9th Primary Campaigning:

Elissa Harwood '09 (NOT A CLUB MEMBER) has organized a series of buses departing on Friday August 4 from Washington DC (6:30 Foggy Bottom Metro) and NYC, destination: Hartford, CT

People interested in campaigning for Lieberman in the Democratic Primary will have lodging accommodations paid for (by his campaign), as well as food and transportation.

Buses would bring you back on August 9th.

If Interested, E-mail: XXX@Princeton.EDU or call her

[Patton]

Jane Hamsher also enjoys breaking Connecticuts laws, such as reckless driving, speeding, talking on cell phone.

She has NO respect for the people of the state.

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2006/07/jane_her_poodle.php

[jerry]

Seems to me Pols hardly ever give a straight answer to anything... reality for us, myths and legends for them, it's an old story.

[Dwilkers]

"I don't know anything about the blogs."

Yeah right. If you listen to the interview of Lamont by Hamsher he brings up FireDogLake by name unprompted and talks about their support for his candidacy. When I watched it I thought that was odd because you'd think a candidate for the senate would want to keep some distance from a blog or blogger that spends most of its time making very thinly veiled sexual references. FireDogLake is actually an example of the worst of the left-o-sphere when it comes to that soprt of thing, just about the last thing a big time politico would want to be associated with.

This is the a danger to Dems this fall IMO. Everything I am reading says they are posied to take over the House and possibly even the Senate. It will be interesting to see how Pubs capitalize on the Dem's nutroot issue.

[Extraneus]

I don't see how anything bad can happen for Republicans if this guy wins the primary. Anyone do a poll of Jewish Democrats yet?

Go Lamont!

[MayBee]

I'm sure Kos will front page Lamont's denial that he knows anything about the blogs.
Oh, and apparently Jane's folly doesn't even warrant a diary.

Remember when speaking at Bob Jones University supposedly painted Bush with all of the faults of the university's policies? I'm wondering why Lamont (or any of the Yearly Kos politicians) aren't being called out on supporting the outrageous Kossacks. Or in this case, Hamsher. Why would any politician keep her nearby? She's wretched.

[Bob]

Of course the MSM will tell you the Dems are going to win in November... they live in an echo chamber. Like a bad Chess player, they surround themselves with themselves, and don't realize how confining their game is. Yes they will get Ned a win in the primary, and jump for joy for their success. But in the long run the CT senate race has no impact on improving their ranks. If anything it'll turn more borderline Dems and independents off then build a stronger base.

Of course it'll be interesting to see the moonbats claim Lieberman stole the election if Neddie looses!

[Dwilkers]

Actually what I was referring to was some stuff I got from Cook Political through a magazine online a few days ago, sorry I can't find it now. It was quite alarming, all but called the Pubs a hopeless cause for November, mainly due to polling on Iraq, the economy, blah blah.

Down here the Pubs still don't even have a candidate for Delay's seat yet. They're fighting in court to get someone on the ballot. In the meantime Lampson has been blanketing the airwaves with ads - and believe me he doesn't talk about Nancy P as House Speaker being the result of him getting elected.

I'm going to be interested to see what Pubs do. Its August, there are about 90 days left. They better put together some sort of media campaign laying out the consequences of Dem victory in November in a light that's favorable to them or Dems are going to whip their asses. The time to influence the electorate's early leanings is over - Pubs are going to have to change people's minds now.

[Stormy70]

I hear this every time an election comes around. The Dems fire early in August, while the Pubs fire for effect in September. Why fire the big guns during the hottest part of the summer, when people are cranky with heat? You wait, and hit them in Sept.

[Bob]

Dwinklers, if the Dems keep using the same polls that gave Kerry and Gore the win in 2004 and 2000, then rest assured it's not worth a whole lot.

I hope I'm not too optimistic, but I just don't see the Dems making that much of a gain. They have nothing to offer than just the same old "anything but Bush" crap. What are they on their 10th plan/platform so far? They can't get any traction due to their lack of ideas.

[MayBee]

I'll be more sad if Lieberman loses than if the Dems take over the Senate. I've got no love for Frist.
I could theoretically handle it if the Dems would win the house...except for Pelosi and Conyers. I can't imagine Conyers as Judiciary Chair. I have CDS.

