The big-name Democrats are quickly supporting Lamont, according to the New York Times, a local Manhattan paper which until a decade or so ago enjoyed an international reputation. Howard Dean, Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, both Bill and Hilarity! Clinton . . . a star-studded cast ready to prostate themselves before the far left:
With promises of money and personal campaign appearances, Democratic leaders rallied today behind the campaign of Ned Lamont, the anti-Iraq war challenger who defeated Senator Joseph I. Lieberman in the Connecticut primary, leaving Mr. Lieberman increasingly isolated as he pledged to forge ahead as an independent candidate.At the same time, Republicans began a concerted effort to use Mr. Lieberman's defeat to portray Democrats as weak on national defense, reprising a theme that they made central to the last two national campaigns. The attacks often came in searing remarks from, among others, Ken Mehlman, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, and Vice President Dick Cheney, who went so far as to suggest that the ouster of Mr. Lieberman might embolden Al Qaeda terrorists.
Read the whole story HERE.
This was certainly the theme of the conference call Mr. Mehlman held with talk radio and bloggers this afternoon. There has been national focus on the Connecticut race for months now, so the Republicans have had time to prepare their response for either possible outcome yesterday. Clearly, they have come out swinging on national security/defense, which have proved their strongest issues over the last forty years.
Howard Dean points to polls showing a majority of Americans believe either the Iraq War was a mistake to begin with or disheartened with its conduct, and is amazed the Republicans dare pull out the same sword once again.
But why wouldn't they? No matter which side you are on, the Iraq War is the biggest thing going on right now. It cannot be ignored. And the Republicans are on the side of stronger national security and more aggressive foreign policy, especially in pursuit of the War on Terror.
The Lamont Democrats' plan is to retreat and hide under the bed and hope the terrorists don't come after us.
So I'm glad to see so many Democratic celebrities lining up to jump on board the Lamont bandwagon, and to show his Nutroots supporters that they did get the message, and will be good little appeasers again from now on.
This is the major dividing issue of our time. The Democrats are in the process of making sure their party is purged of anyone who supports the war, so it is becoming a very simple either/or question for the voters.
Who do YOU trust with national security, the war on terrorism, and the continued conduct in and out of Iraq?
Choose carefully.
Howard Dean can have all the poll results he wants to wave around; I welcome the choice, and trust the American people to make it correctly.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
2006 Senate Race, Commentary
Comments (7)
Who do you trust, the party... (Below threshold)1. Posted by kimyl oh! | August 10, 2006 2:30 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Who do you trust, the party that has f***ed up horribly or the party that has opposed lots of their boneheaded decisions?
And just remember, the Democrats are in support of getting out of this quagmire, not against the idea of fighting for America when it is smart and really matters.
I would like to see Republicans describe to me a Bush/GOP led war effort that we should pull out of. Would it be a war against invisible men on the moon? A war against hurricanes? Drugs?
Our military has completed its objectives and the rest is up to the Iraqis. Get out, get the troops out, close the bases, and be there as humanitarian support so that people know we care about people and not oil, military supremacy, or regional control.
1. Posted by kimyl oh! | August 10, 2006 2:30 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 10, 2006 02:30
2. Posted by Jim Addison | August 10, 2006 4:11 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Well, if the other party had proposed practical alternatives, other than running away like a bunch of scared rabbits, or the French, I would have something to consider.
In fact, the Democrats - the "Lamont Democrats" who are apparently taking over - ARE in favor of hiding from confrontation. They would use military force against domestic churches, maybe.
2. Posted by Jim Addison | August 10, 2006 4:11 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 10, 2006 04:11
3. Posted by P. Bunyan | August 10, 2006 10:35 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"And just remember, the Democrats are in support of getting out of this quagmire, not against the idea of fighting for America when it is smart and really matters."
To a secular socialist like kimyl, it only smart and really matters AFTER we've been attacked and thousands and millions of Americans have been killed. To people like that prevention does not matter and it is not smart.
Thanks for reminding all of us kimyl. This will get get everyone to vote for the secular socialist democrats.
"I would like to see Republicans describe to me a Bush/GOP led war effort that we should pull out of."
