I met Joe Lieberman today...

[Moose]

I was at the Norwalk Oyster Festival this morning and Joe Lieberman and his wife were there. We shook hands and chatted a bit. I mentioned that I saw that Jack Kemp promised to do whatever he can to assist him in his campaign (by either supporting him or denouncing him ) and Lieberman laughed and said the two of them have been close friends for a very long time. Although I couldn't vote in the primary (if you haven't guessed, I'm not a Democrat), I told him I'd be casting my vote in his favor.

 

Anyway, he seemed like a real down-to-earth guy. I predict he'll win easily in November against Lamont and whoever the Republican candidate might be.

[Chilly]

I was at the Norwalk Oyster Festival this morning and Joe Lieberman and his wife were there. We shook hands and chatted a bit. I mentioned that I saw that Jack Kemp promised to do whatever he can to assist him in his campaign (by either supporting him or denouncing him  ) and Lieberman laughed and said the two of them have been close friends for a very long time. Although I couldn't vote in the primary (if you haven't guessed, I'm not a Democrat), I told him I'd be casting my vote in his favor.

 

Anyway, he seemed like a real down-to-earth guy. I predict he'll win easily in November against Lamont and whoever the Republican candidate might be.

768446[/snapback]

 

Bold Prediction.

[erynthered]

I was at the Norwalk Oyster Festival this morning and Joe Lieberman and his wife were there. We shook hands and chatted a bit. I mentioned that I saw that Jack Kemp promised to do whatever he can to assist him in his campaign (by either supporting him or denouncing him  ) and Lieberman laughed and said the two of them have been close friends for a very long time. Although I couldn't vote in the primary (if you haven't guessed, I'm not a Democrat), I told him I'd be casting my vote in his favor.

 

Anyway, he seemed like a real down-to-earth guy. I predict he'll win easily in November against Lamont and whoever the Republican candidate might be.

768446[/snapback]

 

 

Nice!

 

He probably loved the way Texas took it in the ass, on Saturday. I wonder if he can vote for Homo status for Texas Alum, not sure.........

 

Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi. GO GAY!!!

[Moose]

Bold Prediction. 

768544[/snapback]

 

Not really - I don't even think it'll be close. Lamont is a nutcase and won't win in a general election. Democrats have an unfortunate propensity for picking left-wing socialists in their primaries instead of someone who stands a chance with the "average American voter". Mark my words, Folks, and we will revisit this in November.

 

BTW, for the record, I believe that Jack Kemp would make an excellent president! Sadly, I think he's pretty much finished with politics.

[/dev/null]

Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi. GO GAY!!!

768574[/snapback]

Will it count as a coming out party in January when Pelosi is sworn in as Speaker?

[PastaJoe]

Lamont is a nutcase and won't win in a general election. 

770143[/snapback]

 

What is is that Lamont proposes that would cause you to classify him as a "nutcase"? His position on Iraq? Yeah, it's real nutty to say we can't win in Iraq militarily so we should pressure their gov't by saying if they don't come up with a political solution we're going to start removing our troops instead of leaving them as cannon fodder as the Iraqis drag their feet. That's just crazy.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

What is is that Lamont proposes that would cause you to classify him as a "nutcase"?  His position on Iraq?  Yeah, it's real nutty to say we can't win in Iraq militarily so we should pressure their gov't by saying if they don't come up with a political solution we're going to start removing our troops instead of leaving them as cannon fodder as the Iraqis drag their feet.  That's just crazy. 

770153[/snapback]

 

I think your support more than qualifies him for the title...

[Chilly]

Not really - I don't even think it'll be close. Lamont is a nutcase and won't win in a general election. Democrats have an unfortunate propensity for picking left-wing socialists in their primaries instead of someone who stands a chance with the "average American voter". Mark my words, Folks, and we will revisit this in November.

 

BTW, for the record, I believe that Jack Kemp would make an excellent president! Sadly, I think he's pretty much finished with politics.

770143[/snapback]

 

I was being sarcastic, lol.

[Lori]

BTW, for the record, I believe that Jack Kemp would make an excellent president! Sadly, I think he's pretty much finished with politics.

770143[/snapback]

Amen to that. Kemp '88 was the only presidential campaign I ever felt strongly enough about to volunteer for...