Anyway, I now have two favorite blog quotes.
Glenn Greenwald "writing from no particular political perspective" and Lamont's "I don't know anything about the blogs".

If they say it, it must be true!

[richard mcenroe]

Your first time under pressure, tell a stupid, obvious and easily checked lie.

Maybe Ned Lamont IS the future of the Democratic Party. He certainly reflects its past.

"Ah did not make commercials with that woman..."

[Don]

Objectively, however, if this is what the 18 year incumbent is attacking in the last days of the primary, the incumbent is in bad shape.

[Sue]

"Ah did not make commercials with that woman..."

LOL.

[ed]

Hmmmm.

Frankly I think it's very likely the Democrats will win both the House and the Senate.

A lot of conservatives are just completely pissed off and have washed their hands of the GOP. That perhaps hasn't come through the polls yet, though it's impact did affect Bush's polls, but it will at voting time. Nobody I know has bothered to contact the local GOP to do any volunteering and a lot of the conservatives have openly stated that they're going to stay home in Nov.

The primary reason being the absolutely disgusting level of manipulation by the GOP on illegal aliens. This whole "House has a tough bill" and "Senate has a weak bill" is just a put-on. It allows the members of the House to act tough, without actually putting anything into law, while the Senate covers for them. It's nothing less than a father's routine "if your mother says you can" response writ large.

Mid-term elections are heavily dependent almost entirely on the poltical base of each party. I think in this year the Democratic base will respond, regardless of how crazy the candidates or their positions are, while the GOP base will largely stay at home.

[Sue]

while the GOP base will largely stay at home.

That'll show 'em.

[Dwilkers]

Its actually quite a serious potential problem IMO.

If Dems win control of both houses this November its going to be dangerously crazy for the next 2 years. And if they win only marginally more seats in both houses getting judicial appointments through the Senate will become much more difficult politically.

Pubs will have wasted their biggest opportunity since FDR to shape US policy for the long term.

[Geek, Esq.]

Well, Hamsher deserves to be thrown under the bus for that.

Anyone who is a political liability can expect that treatment--that's the way campaigns work. Doesn't matter if you're a blogger with extraordinarily poor judgment or the POTUS.

[Mikey NTH]

I'm part of the base, ed, and I don't intend to stay at home.
Am I totally happy with the GOP? No.
Am I going to pull a tantrum and hand the game over to the Dems? Of course not.

/rant on/
Sorry, but I get a bit prickly when someone says "'the base' is gonna do this" and "'the base' is gonna do that", when I'm part of the base and I don't recall receiving any orders from anyone. If you mean "me and people who think like me" are going to do something, fine. But please, you do not speak for me on who or what I shall vote for or against.

/rant off/

[Christopher Fotos]

Notes on Ned-I-don't-know-anything-about-the-blogs-Lamont from that New Haven Independent story:

Lamont's staffers recognized the value of the blogs early. They realized they can't control them, but they can feed them information and make use of their energy and independent video reporting and commentary. The campaign's full-time blog coordinator, Tim Tagaris, the young guy who was speeding behind us in his own car up I-91, works the bloggers the way traditional press staffers work the pencil and camera reporters.

"Nobody," Hamsher declared, more than once, "interfaces with the blogs like the Lamont people."...

The story--by Paul Bass--also has Hamsher saying Firedoglake raised $30,000 for Lamont.

[megapotamus]

Tom, aces for the Rocky Horror gem. You are a font of pleasures.

[Gabriel Sutherland]

Ned's denial is worse than Ray Lewis'.

[Gabriel Sutherland]

However, at their[Lamont Campaign] request, I removed the image earlier today.

Jane Hamsher

But she didn't just apologize. Nope. She actually used the controversy to score political points. Her apology is 6 paragraphs. 5 of them are devoted to campaigning against Lieberman.

such as that flyer accusing Lamont of being a racist (which inspired the satirical graphic in the first place.)

lol, the "it was Rove" defense

I sure hope someone on the Lamont staff is at least using all that money to get a tan. Because it sure isn't helping them to win a race.

[clarice]

http://americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=5739

[clarice]

Bob--In the months preceding the elections, the MSM wows us with DNC talking points and polls showin g how the Dems have it in the bag. The months after they examine claims that the election was stolen, there were sunspots over the polling places that kept Dems away, etc.