The only war effort of which we should ever "pull out" is one in which we have acheived total victory and insured a lasting peace. Anything short of that only emboldens our enemies. If we do what the "democrats" want then we will have a quagmire and the war will be unwinnable. The only way to victory in the war on Islamofascism is to keep the Republicans in power.
That should be your slogan kimyl, "The democrats- emboldening and strengthing the enemies of the United State for over 40 years!"
3. Posted by P. Bunyan | August 10, 2006 10:35 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 10, 2006 10:35
4. Posted by The Unbeliever | August 10, 2006 11:29 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Who do you trust, the party that has f***ed up horribly or the party that has opposed lots of their boneheaded decisions?
The party who opposed all the other side's boneheaded decisions, of course. Which is why I vote for Republicans and think the Dems are too dangerously stupid to hold the reigns of power.
4. Posted by The Unbeliever | August 10, 2006 11:29 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 10, 2006 11:29
5. Posted by Everett Hatton | August 10, 2006 11:41 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Who are these people who think that they can ignore all this terrorism in the world today? Shouldn't we just stay at home and build up our walls? Not trade with anyone. Sure, we'll build Nike factories and put Walmart out of business. We'll not import any oil at all and teach those foreigners a thing or two. We leave them alone and they will leave us alone. We'll all live a prosperous and wonderous life here in our own USA. We'll all drive electric cars and have free healthcare for all. Abortions will be free and no one will be allowed to smoke or mention God ever again. We'll have all the big companies and weathy people pay for everything. I love these Liberal Dems. Life will be great in their dreamworld.
5. Posted by Everett Hatton | August 10, 2006 11:41 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 10, 2006 11:41
6. Posted by Kimyl Oh! | August 11, 2006 1:44 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Democrats do not want to ignore terrorism, they want to prevent attacks and stop engendering more terrorists, like we do when we invade sovereign nations unassociated with 9/11. We think that pushing the rest of the world around to show our power might be cruel to other people and might prevent real diplomacy and peace. For fuck's sake, no Democrat wants to stop spying on Al Qaida, they just want a warrant.
Everything else you said is such a sad, Rush Limbaugh rant caricature of the left wing agenda it is laughable. All those slippery slopes....
Separation of church and state: LIBERALS HATE GOD AND WANT CHRISTIANS DEAD AND HATE JESUS!
Ban smoking indoors to save lives: DEMOCRATS WANT TO CONTROL YOUR LIVES AND STOP YOUR FUN!
Wal-mart should pay a living wage, buy American goods if possible, and protect their customers: LIBERALS HATE SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS!
Women should have autonomy over their bodies: LIBERALS WANT TO MURDER BABIES, EVEN THE ONES THAT ARE ALREADY BORN!
We'll all drive electric cars: God, I wish.
We can have an effective health care system that provides coverage for all, and better coverage for some: LIBERALS WANT COMMUNIST MEDICINE WHERE NO ONE GETS CARE AND WE ALL DIE!
Certainly, a distorted view of any ideology that is totally dishonest is not a pretty picture. I could paint a picture of the GOP world, but we live in it--things are shitty, getting shittier, we waste money, the economy is growing for the rich, we sacrifice more rights and moral high ground, and there is not one principle we will not sell out to maintain GOP power.
6. Posted by Kimyl Oh! | August 11, 2006 1:44 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 11, 2006 01:44
7. Posted by everett Hatton | August 11, 2006 9:35 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Let me get this straight from a LIB. We shouldn't invade or spy without a warrant???
Damn, didn't we finally defeat the Mafia with power? Defeat Nazi Germany with power? Japan? And are they still in business???
The Dems way of fighting terrorism is to be nice, give them a search warrant and a box of Girlscout cookies and they'll be honest good Extremist and leave the USA alone...Sure they will.
Seems the destortion is coming from the left as was proven in the last 3 elections. The moderates and right are not distorted about how to beat a bunch of thugs in the world.
In my book...a Liberal is a terrorist if he makes it easier for a terrorist to kill innocent people.
7. Posted by everett Hatton | August 11, 2006 9:35 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 11, 2006 09:35