Comments on: Ned Lamont’s First Video Blog: Let’s Talk About Iraq

By: Ned Lamont - Blogger at politburo diktat 2.0

Ned Lamont - Blogger at politburo diktat 2.0 — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 16:23:41 +0000

[…] Ned on July 31: […]

By: nikto

nikto — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 04:24:19 +0000

Poor little Joe.

A Neocon with no Diebold or Katherine Harris to help save him!

Imagine that.

A Neocon without a Diebold/Harris is
like an assasin without a weapon.

What’s a crook to do?

By: 2old2die

2old2die — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 03:41:52 +0000

Talk about the war? Yes, let’s talk about war. And which war is it, that you want to talk about? Is it the direct American agression in – say, Iraq (U.S. military in Iran’s neighboring country on the west) or say, Afghanistan (U.S. military in Iran’s neighboring country on the east) or the indirect proxy war in Lebabon (Isreal (U.S.) vs Hezbollah (Iran)). Let’s talk about, Rumsfeld’s past visits to Azerbaijan to discuss setting up bases in Azerbaijan (one of Iran’s northerly neighbhors). Or, might it be the war of wills we are having with Iran over its right to enrich uranium? Can we talk about why the U.S. is squeezing Iran in this manner? Can we talk about what we want in the downfall of Iran? Is it because we are mad at Iran for throwing off the pro-U.S. govt that we installed via the 1st ever coup engineered by our lovely CIA (hardly!)? Or, is it because those who want to control the oil resources (Carlyle Group-heavily populated by Bushies and more recently, Mr. Blair) of Iran are slowly pulling the noose tighter and tighter around the neck of Iran. Let’s talk about the next move on the chess board. So, let’s talk about the real war we are waging, that would be the war against Iran in order to seize control of its resources – no matter the price.

By: Dumbo

Dumbo — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:43:39 +0000

Here’s an opinion for you.

The problem in Iraq isn’t the inept mismanagement. It’s not the torture. It’s not the cost. It’s not the dead Iraqis. It’s not even the dead American soldiers.

The problem with this Iraq war, and the reason it can’t succeed, is that it was never fucking worth it.

If this were a real battle of good versus evil, something like WWII, people would overlook all those things mentioned in the first paragraph as part of a steep price we must pay to accomplish our goals. Maybe people SHOULDN’T accept those things even under those circumstance, but human nature being what it is, that’s what would have happened. Nobody questioned a number of extreme measures that America took during WWII because it was generally recognized that the stakes were so high it was worth it.

So there’s a cost-benefit analysis involved here. We might overlook a number of things we consider un-American if the stakes were high enough. But they aren’t. The best argument the Bush administration can muster is, “Well, if we leave our big fuck-up now, things will be even more fucked-up!” It’s hard for Americans to justify to themselves the continued stream of dead and wounded Americans and the continued complicity of America in the torture of prisoners without far better reasons than this.

By: Kent Bye

Kent Bye — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:36:59 +0000

Flashback: Lieberman Was an Early Supporter of Iraq War
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv1v0T-gSX4

10/2/02: Joe Lieberman was very eager to authorize Bush “to take military action to protect the region and the world from Iraq under Saddam Hussein.” He was one of the senators who shared the stage with Bush before the House & Senate approved the war 9 days later.

Lieberman says, “There is no more fateful, important, or difficult responsibility that the Constitution gives members of Congress than to decide when, whether, and how to authorize the President as Commander-in-Chief to go to war. Mr. President, in your eloquent, powerful, and convincing statement this morning, you have reminded us, and I believe the American people, about why this is such a circumstance.”

Lieberman concludes by saying that the resolution authorizing the war in Iraq is “the best hope for a stronger America and for a life for the American people that is safer.”

Video from whitehouse.gov uploaded by http://www.echochamberproject.com

By: Tim Wayne

Tim Wayne — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:35:53 +0000

I love the idea that Ned is doing a video blog. However I do not like this first entry*. It is overly edited. It sounds like a stump speech or that he is practicing for a commercial. I would have vastly preferred something less edited and more conversational, something rough, something which feels to me like I am in the room with him and there is no camera.

Heres’ a thought: Have him discuss a point, off the cuff, and don’t edit what he says. if it takes five minutes instead of 8 seconds (sound bite size) then so be it. I would watch it. I imagine other people would too.

(*- no, I am not a concern-troll or any other type of troll. I am a semi-frequent commenter to this blog, I have contributed $65 to Lamont’s campaign, I wouldn’t pee on Lieberman if he were on fire, etc. etc., so please do not attack me for airing what could be construed as a negative against Lamont. It isn’t—it’s a suggestion for improvement).

[ Moderator: anybody who lives on Haight Street in SF cant be a troll unless they are truly an evil queen. ]

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 18:03:39 +0000

Joining Senator Lieberman on the bus and at various events around Connecticut were senators Joe Biden of Delaware, Ken Salazar of Colorado, and Daniel Inouye of Hawaii. The tour made stops in Bridgeport, New Britain, Hartford, Glastonbury, Windsor Locks and Enfield.

Joe’s “Short Ride” Tour 2006

By: Jeffrey Feldman

Jeffrey Feldman — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 17:05:01 +0000

One suggestion is to encourage Lamont not to say ‘the war in Iraq,’ but to say instead: The American occupation of Iraq.

He wants to present a clear difference to Lieberman’s position–but he should also try to prersent a different frame.

There has been an effort for some time in the Progressive netroots to get the phrase ‘occupation of Iraq’ to be used instead of ‘war in Iraq.’ Lamont has a real opportunity to give voice to this important position.

By: Blank Kludge

Blank Kludge — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 17:01:08 +0000

from previous post Al Hunt:

“Joe Lieberman is a thoroughly decent, intelligent, compassionate public figure with a solid three-term record of supporting mostly liberal positions on the environment, civil rights and social issues such as abortion and gay marriage.

If *ilson were here, he’d edit that to something like, “Joe Lieberman is the kindest, gentlest…” etc.
—
aside: spellcheck indicates 0 typos.

By: Shez

Shez — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 17:00:21 +0000

Wow, I snag my usual 4 hours of sleep and come back to cool new tools, thanks Jamie! (Someone asked if this is a Wordpress plugin, is it?)

Waiting to hear about the lawyers for Lamont, love the brain power around here. Hope he has a full fleet of them. (You rock looseheadprop)

Great job on Lamont’s first video blog, congrats!