[Gerry]

"If ever there were a reason to shit-can Holy Joe, it is the Malkin/Maguire/College Republicans Campaign for a Democrat(?)"

Holy Joe? Yes, but let's not ever have anyone on the right claim that the left is hostile to the religious.

But, if it will make you feel better, you should know that we, over at RedState, heartily endorse Ned Lamont.

[Gabriel Sutherland]

The reviews for Hamsher's book are comedy gold.

It's amazing that she could produce a film written by then unknown Quentin Tarantino with Oliver Stone directing it and make "Double Dragon" in the same year. I thought Double Dragon was her better work.

[windansea]

It’s also important to note that I do not, nor have I ever worked for Ned Lamont’s campaign.

so I guess you won't be riding around in the limo anymore Jane?

[Other Tom]

Wish I could be optimistic about November, but I'm not--not at all. I think the House is gone; not so sure about the Senate. Hugh Hewitt a couple of days ago linked to a joint Dem-Repub project polling the 40 most competitive House seats, and the result was what Hewitt called a "bloodbath." I think it's a combination of conservative disaffection and a widespread hope that if we just stayed away from all this foreign terrorist stuff, it would all go away.

Bad news in the short term, but no big deal over time. The Dems will hold all sorts of nettlesome hearings for the next two years, but unlike Clinton, Bush won't be fazed in the slightest. The Repubs have been a huge disappointment in congress, but the Dems are clearly not a party prepared to lead, and their ascendancy will be short-lived. I'm already figuring Rudy will lead the resurgence, and 2008 isn't that far off. He'll have two years of Dem leadership to use for target practice, and it should be great fun.

[Pete]

I hope that Ned wins the primary too. If Ned wins the primary then all bets are off in Nov. Infact one recent poll suggested that if Ned wins the Democratic nomination then he would be tied with Lieberman(I).

I find it strange that those on the right who saw the 2004 elections as a vindication of the Iraq war, are now not touting the clear differences among the two candidates on Iraq.

If the Iraq war is going so well then why aren't the Republicans and Lieberman running on the Iraq war?

[Rick Ballard]

Mikey NTH,

Thanks for speaking for that portion of the base which holds to Disraeli's view on party. The proper name for us should be the Indefatigables. There is a reason that the British Navy likes the name.

[Chants]

This post about Hamsher and Ned is great stuff, Tom. Well done.

[maryrose]

ed:
You are wrong about the dems winning the House or Senate in November. Just because Charlie Cook says it doesn't make it so. I agree with Mike and will be out in force in Nov. voting as part of the base and making phone calls to make sure republicans win in Ohio. Blackwell raised over 1 million yesterday thanks to a fund-raiser in Kirtland, ohio attended by President Bush. DeWine is even with Brown a super-liberal dem from Southern Ohio. No one in the Northeast is going to vote for him because they don't know or like him. African -Americans are not going to vote for Strickland from Dayton when Blackwell from Columbus is running against him as a tax-cutter. Dems are dreaming and don't have a 72 hour gotv plan like repubs do. Wishful thinking dominates and I can't wait to see if Rangel carries through with his promise to resign if dems don't take the House.
Lamont is at 54% with likely dem voters but Joe will either thump him in the primary with Jewish dem voters carrying the day or thrash him as an Independent.
OT;
CNN and MSNBC is carrying Hillary live in armed services mtg with generals and Rumsfield. Also saw commentators refer to Don Rumsfeld as Rummy in a dismissive, condescending manner this morning. Is that what they were taught in journalism school? Funny I don't recall them referring to Clinton as Bubba. Put then compromising an intern is so "New York" and fashionable .

[Clark]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgPoEFqqiiQ&search=hamsher

Ned can be seen here in praise of the blog's support. He is actually being interviewed by Jane Hamsher. Priceless.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

One wonders whether the press will give him a pass on that little fib.

One does?

Why?

[Pete]

Other Tom: "a widespread hope that if we just stayed away from all this foreign terrorist stuff, it would all go away."

Ha!

Unfortunately for most voters the line that "either you support Bush or you are a terrorist" has run rather thin.

[windansea]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgPoEFqqiiQ&search=hamsher

Ned can be seen here in praise of the blog's support. He is actually being interviewed by Jane Hamsher. Priceless.

priceless indeed, someone should post that at the hamsterwheel and see if Jane will delete her own interview :)

[Cecil Turner]

I find it strange that those on the right who saw the 2004 elections as a vindication of the Iraq war, are now not touting the clear differences among the two candidates on Iraq.

