Disclosure: I worked for the Lamont campaign doing web design and production and some writing for the official blog (from 9/5/06 to 11/07/06).
Friday, June 23, 2006
Friday Morning Round-Up
- Lieberman goes after Lamont for not being anti-war enough, since he supposedly didn't support Kerry's amendment. Or something like that. Lamont ends that line of attack rather quickly:
"I would have supported them both, Lamont said. "You've heard me say before, I think it's time to get our front line troops out of harm's way."
By the way, this attack is a mirror image of Bush's 2004 attacks on Kerry for holding a "confusing" position on Iraq. The real "confusing" position is a Connecticut Democrat wholeheartedly supporting Bush's failed Iraq policy. (Update: And wasn't it just last week that Lieberman was whining that Sen. Lamont would be "too polarizing?" Now suddenly, because he wants to build party consensus on Iraq, he's not polarizing enough?) - Mark Schmitt has an absolute must-read piece in TPM Cafe this morning describing his long evolution as a Lieberman supporter - one I'm sure is shared by many other Democrats. He concludes:
It seems to me that Lieberman is following the path, quite literally, of the neo-conservatives - not the Rumsfeldian nationalists who incorrectly wear that label now, but the original neo-cons of the 1960s, driven to the right above all by their irritation at the left, often based on domestic politics. (Hence the title of this post, an allusion to one of the most famous original documents of the neocons, Norman Podhoretz’s 1967 essay, “My Negro Problem - And Ours”.)
Is that enough of a reason to oppose Lieberman? Sure, because it’s a huge error on one of the most fundamental questions of our time. It’s an error not of policy or of political loyalty, but of attitude. And it is not an error that I see others making....
Nor do I accept the argument that if Lamont wins, it represents a “purge” or shows that “there’s no place in the Democratic Party” for Lieberman. I value competitive elections. Lieberman’s not guaranteed a fourth term in the Senate. Ned Lamont’s reasonably well qualified, certainly as qualified as, say, Paul Wellstone was. If Connecticut Democrats want a Senator who had the right position on the war, or at least doesn’t treat those who did have the right position with contempt, they are entitled to it. - Connecticut Democrats may disapprove of Joe, but Ann Coulter apparently loves him.
- First Lamont supporters were "terrorizing" "left-wing weirdos" on a "jihad" or "crusade." Now The New Republic - who endorsed Joe Lieberman for president in 2004 - calls Lamont supporters "fascistic." As Atrios notes, they're rapidly turning into The Onion.
- The New Haven Independent has more on the packed house in New Haven for Ned and David Sirota on Wednesday night. David also writes about it, and CTBob has video from the event.