Ned Lamont FIRES BACK at Dick Cheney's "Lamont voters aid Al Qiada" smear!
Ned Lamont FIRES BACK at Dick Cheney's "Lamont voters aid Al Qiada" smear!
Shows crusty, terrified Dem. "leaders" how to lead...
WHY is it that the ONLY Democrat providing millions of us Democratic voters with SOME hope that SOMEONE will STAND UP TO THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION's crimes, corruption, incompetence, smears, censorship, and FAILURES (among an even longer list of other administration sins) IS A NEOPHYTE political outsider with practically NO campaign experience, much less a charter member of the Democrat's insider "Georgetown cocktail hour get-to-know-your-big-donors" club?
How is it that ONE outsider candidate, has STIMULATED and ENCOURAGED more Democratic OPPOSITION to the THUGGISH Bush administration, THAN ALL OTHER Democratic Senators, PUT TOGETHER?
And that includes the senate's most liberal member, Barbara Boxer, busy stumping for Lamont's corrupt opponent (that would be Joe "sell out Democratic voters" Lieberman himself), and even the courageous Russ Feingold, who always finds a way to blend back into the woodwork when his comments and stands inevitably start CONFRONTING the lies and frauds of the Bush administration.
Not to take the analogy too far, but Ned Lamont reminds us of a young colonial army officer, Col. George Washington, who narrowly survived the massacre of British General Braddock's British army at the hands of the French on July 9, 1755. As a survivor Washington came to realize that authortarian pomp and military rigidity had their limits in the American wilderness, and the scorn and rejection Washington received from the British (he was denied a commission in the regular army, i.e. as a Redcoat officer) clearly laid the seeds of Washington's future leadership of the American rebellion against King George and the Royal Army.
Hopefully Lamont will not suffer the defeats that the young George Washington endured at the battles of Fort Necessity and Braddock's massacre on a fork of the Ohio River. But sometimes it just takes an outsider, a survivor, a determined neophyte who has been scorned by "the regular leaders" to light that fire that sparks "We the People" to rise up and demand our rights and our due.
Or, to use a perhaps lighter metaphor from the American war for independence, Ned Lamont and his supporters remind us of that band of rogues and privateers, er, Boston Patriots, who took the tea off the ships of the East India Tea company monopoly in America, and tossed those tons of cargo into Boston harbor, telling the King and his favored monopoly what they could do with their tea!
And telling the Vice President who didn't even win the popular vote in 2000, and who then went ON VACATION as Al Qaida terrorists plotted TO HIJACK FOUR American airliners LESS THAN A YEAR after Al Qaida's SUCCESSFUL attack on a US warship (the USS Cole), that a "Vote for Lamont IS NOT a vote for Al Qaida," is certainly a great place to start.
PLUS: Under Dick Cheney/George W. Bush White House, US government earns "FAILING GRADES" from the 9-11 Commission Final Report.
Official 9-11 Commision final report, summary, pdf download:
http://www.9-11pdp.org/press/2005-12-05_report.pdf
Washington Post review, "US given FAILING GRADES by 9-11 Panel"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/05/AR2005120500097.html
=========================================
In AP Interview, Lamont Fires Back at Lieberman's Remarks, Saying They Sounded Like Cheney's
Lamont: Lieberman Sounded Like Cheney
By ANDREW MIGA
The Associated Press
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/print?id=2308572
WASHINGTON - Democratic Senate nominee Ned Lamont, the anti-war candidate who toppled Sen. Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut primary, says he was surprised by Lieberman and Vice President Dick Cheney's claims that his victory could embolden terrorists.
"My God, here we have a terrorist threat against hearth and home and the very first thing that comes out of their mind is how can we turn this to partisan advantage. I find that offensive," Lamont said in an interview Sunday with The Associated Press.
After British officials disclosed they had thwarted a terrorist airline bombing plot on Thursday, Lieberman warned that Lamont's call for a phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq would be "taken as a tremendous victory" by terrorists.
Cheney suggested Wednesday that Lamont's victory might encourage "the al-Qaida types" who want to "break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task."
Lamont said Lieberman's swipe at his candidacy "sounded an awful lot" like Cheney.
"It surprised me," he said. "It seemed almost orchestrated. It's sort of demeaning to the people of Connecticut. ... I thought the senator and the vice president were both wrong to use that attack (strategy) on the voters of Connecticut."
The Lieberman camp Sunday brushed aside Lamont's comments.
"All Lieberman did was point out an important difference between his approach to national security and Ned Lamont's, which is what campaigns are all about," said Lieberman spokesman Dan Gerstein.
Cheney spokeswoman Lea Anne McBride said Lamont was the one seeking to score political points with the terror war.