Huh? Are you actually missing the "Cut and Run" bit of this post's title, or Ned's earlier lamentation about the emphasis on his war stance:

But he would love, love to get people talking about other things than his wealth or the war.

[Neo]

Here the GWOT arrives in CT with an insurgent movement.

[Bob]

Ned is going to win the primary... with Lieberman stating he'll run as an independent, a lot of Lieberman's voters will not show up on Tuesday. They know that Joe will win in November ,either ad a Dem or a Indi!

As far as the rest of the country goes, I think you'll have to wait until September to see how much interest there is or isn't in the elections. But I think you'll see exactly what happened out in San Diego with Busby/Brilbray - even in the face of disaster the GOP's base+ will show up and fight!

[DC]

Dude, get over it. The people of Connecticut are speaking, and your boy Lieberman is on his way out. As if the "DailyKos" has any control over those votes. Wake up. See reality. Ned is up 10% heading into the election.

[owl]

Malkin 8/02/06 posted a great picture labeled....
Ned Lamont with his favorite race-baiters, Rep. Maxine Waters and nutroots all-star Jane Hamsher.

I consider Maxine to be a top of the list racist. You don't hear her much lately but she has been rabid in the past. When I look at Maxine Waters, I immediately think 'racist' at the same speed as David Duke. Bet Lamont would like to delete that picture also.

[Tom Maguire]

I agree with the Machiavel post from RedState - it's all good for the Reps, but a Lamont win is probably better.

(Briefly - Lieberman wins now, the netroots look silly; Lamont wins, the netroots spend the fall frothing about his independent run.)

Based on polls and other stuff, the "Lamont Wins Primary" story looks highly probable.

[Pete]

Cecil - Sure Ned wants to talk about other things. The point I was making was not about those opposed to the war, but rather those who claimed that the 2004 election was a vindication of the Iraq war.

Since the right wing blogs claim that the 2004 election was a vindication of the Iraq war, and since the right wing blogs think that the Iraq war is among the greatest success of this administration, then it should follow that the right wings blogs should be diverting the attention of the CT voters to the clear difference in the Iraq war position of Ned and Joe.

"Cut and run" is a clever slogan, but given the situation in Iraq (which now even the British say is creeping towards civil war) it remains to be seen whether it can be successfully exploited in the Nov elections.

[Bob]

OT, but from the "you can't make this Shit up" side of the world!

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lemonde.fr%2Fweb%2Farticle%2F0%2C1-0@2-734511%2C36-800810@51-759824%2C0.html&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools>Iran claims a cease-fire and wishes the destruction of Israel

"the unison with the Organization of the Islamic conference (OCI), larger Moslem organization in the world, the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, claimed, Thursday August 3, a cease-fire in Lebanon and Gaza. Then, in a declaration, the Iranian president recalled that the destruction of Israel was the only solution of the problem in the Middle East."

[Other Tom]

"The line that 'either you support Bush or you are a terrorist' has run rather thin."

If you will identify a single person who has ever uttered that line, other than yourself, I will eat my hat. And no, I don't think the war in Iraq is going well. The war in the Pacific wasn't going well in 1942, and the war in Europe didn't go well until late 1944. That was no reason to give up then, and it's no reason to give up now. In the meantime, Saddam is no longer a menace to the region, and neither is Iraq. If the opponents of the war had had their way, Saddam would still be in power. And who knows, by now he might have obtained the uranium oxide that we now know he sought from Niger.

[Bob]

Dude! I couldn't give a rats ass who wins in CT. Having lived in CT for 25 years I'm resigned to the fact that the limousine liberals of CT only vote for morons anyway.

And Ned is just as much a jerk a Joe. If it weren't for his Hawkish" side, he'd be almost as useless as Dodd.

[Gabriel Sutherland]

In the land of make believe, aka the "Reality Based Community", the prospect of civil war may be news, but this is nothing new. In fact, four stars have been advising White House for at least 2 years now that Iraq could be headed for a civil war.

As usual, the residents of the land of make believe are late to the party, but hope they can run a campaign based on the resurrection of old news.

