Tough Primary Race Confronts Lieberman

[spindrifter]

By Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, April 30, 2006

NEW HAVEN, Conn. -- With his ruddy tan and dark gray suit, Ned Lamont is an antiwar liberal with a twist. Rather than targeting a Republican, the millionaire Greenwich businessman is challenging a fellow Democrat, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, one of President Bush's strongest supporters on the war in Iraq.

When Lamont announced his primary challenge in mid-March, he was viewed as the longest of long shots, a quixotic blueblood who was scratching a political itch. While many Connecticut Democrats had soured on Lieberman over his war stance, a poll showed that voters backed the three-term senator over Lamont by 5 to 1.

But in the space of six weeks, the newcomer has come on strong. Lamont raised $344,111 from 4,337 online donors and added $371,500 of his own money. He hired a staff of seasoned professionals and signed up several thousand volunteers. The 52-year-old cable television entrepreneur is blitzing the state, hitting as many as three events per evening.

Now, Lamont has turned the Democratic primary into a horse race, giving Lieberman his first real test since he joined the Senate 18 years ago, according to Democratic operatives and analysts in Connecticut. Party leaders were so rattled by the challenge that Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) called Lamont asking him to back off.

<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/29/AR2006042901030.html

[NNadir]

1. Cool.

[SnoopDog]

5. Out of curiosity, what does 'cool' mean in your post?

[NNadir]

7. It means that I'm glad there's Democracy in CT.

I would feel like shit if I lived there and had to vote for Lieberman to vote Democratic.

I have never failed to vote for a Democrat; neither have I ever abstained in an important election. But voting for Lieberman would be very, very, very painful.

He is the worst DINO ever to have come from a Northeastern State.

[SnoopDog]

8. I am so glad to hear that ....

I did not know how to take your response... We have our very apparent differences on nuclear energy - I am glad that we want real Democrats in office!:hi:

[NNadir]

12. I'm sorry but your remarks kind of offend me.

I don't regard my position on energy as being in any way inconsistent with my views on politics. I don't know why you raise this issue in this context, but if you are implying that I might be for Lieberman because I am for nuclear energy, I take it very, very badly and am not amused.

I am, first and foremost, an environmentalist. To me, nuclear energy is the only realistic option in the most serious environmental crisis of our times, probably of any times, global climate change. I have consistently offered data on this subject, including a detailed analysis of external costs of various kinds of energy. References to this type of data appears in my journal. In fact, it is because I am a Democrat that I elevate reality and reason over dogma.

Here is one of my Democratic heros, a Nobel Laureate, whose views on energy and peace were exactly consistent with my own:

In 1960, Bethe, along with IBM physicist Richard Garwin, wrote an article criticising in detail the new anti-ICBM defense system that the government was planning to install. In the article that was published in Scientific American, the two physicists described in detail how almost any countermeasure that the US could take would be futile, as the enemy would be able to thwart the system through the use of suitable decoys. He was one of the prime scientific voices behind the signing of the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty which prohibited atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons.

During the 1980s and 1990s, Bethe campaigned for the peaceful use of nuclear energy. After the Chernobyl accident, Bethe put together a committee of experts that analysed the incident, and concluded that a similar episode would not happen in any good US reactor, as the Russian reactor suffered from a fundamentally faulty design and human error also had significantly contributed to the accident. Throughout his life, Bethe remained a strong advocate for electricity from nuclear energy.

In the 1980s, he, along with other physicists widely opposed the Strategic Defense Initiative missile system that was being conceived by the Reagan administration (with considerable support from Edward Teller), arguing against the enormous sums of money spent on it and the feelings of instability and animosity that it would foster. In 1995, at the age of 88, Bethe wrote an open letter calling on all scientists to "cease and desist" from working on any aspect of nuclear weapons development and manufacture. In 2004, he signed a letter along with 47 other Nobel laureates endorsing John Kerry for president of the United States citing George W. Bush's misuse of science.

He continued to do research on supernovae, neutron stars, black holes, and other problems in theoretical astrophysics into his late nineties. In doing this, he collaborated with Gerald Brown of the State University of New York at Stony Brook. In his 80s, he wrote an important article about the solar neutrino problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Bethe

The notion that in order to be a Democrat, one must be an opponent of rational energy choices is absurd on its face. Hans Bethe was a Democratic Policy advisor for 50 years, a tireless worker for peace and the peaceful use of nuclear energy. He was, in fact, one of the most prominent people in the 20th century, the man who answered one of the fundemental questions that humanity had been asking almost since it's dawn: How does the sun work? He was also one of the crystalizing forces of scientific liberalism in his century.