[KRC]

Does this Lamont guy have any other ideas other than Iraq? From his website:

 

Situation in the Middle East:

In making its case to invade Iraq, the Bush administration made exaggerated claims about the effect of the war on the politics of the region.

 

The administration said that one consequence of the Iraq war would be to create a cascade of democracies in the region that would promote peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. That tragically naïve view has contributed to the open conflict going on right now, and the diminution of our influence in the region.

 

Let’s be clear that Bush emphasized Iraq at the expense of an Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement, and we are reaping the consequences. Just think what the situation could have been if the United States had invested its power, prestige, and resources in a peace settlement. Instead we chose a failed war and stand virtually alone, paying a heavy price for a profoundly failed set of decisions.

 

 

Education:

What our country spends in one year in Iraq could provide a year’s free tuition at the University of Connecticut for every college freshman-aged American and Head Start for every four-year-old. We need to refocus our resources and our attention on the children and young people here.

 

 

Healthcare:

While our government continues to spend more than $250 million a day in Iraq, we have not made universal healthcare affordable and available to all Americans.

 

 

Infrastructure:

While we have been bombing and then rebuilding Baghdad, many of our own country’s greatest resources have languished and decayed.

[Chilly]

Does this Lamont guy have any other ideas other than Iraq? From his website:

770417[/snapback]

 

I find your assertion strange, given that anyone who is even remotely interested in politics has multiple ideas on what should or shouldn't be done. Thats evidenced on this board.

 

Lamont is most likely presenting himself this way to set himself apart from Lieberman. Most likely the political team felt that the difference between Lamont and Lieberman was biggest in the Iraq war, so they are presenting themselves as the alternative to the Iraq war.

 

While you may request deeper differences and a stronger candidate, the American people on average won't. Typically there is one defining issue, and lately its been Iraq. Lamont is trying to capitalize on Lieberman's support of Iraq by playing his cards this way.

 

Its one of the biggest reasons why people who are above-level intellectually on politics see all politicians as stupid, and one of the smaller reasons why a 3rd party candidate (who typically focus on lots of specific issues rather then large, general ideas in my experience) won't be easily swayed.

[VABills]

I find your assertion strange, given that anyone who is even remotely interested in politics has multiple ideas on what should or shouldn't be done.  Thats evidenced on this board.

 

Lamont is most likely presenting himself this way to set himself apart from Lieberman.  Most likely the political team felt that the difference between Lamont and Lieberman was biggest in the Iraq war, so they are presenting themselves as the alternative to the Iraq war.

 

While you may request deeper differences and a stronger candidate, the American people on average won't.  Typically there is one defining issue, and lately its been Iraq.  Lamont is trying to capitalize on Lieberman's support of Iraq by playing his cards this way.

 

Its one of the biggest reasons why people who are above-level intellectually on politics see all politicians as stupid, and one of the smaller reasons why a 3rd party candidate (who typically focus on lots of specific issues rather then large, general ideas in my experience) won't be easily swayed.

770570[/snapback]

So if the only difference is the Iraq war, then why bother? This is exactly what a lot on the left complain about when they accuse conservatives of being a one issue party and saying abortion is the issue.

[KRC]

I find your assertion strange, given that anyone who is even remotely interested in politics has multiple ideas on what should or shouldn't be done.  Thats evidenced on this board.

 

Lamont is most likely presenting himself this way to set himself apart from Lieberman.  Most likely the political team felt that the difference between Lamont and Lieberman was biggest in the Iraq war, so they are presenting themselves as the alternative to the Iraq war.

 

While you may request deeper differences and a stronger candidate, the American people on average won't.  Typically there is one defining issue, and lately its been Iraq.  Lamont is trying to capitalize on Lieberman's support of Iraq by playing his cards this way.

 

Its one of the biggest reasons why people who are above-level intellectually on politics see all politicians as stupid, and one of the smaller reasons why a 3rd party candidate (who typically focus on lots of specific issues rather then large, general ideas in my experience) won't be easily swayed.

770570[/snapback]

 

 

It gets to be nauseating. If I am looking at your opinion on Education, I see Iraq. If I look at your opinion on Healthcare, I see Iraq. If I am looking for your opinion on infrastructure, I see Iraq. You have just alienated anyone who cares about any of the aforementioned issues because he can't stop fvcking talking about Iraq. I get it. He wants to cut and run from Iraq. He is providing nothing else.