I've yet to read any good analysis that a Lamont victory is bad for Republicans. Not even Democrat superstar Senator Obama can talk about Iraq enough to sway public opinion.

[Don]

So if a Lamont win is good for Repubs and looks to be the will of the Dem primary voters and the Daily Kos crowd- everybody's a winner!

Except Lieberman.

[Extraneus]

If Lamont loses the primary, the netroots can be marginalized by the Democrats in their thinly-veiled yet potentially effective attempts to appear moderate. If Lamont wins, however, the roots will rise in a surge the likes of which we haven't seen since Michael Moore helped the Democrats so much in 2004. And if Lieberman then beats him in November -- whether as an Independent or, assuming they get ugly enough to push him hard enough, a Republican -- he could drive a stake right through their hearts.

Go Lamont!

[Don]

No offense, but if Lieberman loses the primary he's done. This is same political comeback fantasy that once swirled around Tom Delay.

When someone is this wounded, they don't rally back; they just slink off and bleed to death.

[Daniel DiRito]

Read a satirical critique of the battle being waged amongst Democrats in the Lieberman v. Lamont Senate race coined "The Hatfield's & McCoy's"...here:

www.thoughttheater.com

[windansea]

Don has spoken!! :)

[Florence Schmieg]

Yesterday someone on free republic.com published a 2004 summer article from Time magazine saying the Republicans were going to lose both houses of congress and the presidency. It was full of lovely polling statistics and predictions from supposedly knowledgables like Larry Sabato and, I believe, Charlie Cook. So, been there, done that. We all have such short memories. I think Republicans are too intelligent to hurt themselves by staying home in November. And I agree about that echo chamber maryrose spoke about. Some people have to stop talking to themselves.

[topsecretk9]

"Ah did not make commercials with that woman..."

LOL.

Posted by: Sue | August 03, 2006 at 06:33 AM

I'm adding a LOL to that too!

[Rick Ballard]

1. Nutroots on the front porch.

Good

2. Lieberman runs as an independent, sucking up money that would have gone to other Dem candidates.

Good

3. Lamont surrounds himself with antisemitic racebaiters to prove the depth of his progressivism.

Very good.

4. Lamont runs on "have you hugged your hezzie today" antiwar platform while Israel stays in the field in Lebanon rooting out Iranian backed Hezzies.

Good.

I know that there's a downside somewhere - will Lamont secretly strengthen Jewish American support for country club WASP candidates accross the land?

[PeterUK]

Excuse me if I find the attitude that,"Our Democrat" is going to beat your Democrat" amusing,it really says a lot for party unity,reminiscent of the Bolshevik purges.
It is always a sign of senility in a political party when eradicating doctrinal heretics is more important than defeating the opposition.
Advice to Republicans,sell the "disunity" meme for all it is worth,in "interesting times" the voters do not trust a party which is "split",as the Democrats so obviously are.

[Other Tom]

"When someone is this wounded, they don't rally back; they just slink off and bleed to death."

Dude must be too young to remember R.M. Nixon in 1962. Waxed by Pat Brown for Governor of CA, gives petulant speech about "you won't have Nixon to kick around anymore," slinks off, bleeding, into oblivion. Or so everyone said.

[Jane]

What's with it with moonbat blogs and pictures? Nearly everyone I've tries to make its point with fake pix. I don't know any right leaning blogs that do that.

[Rick Ballard]

"When someone is this wounded, they don't rally back; they just slink off and bleed to death."

So Magic Hat and The Stump are zombies? I can go along with that. After all, how would anyone know whether or not Algore was a zombie. Magic Hat is a bit more animated, maybe it's because he hasn't been dead as long?

[SteveMG]

Zengerle highlights the main problem with the netroots. Their in-your-face (and elsewhere) rhetoric is great for rallying like-minded folks at your blog. But this echo chamber isn't very good at editing out the more intemperate and over-the-top rhetoric. And when they try to become mainstream, the ordinary voter won't go for it. Even if they believe that Bush is the cause of every ill in the world including the epidemic of toenail fungus.

I'm quite sure that Hamsher and her acolytes probably thought the Lieberman in black-face satire was great, just great.

They'll find out that extremism in the defense of liberalism is no virtue.

Kos knows this; which is why he hasn't posted much on the Hezbollah-Israel conflict.