"Sounds like he's the one playing politics at a time the president is trying to build national unity and cooperation in fighting a determined and murderous enemy an enemy whose tactics and hatred we got to glimpse again last week, an enemy that continues to plot in the shadows and to probe weaknesses," McBride said.
Lamont's upset victory last week, fueled in part by liberal bloggers, was viewed by many as a referendum on Iraq and President Bush's handling of the war. The debate has placed his candidacy in the national spotlight.
Lamont, who was in Washington for appearances on two Sunday TV news talk shows, is reaching out to the Democratic Party establishment for help in what is expected to be a bruising general election fight against Lieberman.
Many top Democrats, including national party chairman Howard Dean and leading senators, have abandoned Lieberman, the party's 2000 vice presidential nominee. They have lined up behind Lamont in the general election, a three-way fight that also includes Republican Alan Schlesinger.
Some Democrats are urging Lieberman to drop his independent bid to clear a path for Lamont.
"It would be better for the Democratic Party, it would be better for the people of Connecticut, it would be better for the country" if Lieberman got out of the race, Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., said on ABC's "This Week."
Lamont said he had no idea whether Lieberman might reconsider his candidacy.
"It's not helpful," he said of the possibility Lieberman could play the role of the spoiler.
Lamont also said he doubted that Republicans would find a stronger candidate than Schlesinger, who trails far behind both Lamont and Lieberman in recent polls.
"My hunch is they're not going to do that," Lamont said.
Lamont's previous political experience was serving in local offices such as selectman in Greenwich, Conn. He said he had no plans to tailor his campaign message in the fall race to appeal to independents or moderates in both parties.
"I'm not changing my message one iota now," Lamont said. "It is a message that resonates. It's not just Democrats who think that we need real change in Washington, D.C."
Lamont, 52, is a great-grandson of the former chairman of JP Morgan & Co. He has estimated that he's worth $90 million to $300 million. In 1984 he founded a company that wires college campuses for cable television.
Lamont spent about $4 million of his own money in the primary. He said he doubted he would have to provide a similar-sized cash infusion for the general election, but he vowed to remain competitive in terms of fundraising.
"We're not going to be badly outspent," said Lamont.
Lieberman has about $2 million in campaign funds for the fall race after spending roughly $5 million during the primary, according to campaign spokesman Gerstein. "We will raise enough to win," Gerstein said.
On the Net:
Alan Schlesinger: http://www.schlesinger2006.com/
Shows crusty, terrified Dem. "leaders" how to lead...
WHY is it that the ONLY Democrat providing millions of us Democratic voters with SOME hope that SOMEONE will STAND UP TO THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION's crimes, corruption, incompetence, smears, censorship, and FAILURES (among an even longer list of other administration sins) IS A NEOPHYTE political outsider with practically NO campaign experience, much less a charter member of the Democrat's insider "Georgetown cocktail hour get-to-know-your-big-donors" club?
How is it that ONE outsider candidate, has STIMULATED and ENCOURAGED more Democratic OPPOSITION to the THUGGISH Bush administration, THAN ALL OTHER Democratic Senators, PUT TOGETHER?
And that includes the senate's most liberal member, Barbara Boxer, busy stumping for Lamont's corrupt opponent (that would be Joe "sell out Democratic voters" Lieberman himself), and even the courageous Russ Feingold, who always finds a way to blend back into the woodwork when his comments and stands inevitably start CONFRONTING the lies and frauds of the Bush administration.
Not to take the analogy too far, but Ned Lamont reminds us of a young colonial army officer, Col. George Washington, who narrowly survived the massacre of British General Braddock's British army at the hands of the French on July 9, 1755. As a survivor Washington came to realize that authortarian pomp and military rigidity had their limits in the American wilderness, and the scorn and rejection Washington received from the British (he was denied a commission in the regular army, i.e. as a Redcoat officer) clearly laid the seeds of Washington's future leadership of the American rebellion against King George and the Royal Army.
Hopefully Lamont will not suffer the defeats that the young George Washington endured at the battles of Fort Necessity and Braddock's massacre on a fork of the Ohio River. But sometimes it just takes an outsider, a survivor, a determined neophyte who has been scorned by "the regular leaders" to light that fire that sparks "We the People" to rise up and demand our rights and our due.
Or, to use a perhaps lighter metaphor from the American war for independence, Ned Lamont and his supporters remind us of that band of rogues and privateers, er, Boston Patriots, who took the tea off the ships of the East India Tea company monopoly in America, and tossed those tons of cargo into Boston harbor, telling the King and his favored monopoly what they could do with their tea!