I can't see why I must explain myself.

My "cool" should be obvious.

[SnoopDog]

13. Mr. NNadir....

It is very apparent that we have a very different view on energy. I personally think nuclear energy is the most stupidest and DANGEROUS solution to ever pass the human mind.

Not withstanding that point, I do not have a problem with our disagreement and our diplomatic means to discuss this issue.

My questioning of 'cool', and please forgive me, was to establish your viewpoint on 'joe'. I think, as you do, as per your post, is that we both want real Democrats.

In totally honesty, anybody who supports Joe Lieberman, is suspect to me. I would very much like to get ride of a kissy face Bush supporter as 'joe' is.

Nuclear energy is absolutely stupid. What else do you want to talk about?

[anchor of hope]

14. Pro-nuclear Liberals

As a native Rhode Islander, I can attest to another advocate of the peaceful use of nuclear power, the late Sen. John Pastore (1950-76).

[SnoopDog]

15. Nuclear energy is stupid... similar to the constant use of oil...

It will kill us all.. there are better ways - let go of these destructive 'personal addictions'... :puke:

[Extend a Hand]

2. I wish Paul Hackett would have told Harry No too

:(

[SnoopDog]

3. "Party leaders were so rattled "

"by the challenge that Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) called Lamont asking him to back off."

This tells me who's side Harry Reid is on... I am sorry, but, by saying this, I question the integrity of our minority leader.

[spindrifter]

6. Party leaders need to understand that

we need to operate on the basis of the best and the brightest. When incumbents are slipping to the dark side, no matter how long they have been in office, then the people need to have other options. Otherwise, they either don't vote or they jump ship one way or the other.

[sam sarrha]

4. Lieberman should be required to hand in his Party card and be sent to the

the other side of the Isle.. in disgrace

[RedG1]

9. well said...

I'm in Connecticut and can't stand DINO Joe...what he defends...his views...his whiney constipated voice...his 'hugs and kisses' for bush...and for sure his 'Israel first' stance

[IndianaGreen]

11. Lieberman should take the job at the Pentagon

Holy Joe will actually do some good there, at least until we get a Democrat in the White House.

[anchor of hope]

16. Lieberman Disloyal?

I don't think we should equate Lieberman's dissent with that of a former Senate colleague, Zell Miller who denoiunced his party at the 200t Republican convention. Otherwise, Democrats risk becoming too ideological, like the GOP. Small d democratic means full and uninhibited discussion of all reasonable viewpoints. We should not treat Sen. Lieberman like some Republicans treat his neighbor from RI, Lincoln Chafee.

[MaryRN]

32. Are you from CT?

Do you have any idea how absent he has been? How his support of bush has been about as close as white on rice? Did you read his denigrating article in the NYT when he talked down to us and basically said we should all stick with bush?

He's not visible here in CT. He's visible in the DLC where most of his time and effort is applauded. I've met Lamont, I've seen him in action. I've met Lieberman and seen him in action as well. There is no comparison between the two.

Lieberman denounced his party the day he said he'll run as an "Independent" if need be so yes, there is a Zen Miller comparison for you right there.

Ned Lamont is the real deal, to borrow a phrase from Has-Ben Biden.

Please check Ned's positions. When you do, you'll discover a progressive democrat that we've been screaming for and also, please note that he will take no campaign donations from lobbyists. Unlike Joe.

[IndianaGreen]

10. "You're going to gain a Democrat."

"Some of the party brass said, 'Ned, don't jeopardize a safe seat,' " Lamont recently told students at Southern Connecticut State University, who gathered for a meet-and-greet session. "But you're not going to lose a senator. You're going to gain a Democrat."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/29/AR2006042901030.html

So Harry Reid prefers a Bush enabler, torture lover, spying on Americans rubber stamper, warmonger and Bush lover Lieberman over a real Democrat? This illustrates how corrupt the Beltway establishment has become!

I wonder if Reid and Chuck Schumer will call Lamont's donors telling them not to contribute to his campaign as they did Paul Hackett in Ohio.

[rpannier]

48. Would be kind of hard

because as far as I know he gets almost all his money in small contributions.

