Steve, I assume you've sent this advice to the Lamont campaign directly, right? I wouldn't count on a campaign (even a DFA inspired campaign) reading blogs.
Posted by BigJohn at August 10, 2006 03:25 PMThe terror alert wouldn't be political, would it? -- Joe Lieberman takes refuge in the last resort of scoundrels:
"If we just pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England,” Mr. Lieberman said at a campaign event at lunchtime in Waterbury, Conn. “It will strengthen them and they will strike again.”
Looks like Karl Rove really is running his campaign ... You say Bojinka, I say BOHICA!
Part of me still likes Joe Lieberman but it's embarrassing to watch him pretend that George W. Bush knows what he's doing. Isn't that the real issue? Not Iraq? Not terrorism? But the sheer incompetence of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and even Condi Rice who after five years have so pathetically little to show for their efforts.
And does Lieberman really want us to pretend that we can trust George W. Bush at this late stage of the game? Isn't it time to start holding George W. Bush accountable instead of pretending that Bush has credibility? It's a sad day watching a good man lose touch with the country and the facts in the broader world.
The Republicans had their chance to get it right and they blew it. In January, Bush will still be president. He's shown no sign whatsoever of learning anything in the last five years. If nothing else, it's time to slow down the worst foreign policy in our nation's history before Bush does more harm. Two more years of Republicans sitting on their hands in Congress is not what we need.
Here's a question: when's the last time a Republican asked Bush why we haven't caught Osama bin Laden yet? We need a Congress that demands action, not one that gives carte blanche to the president.
Posted by Craig at August 10, 2006 04:18 PMThe successful airline disruption and revenue reduction plot prooves once and for all that fighting them over there only produces more terrorists.
Very little cargo is checked, is that where the next bombs will be placed?
Start training the bomb sniffing dogs now to combat the future crop of pissed off terrorists that Israel is currently cultivating in Lebanon.
Posted by TIKI AL at August 10, 2006 04:57 PMBill Schneider on CNN quoted Lamont as saying the terror arrests in Britain show the need to "fight for our security in a rational, serious way, rather than being bogged down in a war that is harmful to our security."
Sounds like Lamont is taking charge of the issue.
Posted by ceee at August 10, 2006 05:29 PMAs Steve points out, KKKKarl Rover is telling his increasingly skeptical GOP sturmtruppen to run on the Iraq War, apparently under the "best defense is a good offense" theory.
I sure don't know how the the blowdried GOP Fundamentalist blowhards feel about going over the top and running towards the machine guns carrying the Iraq Occupation" as their big message, but what else have they got?
The economy? Risky, as some bad fall numbers (as expected) would really sink the ship.
Fiscal Responsibility? BWAAHAAHAAA! Social Issues? Good luck.
It appears significant majorities of voters agree with Dems on most domestic issues, and they now "oppose" the war. Using mountains of money to make Dems appear to be dangerous, cowardly, weak quitters on national security is basically the Bedwetting Terror Party's only hope.
Dem candidates better be memorizing and ready with every argument, every angle, of how Bush's Iraq Adventure and open-ended occupation was a disastrous misstep in the REAL battle against Osama. And they need to declare that "Cut n' Run" as just another Republican distortion and lie, which is all Republicans do. "Republicans" must come to equal "Liars".
But they need their own Iraq counterphrase, too. What is is? "Borrow and Bleed"? "Spend and Die"? "Stay Forever"? "The Iraqi Ulcer"? "No Exit"? "The Endless Occupation"? They've got to state the basic argument incessantly and can't ever run out of ammo, even for a minute.
In our bedwetting militarist country, with its worthless, alarmist, war-loving TV news, that does nothing but parrot unchallenged talking points, it's going to come down to national security, once again. KKKarl and the Terror Party will never stop with the terror campaign until they lose on it.
I still say this whole mess was concocted by Oliver Stone and his PR group! Guess which movie will be #1 this weekend!
Posted by Seven of Six at August 10, 2006 06:34 PMI liked this from Wiki: BOHICA-'Bend Over Here It Comes Again'.
Posted by Seven of Six at August 10, 2006 06:38 PMWell put, Steve.
Since this race already has national attention, what better place to have a political battle over Iraq than this race... With an unappealing Lieberman (tied at the lips with W) as the Republian spokesman?