 

It reminds me of a candidate in my area: Patrick Murphy. He is running on Iraq. Nothing but Iraq. One of his lackeys cornered me when I got home from work one day. Here is the conversation:

 

Her: Can I talk to you for a few minutes?

Me: Depends on what you want to talk about.

Her: Are you planning on voting this November?

Me: Yes.

Her. I want to talk to you about Patrick Murphy and why I think you should vote for him.

Me: K.

Her: He was a veteran and served in Iraq. He is against the war.

Me: Why?

Her: Uhh...He feels it is wrong.

Me: Why?

Her: Uhhh...We are not making any more progress there.

Me: Why would you say that?

Her: Uhhh...<crickets>...Uhhh...He feels that we went there for the wrong reasons and we should leave.

Me: So, he feels we should cut and run?

Her: No. We should set a timetable.

Me: Why the hell would you want to do something like that?

Her: (Fear is starting to creep in) Uhhh... <crickets>...Uhhh...The war is wrong and we should get out of there.

Me: Why?

Her: (It looks like she is going to cry) Uhhh...<crickets>...<more crickets>...Uhhhh...Well, just call the number listed and I am sure they could answer all of your questions.

Me: How does he stand on issues other than Iraq?

Her: Just call the number and they will answer all of your questions.

 

Yeah, he's got my vote.

[VABills]

Yeah, he's got my vote. 

770660[/snapback]

Wow, you're easy. I wouldn't have voted for him.

[Nervous Guy]

Although I couldn't vote in the primary (if you haven't guessed, I'm not a Democrat), I told him I'd be casting my vote in his favor.

 

768446[/snapback]

what if he supported animal research?

[KRC]

what if he supported animal research?  

770794[/snapback]

 

What does animal research have to do with the war in Iraq?

[VABills]

What does animal research have to do with the war in Iraq?

770799[/snapback]

Well if we didn't have the war in Iraq then we could spend more on animal research or pay for better government oversight to prevent animal research, depending on what will get your vote.

[Chilly]

So if the only difference is the Iraq war, then why bother?  This is exactly what a lot on the left complain about when they accuse conservatives of being a one issue party and saying abortion is the issue.

770594[/snapback]

 

I'm sure its not the only difference, but its most likely the largest difference and what can set him apart easily as a candidate from Joe.

 

Lamont probably views his best chance of winning as to make the Iraq war the key issue, appealing to the democratic-base in the area, which is why he's pounding it over and over and over and over and...

 

It gets to be nauseating. If I am looking at your opinion on Education, I see Iraq. If I look at your opinion on Healthcare, I see Iraq. If I am looking for your opinion on infrastructure, I see Iraq. You have just alienated anyone who cares about any of the aforementioned issues because he can't stop fvcking talking about Iraq. I get it. He wants to cut and run from Iraq. He is providing nothing else.

 

It reminds me of a candidate in my area: Patrick Murphy. He is running on Iraq. Nothing but Iraq. One of his lackeys cornered me when I got home from work one day.

770660[/snapback]

 

Yeah, you do see Iraq, but you also do see other things.

 

Taking a look at Ned's website, he has two paragraphs on education before the Iraq thing:

 

I teach in a 50-year-old inner city public school, and I know that quality public education is our best hope for providing every child the best opportunity in life—and the key to the competitive future of our country.

 

The answer is neither more standardized tests nor vouchers. We need to support universal pre-school to give kids a head start and offer their parents the best chance at providing for the household. We need trained, talented, and motivated teachers. We also need to provide parents and communities the support they need to assure that children start their school day ready to learn. We need schools that don’t close at 3 p.m. but are open to meet the real needs of the community, including arts and sports, tutoring, health care, activities for parents and families.

 

He also has a 10 page PDF document on education, linked from the same page that you are looking at, which provides the following:

 

A. Provide support to local school districts, on a sliding scale basis, to ensure that every child in America enters kindergarten prepared to

learn. Fund the full cost of implementing well-tested approaches to early childhood education for those kids not presently being served.

B. Through grants to selected recipient educational institutions, encourage the development of full-service “community schools,” which

leverage the educational program of each school with additional services provided by the school or its community partners to students

during extended hours before, during and after school and on weekends.

C. Invest in math and science education in a systemic and thorough way.

D. Facilitate the alignment of curricula through seamless P-16 (pre-kindergarten through college graduation) systems of education in the

states.