[KingFlorez]

17. Useless primary challenger

I swear some people here think Lieberman is a big right-winger because of the war, when on most issues he's great. People need to get their priorities straight here. Opportunists like Lamont are no good.

[SnoopDog]

18. I prefer real Dems...

not some kissy Bush face like 'joe'...!

[CTLawGuy]

19. Sieg Heil!

Heil Democrats!

Wenn der fuhrer says... we is da master race then we HEIL, HEIL, right in da fuhrer's face!

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[monarch]

29. I find it interesting that Lieberman defenders are not from CT

Are you supporters aware that he thought that the federal gov't was right to try to intervene in Schiavo, that he thinks that rape victims should be happy to take a cab to a noncatholic hospital to be able be prevent pregnancy resulting from the assault, that habeas corpus--habeas corpus, for pete's sake-- should be denied to the hapless inhabitants of Gitmo, that he wouldn't filibuster Alito, etc., etc.

I know the guy, I like him personally, but I think he has taken leave of his senses. This goes far beyond "The Kiss," Hannity, Fox News etc.

Lamont is a patriot! Get over Lieberman.

[WhoWantsToBeOccupied]

30. How dare you call Ned an "opportunist"!

I've been working for Ned since mid-January because he cares deeply about our country. He has bravely stood up to the state and national Democratic Party establishment because he is a *great* guy who cares about Connecticut and America!

Ned doesn't need to be a senator. He's a successful businessman with a great family. He's not running because he's got a fat ego. He's *totally* down to Earth and as egoless as anyone you will ever find running for the US Senate. I cannot emphasize that enough. Ned is just a great guy with a giant heart.

Have you met the man? Ned has supported Democrats financially for many years. He's running because (like many CT Dems and many here on DU) he believes Sen. Lieberman has not served his state or his country well.

Sen. Lieberman does not own his Senate seat. Nor does the Democratic Party establishment. The people of Connecticut do. And the people of Connecticut will decide.

You are flat wrong to call Ned an "opportunist." I have come to know the man very well, and he is the exact opposite of an opportunist. He felt compelled to run by the poor representation Sen. Lieberman offered and by the lack of anyone else willing and able to challenge an entrenched 18-year senator who has served corporate America so well for so many years that they are now paying him back so richly that he will have trouble spending all the millions they're throwing at him.

I would love to ask whether you have any personal or business stake in Sen. Lieberman's campaign, but doing so is probably against DU rules.

[sendero]

41. Reality Alert..

.. at the present time, the IRAQ WAR and the CREDIBILITY OF GEORGE BUSH overshadow every other issue by an order of magnitude.

I don't give a crap if someone is going to change the spark plugs in my car if they are also going to drive it off a cliff.

Fuck Lieberman. I hope Lamont wins the primary.

[nickshepDEM]

21. lol. Lieberman is safe.

You guys crack me up sometimes. Whats next... someone going to knock off Hillary in the primary too?

:rofl:

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nickshepDEM]

23. Good one! Did you come up with that all by yourself?

When Lieberman stood up for ANWR, were you saying the same thing?

Doubt it.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[IndianaGreen]

26. I think as highly of Lieberman as I do of Paul Wolfowitz

They are both neocons, and as such, they are enemies of the people!

[rpannier]

50. Chances are most of them weren't.

To be upfront, I don't like Lieberman because I think his behavior on Iraq undermines the Democrats ability to create a cohesive national policy on Iraq. Partly because he's so vocal and partly because he doesn't hesitate to denounce other Democrats in the process (his comments about how scrubs critics were endangering our security is one example).
However on most other issues his voting record is fairly liberal and we could do a lot worse the Lieberman -- hell miller comes to mind.
I sent money to Lamont, I hope he wins, I don't think he will. If he doesn't win, he won't be the first failed candidacy I backed, nor will he be the last.
Part of the problem is (and I am as guilty as anyone else) these strands turn into personal hate-fests, as if the candidate in question somehow ran over the posters dog or cat.
Lamont's challenge is healthy for the Party and for Lieberman. It is the constant visual reminder for him that he is vulnerable -- had Lamont had more exposure in CT and been someone prominent in CT politics, Lieberman might very easily lose this primary.
Your defense of Lieberman is admirable and on many levels correct -- he is liberal. There is a group that puts out an award called "The Weasel Awards." They monitor the voting patterns of Democratic Senators and give a 'razzy-style' award to those who vote more like Republicans than Democrats. Lieberman didn't even make the top 6 (or bottom 6 depending on how you read it) Senators on the list. I think he was like 9th or 10th.
In closing I will repeat, I don't like him, I hope he loses, but I will not be crying in my beer here in Korea if he wins the nomination, nor should anyone else. I think we can do better than Lieberman. But, maybe Democrats in CT feel he is the best -- or as good as they can get.