SMG

[Don]

Other Tom, Nixon had vampiric qualities.
But I'm not talking about losing an election. I'm talking about Lieberman's situation.

I'm no youngster and I'm hard pressed to think of a politician who lost his party's nomination and went on to win a general election. Anybody know one?

P.S. Mr. Ballard-I have no idea who the Magic Hat and the Stup are. Praytell.

[Other Tom]

My guess is the Magic Hat is the hapless tin-eared fool John Kerry. I infer that the Stump is the simpleton Gore, but I'm at a loss as to where the nickname comes from.

Nixon was also aided by being the antichrist. I sure can't think of anybody who lost his party's senatorial primary, then went on to win in the general. James Buckley, perhaps? In any event, I think this year's CT circumstance is unique, in that I can see a huge Republican crossover in the general, given their own feckless candidate.

[topsecretk9]

I'm quite sure that Hamsher and her acolytes probably thought the Lieberman in black-face satire was great, just great.

Of course she did, just like her use of Rape Gurney Joe. That's the thing with the disingenuous "I don't know about "the blogs" response. He had AMPLE warning and familiarity with the over the top, inappropriate tactics Jane uses. Lamont sought and CHOSE to maintain the alignment.

This is about his judgment and when the S*** hit the fan, his first crisis? He flopped.

[Extraneus]

Lamont sought and CHOSE to maintain the alignment.

Wonder if he'll have to turn on them before it's all over.

[Rick Ballard]

Other Tom,

He was known as "The Tree" for his flamboyantly wooden oratorical skills in the earth toned leadup to his trimming in '00. The remnant is justly referred to as "The Stump" - being the same in essence but diminished in stature.

[Lew Clark]

I just wonder if Rove is behind the Lieberman/Lamont hype. This is in reality a very very liberal Democrat who just happens to openly support the GWOT against a very very liberal Democrat who opposes the GWOT. I personally feel, if you have to have a Democrat in the Senate, have Lieberman, not Lamont. But, in the big picture, it's a liberal Democrat seat. It will be a liberal Democrat seat after November. So, I love the left exhausting so much energy on purging a "heretic". Every penny spent, every word written, to defeat Lieberman, is a penny/word not used to take control of the congress.

[Extraneus]

Ah, but as Joe showed in 2000, he's willing to bend his philosophical principles when the need arises. If they go over the top and force him out of the liberal Democrat camp, and he ends up winning in November, then things might get even more interesting. After all, didn't Sharpton say yesterday that Joe should be a Republican? Maybe he'll end up in agreement.

[Extraneus]

Powerline:

Quinnipiac's July 20 poll of 2,520 Connecticut voters showed Lieberman, running as an independent, ahead in a three-way general election with 51 percent compared with 27 percent for Lamont and 9 percent for Republican Alan Schlesinger.

[Jane]

Lew,

What makes you think (other than his position on the war) that Lamont is uber liberal?

[clarice]

Florida was close in 2000 because Lieberman was on the ballot. If he loses the Dem primary I do not think it will in the end prove good for the party, their continued high level of Jewish support or for Hillary, for that matter.

Sharpton and Jackson campaigning for Lamont and the CBC backing out of a pledge to campaign for Lieberman as Lamont's team publishes racist attacks on Lieberman has diminished them even more, I think.(Down to the sub sub basement)

http://americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=5739

[topsecretk9]

OK, this is just hilarious. Remember Ned Lamont owns stock in Halliburton? Defenders of Ned said it was only a big if they made it a big deal and it was only Joe using it as a campaign distraction.

OK.

Then the lefty bloggers went ape over Lieberman receiving $1000 dollars WalMart PAC money. They blogged and heckled. Joe said he returned it a week after received last February. They blogged he was lying, there was no SEC record - the plot thickens they said.

OP...WalMart confirms Joe sent it back way back when. Blog plot fizzles, embarrassingly.

SO, what do we find today? via the Hotline

August 03, 2006

It's Hard To Get Away From Wal-Mart

A Quinnipiac poll shows Ned Lamont (D) leading Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) 54%-41% among likely Dem primary voters... with just five days to go.

Black-face pictures and Wal-Mart are the trigger points du jour. Lieberman and Lamont
went out of their way to criticize the mega-giant retailer.

Lieberman, of course, at one point received (but later returned) Wal-Mart contributions.