E. Increase the maximum Pell grant to $5800 in FY 2007, as Democrats in the House of Representatives have proposed, to restore the

purchasing power of the Pell grant to its level when President Bush took office in FY 2001.

 

So, really, his policy on education isn't only Iraq. You may not agree that its the best policy, but the information that you omitted is there.

 

Compare that with Lieberman, who doesn't even list education on his issues page: http://www.joe2006.com/issues.asp

 

Take another one of your issues with Ned, Health Care. Here's another area where Iraq is mentioned once in the 3rd paragraph of the webpage, and theres a word document linked for this views on it, which gives us three highlights:

 

Protect and expand existing health coverage.

Make health care coverage affordable for all.

Reduce costs and improve quality by smarter spending. 

 

Now, lets compare that to Joe's page. His bullet points are:

 

Expanding Health Care

Affordable Health Care for All

Improving the Quality of Health Care

Curing Diseases and Stem Cell Research

 

Sounds familiar, doesn't it? The reason why Ned is throwing Iraq into it is because he feels that its his best chance to distinquish himself from Joe.

 

On Infrastructure he also gives the following blurb:

 

Rather than the pork-ridden omnibus transportation bill, which featured more than 6,000 earmarks for favored congressmen, I would work for a transportation strategy which interconnects cities and suburbs, inner cities and jobs and affordable housing, and ports and airports. This is a pre-requisite if Connecticut and the United States are to compete and prosper in the 21st century.

 

 

Joe Liberman's headline for Transportation states "Fighting Congestion and Gridlock - and Adding Jobs". Hmm, sounds somewhat similar. The big difference here is that Lamont is stressing lower-income areas, while Liberman is keeping it generalized. Still, the ideas to improve transportation as a major campaign theme are there.

 

This is why Iraq is getting tossed around by Lamont a lot, its the easiest way for him to distinguish himself from Lieberman.

 

KRC, while I do understand and agree that people might be annoyed with the mention of Iraq multiple times, I do not think that its the only thing Lamont is running on. A quick check of his webpage shows that. But it is the thing that he's trying to drive home the most for electoral reasons.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

I'm sure its not the only difference, but its most likely the largest difference and what can set him apart easily as a candidate from Joe.

 

Lamont probably views his best chance of winning as to make the Iraq war the key issue, appealing to the democratic-base in the area, which is why he's pounding it over and over and over and over and...

Yeah, you do see Iraq, but you also do see other things.

 

Taking a look at Ned's website, he has two paragraphs on education before the Iraq thing:

He also has a 10 page PDF document on education, linked from the same page that you are looking at, which provides the following:

So, really, his policy on education isn't only Iraq.  You may not agree that its the best policy, but the information that you omitted is there.

 

Compare that with Lieberman, who doesn't even list education on his issues page:  http://www.joe2006.com/issues.asp

 

Take another one of your issues with Ned, Health Care.  Here's another area where Iraq is mentioned once in the 3rd paragraph of the webpage, and theres a word document linked for this views on it, which gives us three highlights:

Now, lets compare that to Joe's page.  His bullet points are:

Sounds familiar, doesn't it?  The reason why Ned is throwing Iraq into it is because he feels that its his best chance to distinquish himself from Joe.

 

On Infrastructure he also gives the following blurb:

Joe Liberman's headline for Transportation states "Fighting Congestion and Gridlock - and Adding Jobs".  Hmm, sounds somewhat similar.  The big difference here is that Lamont is stressing lower-income areas, while Liberman is keeping it generalized.  Still, the ideas to improve transportation as a major campaign theme are there.

 

This is why Iraq is getting tossed around by Lamont a lot, its the easiest way for him to distinguish himself from Lieberman.

 

KRC, while I do understand and agree that people might be annoyed with the mention of Iraq multiple times, I do not think that its the only thing Lamont is running on.  A quick check of his webpage shows that.  But it is the thing that he's trying to drive home the most for electoral reasons.

770832[/snapback]

 

Does he ever mention how he's going to pay for all that?

 

And don't even get me started on that "K-16" nonsense. A "seamless" transition from HS to college?

[Alaska Darin]

Does he ever mention how he's going to pay for all that? 

 

And don't even get me started on that "K-16" nonsense.  A "seamless" transition from HS to college? 

770902[/snapback]

Of course, they're going to raise taxes on the rich (a cop married to a teacher will continue to qualify).