[KingFlorez]

27. Some people are never satisfied

I think some people here would rather have a Republican Senate than support Lieberman

[IndianaGreen]

28. Lieberman is a Republican on the war, PATRIOT, torture, concentration camp

and the dictatorial powergrab by Bush.

Anyone that supports those Bush's policies is an enabler of war crimes and a traitor to the Republic. Lieberman should be tried for his crimes of collaboration with the criminal cabal that is the Bush regime.

[depakid]

31. Could be that wouldn't be such a bad thing

for the party. As it is, the man does a LOT of damage to other candidates all around the country.

[ihelpu2see]

33. I gave $150 to Ned Lamont. Joe never answered my email about Smirky

and the constant lying. I will continue to give to Ned and our town plans to give its 6 delegates to Ned at the state convention in May.

[IndianaGreen]

34. Holy Joe won't vote for censure or impeachment of Bush

that alone is enough reason to dispose of him!

[cliss]

35. Now let's watch Holy Joe sweat....

Wouldn't it be something if Liar-man gets ousted?

But Joe-momentum shouldn't worry. If he loses his job, he can co-host the Sean Hannity show.

[Arugula Latte]

36. Well, no matter the outcome of the primary challenge,

at least Ned Lamont has made that asshole Lieberman shut the fuck up about falling into lockstep with Bush and I've heard that Traitor Joe has stopped going on Hannity's show.

[Tom Joad]

37. Harry Reid can go to hell if he wants to support Joe the Warlord...

Lieberman is supporting the needless deaths of U.S. serviceman, this is a man who is supporting the slaughter of Iraqis, this is a man who is supporting the bankrupting of the United States.... and no liberal program can survive such a tragic misdirection of resources put into this illegal and immoral war.

We need to rise up and hold everyone, and i mean every officeholder, who supported this crime in Iraq.

You go Lamont. Tell Harry and Joe to go to hell if you have to, stop this illegal war.

[depakid]

38. Don't forget who the source of that unattributed quote is

Not exactly a credible paper, LOL.

To say the least....

I'd believe the Moonie Times before I trusted the Post about ANYTHING like that.

[Tom Joad]

39. Party leaders tend to be very faithful to incumbents, no

matter their politics. The goal seems to be getting as many Democrats elected as possible, no question about issues. That is why so often rich people are urged to run. It is all about market share, nothing about content. Like soft drinks.

[depakid]

40. True enough

but the Post's become nothing more than a propaganda organ for the RNC and has ZERO credibility when discussing "unnamed analysts" who claim x, y, or z about the Democratic "leaders."

Anyone who believes that paper is just a sucker.

[Tom Joad]

42. Neither the post or the nyt (remember Judith Miller!) have much

credibility. You are right there.

[Jack Rabbit]

43. If Lamont wins in November, we should count this as a Democratic gain

Support for Bush's policy in Iraq is no longer tenable for anybody, Republican or Democrat. Those who supported it three years ago at least had a lame excuse; those who continue to support now don't even have that luxury. They are Brand W idiots and need to be defeated.

[oc2002]

44. I just donated to LAMONT $50.

try to donate if you can. even $20 can help if thousands like you do.

https://secure.nedlamont.com/page/contribute

[rpannier]

46. I sent my 50 to Mr. Lamont

I hope he buries joe.

Hey, hey. Ho, ho. Warlord Joe has got to go.

[meowfire]

45. Running as an independent

That Lieberman has threatened to run as an independent says it all. This would split the democratic vote, giving an advantage to Republicans. Whether this is him being a spoiled child or supporting Republicans is of little difference. Get rid of him.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

47. Lieberman needs to quit pretending to be a Democrat. I'm sick of it. nt

[rpannier]

49. One thing I think will come out of this...

even if the warlord is re-elected...we won't be seeing him running for president, or included on the Democratic ticket ever again.

edited for spelling