And telling the Vice President who didn't even win the popular vote in 2000, and who then went ON VACATION as Al Qaida terrorists plotted TO HIJACK FOUR American airliners LESS THAN A YEAR after Al Qaida's SUCCESSFUL attack on a US warship (the USS Cole), that a "Vote for Lamont IS NOT a vote for Al Qaida," is certainly a great place to start.
PLUS: Under Dick Cheney/George W. Bush White House, US government earns "FAILING GRADES" from the 9-11 Commission Final Report.
Official 9-11 Commision final report, summary, pdf download:
http://www.9-11pdp.org/press/2005-12-05_report.pdf
Washington Post review, "US given FAILING GRADES by 9-11 Panel"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/05/AR2005120500097.html
=========================================
In AP Interview, Lamont Fires Back at Lieberman's Remarks, Saying They Sounded Like Cheney's
Lamont: Lieberman Sounded Like Cheney
By ANDREW MIGA
The Associated Press
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/print?id=2308572
WASHINGTON - Democratic Senate nominee Ned Lamont, the anti-war candidate who toppled Sen. Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut primary, says he was surprised by Lieberman and Vice President Dick Cheney's claims that his victory could embolden terrorists.
"My God, here we have a terrorist threat against hearth and home and the very first thing that comes out of their mind is how can we turn this to partisan advantage. I find that offensive," Lamont said in an interview Sunday with The Associated Press.
After British officials disclosed they had thwarted a terrorist airline bombing plot on Thursday, Lieberman warned that Lamont's call for a phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq would be "taken as a tremendous victory" by terrorists.
Cheney suggested Wednesday that Lamont's victory might encourage "the al-Qaida types" who want to "break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task."
Lamont said Lieberman's swipe at his candidacy "sounded an awful lot" like Cheney.
"It surprised me," he said. "It seemed almost orchestrated. It's sort of demeaning to the people of Connecticut. ... I thought the senator and the vice president were both wrong to use that attack (strategy) on the voters of Connecticut."
The Lieberman camp Sunday brushed aside Lamont's comments.
"All Lieberman did was point out an important difference between his approach to national security and Ned Lamont's, which is what campaigns are all about," said Lieberman spokesman Dan Gerstein.
Cheney spokeswoman Lea Anne McBride said Lamont was the one seeking to score political points with the terror war.
"Sounds like he's the one playing politics at a time the president is trying to build national unity and cooperation in fighting a determined and murderous enemy an enemy whose tactics and hatred we got to glimpse again last week, an enemy that continues to plot in the shadows and to probe weaknesses," McBride said.
Lamont's upset victory last week, fueled in part by liberal bloggers, was viewed by many as a referendum on Iraq and President Bush's handling of the war. The debate has placed his candidacy in the national spotlight.
Lamont, who was in Washington for appearances on two Sunday TV news talk shows, is reaching out to the Democratic Party establishment for help in what is expected to be a bruising general election fight against Lieberman.
Many top Democrats, including national party chairman Howard Dean and leading senators, have abandoned Lieberman, the party's 2000 vice presidential nominee. They have lined up behind Lamont in the general election, a three-way fight that also includes Republican Alan Schlesinger.
Some Democrats are urging Lieberman to drop his independent bid to clear a path for Lamont.
"It would be better for the Democratic Party, it would be better for the people of Connecticut, it would be better for the country" if Lieberman got out of the race, Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., said on ABC's "This Week."
Lamont said he had no idea whether Lieberman might reconsider his candidacy.
"It's not helpful," he said of the possibility Lieberman could play the role of the spoiler.
Lamont also said he doubted that Republicans would find a stronger candidate than Schlesinger, who trails far behind both Lamont and Lieberman in recent polls.
"My hunch is they're not going to do that," Lamont said.
Lamont's previous political experience was serving in local offices such as selectman in Greenwich, Conn. He said he had no plans to tailor his campaign message in the fall race to appeal to independents or moderates in both parties.
"I'm not changing my message one iota now," Lamont said. "It is a message that resonates. It's not just Democrats who think that we need real change in Washington, D.C."
Lamont, 52, is a great-grandson of the former chairman of JP Morgan & Co. He has estimated that he's worth $90 million to $300 million. In 1984 he founded a company that wires college campuses for cable television.
Lamont spent about $4 million of his own money in the primary. He said he doubted he would have to provide a similar-sized cash infusion for the general election, but he vowed to remain competitive in terms of fundraising.
"We're not going to be badly outspent," said Lamont.
Lieberman has about $2 million in campaign funds for the fall race after spending roughly $5 million during the primary, according to campaign spokesman Gerstein. "We will raise enough to win," Gerstein said.
On the Net:
Alan Schlesinger: http://www.schlesinger2006.com/
posted by verifi at 12:53 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home