Anchors away, my friends
Posted by peconicrat at August 10, 2006 06:55 PMthis just shows there is a Cabal, party affiliaitions irrelevant, that seek to control. This seems more and more like the X Files every day.
Posted by T2 at August 10, 2006 07:07 PMRight on, Steve!
And I echo the sentiments of others that this advice should be sent directly to Lamont's campaign. In fact, we should probably all send e-mails to Lamont's campaign that link to this post.
By the way, Lieberman ostensibly believes his independent bid is selfless. Said Joe,
I must tell you if I was being selfish and listened to my wife, I would accept the results of yesterday's primary, finish my term and go out and make a lot of money.
You know, Joe, be selfish - just this once. We know you're such a noble guy, but go on. Give in to temptation. I promise we won't hold it against you.
Posted by Liveliest Crib at August 10, 2006 07:41 PMOops...I must have left something out on the link tags. Here's the link I was trying for:
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/08/10/what_does_hadassah_want.html
Posted by Liveliest Crib at August 10, 2006 07:42 PMSteve, the following is not reverse psychology: Karl Rove has no power that you do not give him by believing that he is capable of anything.
As a general rule, one ought never mythologize those whom one despises: the line between love and hate is just too thin.
Posted by Toby Petzold at August 10, 2006 08:26 PMoozo: If we had Gore, there'd be no war.
I wish I owned an airport giftshop. How much toothpaste, deodorant, shampoo, and blindness causing Renew Moisture Loc do think they sold today? Did Proctor and Gamble's stock go up?
Posted by TIKI AL at August 10, 2006 08:26 PMKudos on this critical strategic advice. We need to make sure that this gets front-line coverage on all the blogs and makes it in front of Lamonts' campaign manager's face this weekend.
I'll be re-posting this on my page over at gnn.
Posted by mandot at August 10, 2006 09:31 PMI think it's fairly obvious now, even to the most obtuse, that Lieberman never was a democrat. It even goes back to the 2000 election, which I think we all can agree, he helped lose for us. No, Joe's loyalty is quite clear, it is to AIPAC and Israel's interest and he saw the neo-cons has helping advance that interest. Of course he'll accept GOP money and do their bidding and I hope in the end, he'll be exposed for the lying piece of con-job shit he is.
Posted by sf at August 10, 2006 09:46 PMFuck Rove. They knew the possibility of mixing chemicals to make a bomb years ago. What did they do? Nothing. Not a fucking thing. This terror alert is bullshit. They left you and I open to a bomb and did nothing to stop it.
we are apparently no safer now
No safer? God damnit, we are less safe. Less safe. What the fuck is so hard to understand about that? Is the Busch presidency an employ the tards progeam? Crap! Make the world safe and get these morons out of office.
And Lamont should do exactly as he is doing. Don't make a sound. The republi-cons put the noose around their necks. Let them tighten it. And they will.
Posted by phidipides at August 10, 2006 10:05 PMCould Joe's obvious ties to Israel hurt Russ by association?
5 years after 9-11 and al caeda is still in business? Why are republicans so weak on terror?
Posted by TIKI AL at August 10, 2006 10:15 PMthere is a linkage to joe lieberman and the purported "terrorist" attacks on commercial airliners.
what would energize such a "false flag" op within hours after holy joe's primary defeat? why would tony and george[their handlers] give a rat's ass about joe lieberman?
i have been musing on this reptillian and zionist demtillian affection for holy joe for some time.
i first started musing on it when al gore selected him as his running mate. i marveled on that at the time. i asked myself, why was al gore selecting an israeli agent as his vp.
this ned lamont campaign made it all come clear...joe has been the israeli bagman in the congress. he is the dry cleaner. the launderer.
as i have mentioned on many occasions, a percentage of the foreign aid we give to israel gets repatriated to amerikan congresspersons.
and joe has been the congressional "go to" guy for deciding who gets some and how much. he is the senatorial abramoff.
i think it is the story that mckinney tried to tell, but no one would air her sty.
there is an odd thing about some purportedly liberal blogs: the rule would seem to be, leave israel alone. let us not discuss its genocidal ways. and if you bring up that issue, we shall identify you as a troll and ban your comments.
i am a virtual nemo. all the same, i had been posting on duncan black's site for some years. i have to say that some of my historical indictments of genocidal israel generated calls for my banishment, but it didn't happen.