And according to financial disclosure forms filed with the Secretary of Senate, at least two accounts affiliated with Lamont hold Wal-Mart stock today.

One trust marked "DC" for dependent child, contains at least $1000 worth of stock (and as much as $15K). The other, marked "J" for "joint," contains the same range. That account also reported at least $201 worth of dividend income from the stock.

We've asked Lamont's campaign for a response...

Update: Wal-Mart's defenders have also noticed...

Posted at 10:54 AM

[Pete]

Other Tom - Bush has used the line - "Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists".

The line that you used yourself is not much different. The implication of what you said is that if you don't support Bush you are "staying away from this terrorist stuff".

Despite the hundreds of billions of dollars wasted by Bush in Iraq, it does not make us any safer. Iraq today is a greater haven for terrorists than it ever was. Meanwhile our own generals are now saying that Iraq could move towards civil war, and that they would not have said that a year ago.

Ultimately the voters are concluding that the Iraq war was not worth it, and that the Iraq war does not make us safer. The Republican party can either accept this or keep on denying it.

[lurker]

"Other Tom - Bush has used the line - "Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists".

I don't have a problem with it and he is absolutely right. Each individual has to make up their minds to either support it or not. I don't see a problem with it.

Read AJStrata's post:

America Stands With Israel, Jews Dumping Dems

MSM's losing more.

[lurker]

"Ultimately the voters are concluding that the Iraq war was not worth it, and that the Iraq war does not make us safer. The Republican party can either accept this or keep on denying it."

Well, I think the voters will tell otherwise in November.

[windansea]

hmmm..this doesn't sound like someone who will slink off into the night.

Lieberman Plans for Loss Next Week

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) will shake up his campaign staff if he loses Tuesday’s Democratic primary to challenger Ned Lamont. Lieberman supporters have watched with growing dismay since the spring as the three term senator’s campaign has gone from oblivious to defensive. They expect to reap a bitter harvest in 6 days.

Expect Lieberman to can anyone who was associated with 2004 Kerry campaign and replace them with a team of pungent veterans who will take the fight to Lamont. As Lieberman tours the broiling state, you can almost hear the gloves coming off in preparation for a fight to the finish in November.

Lieberman will face pressure to abandon his independent run if he gets clocked on August 8th. But on August 9th he will be able to capture the spotlight by filing his petitions for his independent run.

Support from Republicans for Lieberman will continue now that embattled GOP contender Alan Schlesinger (a/k/a Alan Gold) has finally filed his most recent finance report. It provides another dismal look at Schlesinger’s effort to fight above his weight in the contest. To date, Schlesinger has raised a paltry $63,581.00 from contributors and has lent his campaign $50,000.00. The amount raised in contributions is less than some vigorous State Senate races.

Renewed Republican muttering about Schlesinger’s doomed campaign to follow as they eye the spot for Lieberman.

political wire

this will be delicious

go Lamont!

[windansea]

Hamsher on blackface once upon a time

Does he First Lady not know who Eddie Cantor was? Or does she actually think it's appropriate to invoke a comedian famous for appearing in blackface when talking about minority students, and then crack wise about their erstwhile future as criminals?

[SunnyDay]

OT: court ruled that DeLay stays on the ballot.

[NJC]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgtksHyL0oQ

Ned Lamont introducing Markos Moulitsas and Jerome Armstrong at a book signing in New Haven on May 21

@ 1:52
"I'm really happy to be introducing Jerome and Markos. You know, they were promoting my candidacy before there WAS a candidacy."

@ 3:09
"I'd just like to say a little bit if I could for a minute about how important the netroots and the blogs have been to this campaign..."

@ 7:18
"...And if you don't believe me, just check the netroots. You know, check MyDD, check DailyKos, check what people are thinking..."

@ 7:45
"...And these are two guys that are changing the course of history. They're changing the nature of politics. You're making campaigns like this possible. Buy the book. Tell everybody about it. Jerome, Markos: It's all yours..."

[Herbert M. Smith]

"...Don't know anything about the blogs."

What is the point of taking a minor thing out of context and calling it a "lie." That's a pretty harsh word.

I'm a Republican, and can't vote in the primary, but I admire Lamont a lot. He's sticking his neck and his wallet out to do something gutsy and civic minded. He's trying very constructively to make a difference.

I wish there were a lot more talented people out there who would do the same.

