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).

Tuesday, June 06, 2006


"Progressive" Joe

You can tell Joe's progressive, cause the word "progressive" is spelled out in big capital letters on the second page of some literature his campaign has been handing out.

Never mind that this dedicated "progressive" may be planning on leaving the Democratic party in a matter of weeks, that this claim relies almost solely on the distorted ratings from issue groups that Paul Bass debunked the other day, or that other claims made in the text are outright lies. Some highlights:

A few pages of the literature (click for larger versions):
page 1page 2page 4page 6

"He supports Connecticut's Civil Union Law..."

Oh? Is that a fact?

The same cannot be said of his views on Connecticut's landmark civil unions law, passed last spring.

Do you support it? we asked.

"Yeah," he said. "I've said this all along, I've said this in regard to the Defense of Marriage Act, which I supported, and some of the gay marriage laws, which I opposed, and the constitutional amendment to essentially prohibit states from enacting gay marriage rights."

Come again?

Kearney: Would you have voted for the civil unions law?

"I don't...I honestly don't know because I haven't looked at it closely enough. I'll be happy to do so if you want me to. I followed it and it seemed to have broad bipartisan support, and therefore I accept it."

Well, stop the presses! In a follow-up email sent by his staff, Lieberman wanted to let us know that he "does support the bill as passed."

from an interview earlier this year

You know who else tried to pull this stunt of NOT mention her support of Bush's Iraq war?

Hillary the Hawk, during her horrible, self-serving, dishonest, pre-acceptance film last week in Buffalo.

Not a peep about her vote to give Bushco the throttles up signal to invade Iraq.

These DINO scumbags make me sick and they are not going to get away with it.
If you'd bothered to read the literature you made fun of, you would have read about Joe Lieberman's 95% rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America, his 88% rating from the League of Conservation Voters, his 84% rating from the AFL-CIO, his 88% rating from the Human Rights Campaign, and his 85% rating from the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.

Nice try, but at this point, quoting the Human Rights Campaign is akin to reading Karl Rove's talking points memo.

Lieberman (and the HRC) are in big trouble.

If you'd bothered to read the post, you'd see that Lieberman's high ratings are addressed.

at this claim relies almost solely on the distorted ratings from issue groups that Paul Bass debunked the other day.

There's even a hyperlink up there.
This is almost funny. Like I almost had respect for Lieberman.

Look, I don't have a problem if Lieberman wants to run as Republican. But his "defense of civil rights" thing during a time of unprecedent executive overreach is completely out of bounds. Lieberman called the NSA a minor issue. Why doesn't Lieberman run on defending the president, if that's where his heart lies?

I wonder if we can use his propaganda to paint him as a liberal when he runs as an independent.
The Democratic Party is in trouble if its (apparent) base thinks that the Human Rights Campaign is "akin to Karl Rove's talking points."

I seriously hope that was a joke.

Just as the HRC is actually having some success convincing a majority of Americans (Senate vote on gay marriage ban) it is attacked for being too conservative.

Does anyone here actually want to win in '06 and '08?
Post a Comment

<< Home