until genocidal israel set up lebanon for an invasion. and i identified israel as the nazis renascent. and mentioned how dailykos had decided to target cynthia mckinney for her ant-zionist utterances. SUPPORTING THE BLACK REPTILLIAN DISGUISING HIMSELF AS A DEMTILLIAN. hank johnson is as much a democrat as the candidate supported by the reptillians is a "green".
how was that post greeted? TROLL COMMMENTS HAVE BEEN SCRUBBED.
and though i supported ned to the tune of a couple hundred bucks[and i don't live in ct], because i wanted the man from the mossad out of the senate, i now wonder if ned isn't the manchurian candidate, so to speak.
my prediction, ned will run the lamest campaign imaginable. it will be like the brown bomber's bum of the month club.
once you understand ned's financial stature, you will recognize that he is really a reptillian at heart.
though you may think him to be a political revolutionary. he ain't.
my prediction, he will stumble all over himself as thoroughly as john kerry f*cked himself.
you will marvel at how diligently he works to lose.
but i could be wrong.
Posted by albertchampion at August 10, 2006 11:32 PMand it is just me, by the way.
apparently, billmon, once treasured by the eschatonians, by the kossaks, has been sent to limboland because of his critiques on genocidal israel.
he says that he doesn't care. that is persiflage. he cares deeply. and is astonished that the genocidal israelis have santuary on the blogsites he once thought to be humanitarian.
my mon, bill. getting educated late in his life at the power of the mossad. and learning how many blogsites they might own.
sic semper tyrannis.
Posted by albertchampion at August 11, 2006 12:03 AMNed has another very powerful strategy at his disposal. He can hammer Joe for taking two bites at the apple.
YES, I KNOW, we all want him to fight Lieberman on the war issue, and he should. But that won't be what sticks in the minds of the dumb voters. And we know there are a lot of dumb voters out there, because they voted for Joe, all 48% of them.
Nobody likes a sore loser or a cheater. Get that 48% to walk into the voting booth thinking about what a load of crap it is that Joe Lieberman tried to make them vote for him twice in three months. He could have bailed out of the primary to begin with and saved them the trouble.
AND hammer him on the war. Both issues.
Really, though. I think the two-bites-at-the-apple argument is the stronger one because we already have all the anti-Iraq-war Dems on our side.
Posted by Dumbo at August 11, 2006 05:20 AMwww.MacYapper.com
Friday, August 11, 2006
TODAY'S HEADLINES:
KICKIN' IT FROM THE OL' SCHOOL
Terror Tactics So, Like, 90's, Man
NO LIQUIDS ON PLANES MAY NOT BE PERMANENT
I Need My Friggin' Long Flight Latte, Man
SOME SEE CONSPIRACY IN TIMING OF ARREST
Uncle Joe In Connecticut One Lucky S.O.B., Man
WHITE HOUSE DARES TO DISCUSS POLITICS & TERROR
They're Usually So Good About Total Separation, Man
Random thoughts below....
What's the deal with the repug-Lieberman party of one meme, electing whimpy Ned Lamont types is just what al Qaeda is hoping for and will lead to a continuation of the attacks like the one thwarted by the Brits yesterday? First off, how does Cheney/Snow/Lieberman et al know what Al Qaeda thinks and wants? Have they been talking to them and if they have been talking to them, how come they haven't caught them? It was the very same meme they used with Kerry (who Al qaeda supported) vs. Manly man Bush(who Al Qaeda supposedly feared and were on the run because of....(except when they and look alike groups continue to plot terror and havoc in the world). So since Kerry lost and Bombs away Bush won, doesn't it mean the attacks by Al Qaeda types should have stopped by now? It's been 5 years of repug rule for which according to repugs, terrorist are supposedly on the run and a scared out of their wits and yet these terror plots and attacks continue...why is that?
Riddle me this, how did having 130,000 troops bogged down in a civil war in Iraq lead to the arrest of 24 terrorist by the British police?
And since most of those arrested were British citizens (second generation) does that mean W will bomb England? Or is it time for W to (re)bomb Iraq(n)/Mexico?
I read over at Think Progress that the indicted Tom "I am the federal gov't" Delaybramoff sez liberals’ reaction to a terrorist attack is, “You can’t go after these wonderful people that just killed a bunch of Americans.”
Um no Tom unlike you, I would just like to go after the people that actually are terrorist for once. Maybe your party could try that some time.
Posted by emal at August 11, 2006 06:01 AM