If you are not a Lamont supporter, identify something really great about Lieberman and celebrate it. Compare Lieberman's position on issues of interest with Lamont's.

But whipping your readers into a frenzy over a non-scandal is kind of a waste of your intelligence and your very great talent as a writer-researcher-blogger.

[Bob]

I'll tell you right now, after Ned wind the primary, I'll be voting for Joe and I know many other conservatives here in CT that will also. As Lew Clark pointed out above, this has always been, and always will be, for the foreseeable future be a Demo State. And as Extraneus said, this may make Joe the Independent a better friend! This slap in the face by the netroots sure won't make him feel comfy with the dems anymore!

[Bob]

Breaking ! http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=109072>Evidence Mounts that Kana "Massacre" Was a Fake

[topsecretk9]

Herbert

I am not whipped up in a frenzy by TM, I am in a frenzy precisely because the nutroots actually HAVE engaged in what you accuse TM of. Open your eyes and read "the blogs" Mr. Lamont knows nothing about, or not, and pretend this campaign is about substance and civics and not the "kiss".

[Gabriel Sutherland]

Pete: You're right. There is no difference between these two lines.

"You are either with us or you are with the terrorists." - President Bush

"either you support Bush or you are a terrorist" - Pete

There's a sword somewhere with your name on it. Time to fall on it and hope you come back an honest person.

[Extraneus]

Quinnipiac's July 20 poll of 2,520 Connecticut voters showed Lieberman, running as an independent, ahead in a three-way general election with 51 percent compared with 27 percent for Lamont and 9 percent for Republican Alan Schlesinger.

Anyone want to speculate on what will happen to Schlesinger's 9% after he gets off the phone with Rove?

[Lew Clark]

Jane,
I didn’t say Lamont was a liberal. I don't know anything about those blogs. Must have been a sock puppet.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Really, it was a statement made in ignorance. I know very little about Lamont's policy on any issue other than Iraq.

But hey, there may be a job for me at the NYT as an editor. I have the fact- checking skills they like to employ.

[Gabriel Sutherland]

Is Herbert Moby?

He was last seen here defending Lamont, once again, in a post criticizing Ned Lamont.

[SteveMG]

You are either with us or you are with the terrorists." - President Bush

Of course, a reading of the full quote will show any semi-literate person that Bush was warning nations that supported terrorism that a new policy would be in place. He was not directing the tocsin against domestic opponents of his policies against terrorism.

But why let the truth ruin a good story.

SMG

[Bob]

Gabriel... it sounds the same when your wearing a tin foil hat. This is a known scientific fact that with a .0075" thick foil hat, folded, not creased is placed on the head, the word "with" transforms into the word "are".

[PeterUK]

"If you are not a Lamont supporter, identify something really great about Lieberman and celebrate it. Compare Lieberman's position on issues of interest with Lamont's."

Lieberman is a Democrat.

Lamont is a Democrat.

There must be other differences which make a difference.

[noah]

Bob, unless you just really admire that avuncular, unctious, puppy dog liberal Lieberman...why vote for him?

Personally I would like to see potential swing voters see what the Democrat party is capable of doing.

[PeterUK]

Gabriel,
"I'm a Republican, and can't vote in the primary, but I admire Lamont a lot. He's sticking his neck and his wallet out to do something gutsy and civic minded. He's trying very constructively to make a difference."

The "I'm a Republican......But" is always instructive,after all "Blogs make a difference".

[noah]

Republicans like Gabriel (if they do in fact exist) can only be found on very hot days in Connecticut.

[clarice]

Bob, latest scientific studies show tin foil is inferior at blocking mind rays. The best thing is a wearever saucepan (chinstrap optional).

[TallDave]

Oh, this is beautiful:

Jane Hamsher says:

July 31st, 2006 at 9:36 am *

I’m off soon to go to NY to see Ned film Colbert.

I’m quite excited as you might imagine, and will be calling in to Christy.

Jane Hamsher says:
July 31st, 2006 at 7:36 am

Ned did great. We have good outtakes too, possibly for release later in the week

Three people then squirm with jealousy. And as a bonus no less than TWO comments praising Glenn "Magic Sock Puppet" Greenwald's brilliance!

P.S. Anejay: Ixnay on the takesoutay.

[Gabriel Sutherland]

noah: If I was only a Republican.