Paraphrasing from Ned Lamont's closing statement in the debate today:
This debate, this campaign is all about change. Things are fundamentally broken in DC, and more of the same will not fix it. I’m running against a career politician who says “stay the course.” Talked about his business experience — "when you see a problem, you don’t kick it down the road, you fix it." I’m going to stand up to the Bush/Cheney Administration. I’m going to stand up to the lobbyists. It won’t take me 18 years to stand up for real health care reform. I’ll stand up to the two oil men in the White House and put in place a plan for real energy reform.
After 18 years, now you are part of that problem [Joe]. Time is up. People in CT want people who represent them to stand up for Connecticut — I’m going to fight for the people of our state. My name is Ned Lamont, and I’d sure appreciate your vote.
Great debate. Was it me, or did you get the feeling that Joe Lieberman thought Alan Schlessinger was just going to come out and take a dive for him? Boy was he ever wrong! Schlessinger's best line: "Your time is up, Joe — no pun intended." And what is up with Lieberman, again, refusing to abide by the debate rules and continuing to talk when his time was up?
We had several people live-blogging in the thread below, and we'll link up a transcript and video as we get links. Please use this thread to talk about the CT Senate debate and the need for a change in Washington.
And please consider donating to Ned Lamont via our Blue America page. (Or a Blue America candidate of your choosing.) It's crunch time — and every five bucks helps at this stage. Help our progressive candidates get to Washington this November — because it is well past time for a change.
Had enough?
Related posts:
- Lieberman’s Filibuster Threats Run Counter to 2006 Campaign Rhetoric
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Michael Huttner and Jason Salzman, 50 Ways You Can Help Obama Change America
- Why Is Lieberman Scared of Big, Bad Rachel Maddow?
- Late Night: Mixing Memory and Desire for Change
- “He’s With Us On Everything But The War”
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Ned!!!
NED!!
Ned instead!
CTBob!!
Lamont!!!
Roots!
And what is up with Lieberman, again, refusing to abide by the debate rules and continuing to talk when his time was up?
He probably figures as a Republican, he’s exempt from the rules. You haven’t forgotten the Bush/Gore debates, have you? Bush constantly interrupted Gore during Gore’s time, until Gore had finally had enough and started giving back as good as he got.
At that point, the media made a big deal out of Gore’s poor sportsmanship, without mentioning so much as a word about Bush doing exactly the same thing.
Christy, after doing the interview with Schlesinger the day before yesterday, I absolutely KNEW he was gonna come out swinging! All Joe needed to do was watch the interview, and he would have had a clue.
But Joe doesn’t need bothersome tasks like prep work or voting to get in the way of him being Senator.
Typo alert–second graph of the pull quote.
Represenbt should be represent
I wonder if Joe Lieberman likes the taste of defeat. He had to take a huge bite on this one.
One early review:
http://www.newhavenindependent…..bate_1.php
“The ghost of Crazy Eddie was channeled Monday by a man who would be Connecticut’s next senator — and whose name is neither Lieberman or Lamont.
This candidate’s name is Alan Schlesinger. He is the official candidate nominated by the Republican Party to replace Joe Lieberman in the U.S. Senate. He trails both Lieberman — who’s now running as a “Connecticut for Lieberman” candidate — and Democrat Ned Lamont by far in this fall’s Senate race; Republicans are overwhelmingly backing Lieberman instead. Schlesinger has been drowned out by all the attention on the other two candidates.”…
——
If the R can pull anything near the 20 percent mentioned in the debate thread, we’ll send Mr. Lamont to DC.
Alan !!
… well, not really, but you know what I mean.
Schlesinger!!
Prediction: Alan goes up to 15-20% by Wednesday.
Realist @
7
I’d like to see a running “truth clock” on debates which shows 1, how many times each candidate interrupts; 2, how many minutes each candidates speaks; and 3, how many times each candidate breaks the rules.
scarecrow @ 13
how many nutmeggers will see the debate?
Ned!!!!!
I think Ned did what he needed to do – look statemanlike. He was centered, controlled, focused on the issues.
Wonderful that Schlesinger could lob grenades at Lieberman. The New Haven Independent calls Alan – “Crazy Eddie”. Schlesinger has been treated like crap by the national GOP and had absolutely nothing to lose. Per CT Bob’s great video interview of Schlesinger, he is counting on this debate to help raise some money so he can get back in the game.
If Ned went after Joe the way Alan did, it would have been all over. Joe has framed the perception that Ned is a destructive, negative crazy person. That clearly is not the case. Joe was pathetic counting up all the times people were “mean” to him.
Ned gave great answers and Joe gave a horrible performance. This is the first time many people have ever seen Ned or heard him speak. It’s a good foundation for the next two debates.
Go Ned!!!
LindaR @ 14
For this debate, they would have needed one of those jumbotron scoreboards.
EPU’d
This article is a very interesting bio of Ned’s wife.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10…..f=politics
scarecrow @
13
If you’re correct, Ned and L4L are tied.
selise @
15
It will be repeated tonight at 7PM on NBC30, and 8PM on Cablevision 12. And it’ll be covered on all the local news, radio, and in the papers.
Alan will be prominantly featured because he was SO damned entertaining!
If we could only transplant Schlesinger’s charisma (minus his nutty politics) into Ned’s body, we’d be talking about President Lamont in a few years!
EPU’ed.
Sorry for the double post…hope its O.K.
___
Holy shit…I want Schlesinger.
Just kidding, but he did an excellent, excellent job and can only hurt Catfish Joe. Can’t wait to see the next polls…I’d be suprised if he doesn’t p/u 5-7% of Joe’s base, the Rethugs.
I thought Ned was nervous at first, speaking a little too fast, but he settled in quite nicely as the debate continued and landed some especially hard blows at the end.
Joe’s attempt to innoculate himself against Ned’s talking points at the beginning of the debate seemed fairly effective until Schlesinger kicked his ass to the curb.
I loved Ned’s comments to Schlesinger toward the end regarding fighting the establishment and running on his ideas and principles. Wonderfully effective tactic in isolating the Catfish where he can’t fight.
Most telling point of the debate and PERFECTLY indicative of Joe’s character: The asshole just would not STFU after he had run out of time.
“Buh..buh.., But, I’m not finished, and I’m Joe Lieberman and I need to tell you more and I,I, I’m scared that I won’t have a job anymore and I NEED THIS!!!
What a fuckboy.
http://www.courant.com/news/po…..lines-home
“Democrat Ned Lamont took fresh aim at Sen. Joe Lieberman’s support for invading Iraq on Monday in their first debate since Lamont toppled the three-term senator in the August primary.
“I’m running against a career politician who says, ‘Stay the course,”‘ said Lamont, echoing the anti-war slant that he rode to victory in the primary. “It’s time for us now to redeploy our forces.”"…
—
AP, short review.
kristinejoy @ 18
Great link. I never knew.
selise @ 15
Not enought this afternoon, but it will be reshown at 7:00 p.m. tonight, locally. And there will be 2 more of these. The exposure will take it’s toll on Joe, unless Alan goes completely crazy. But the key, I suspect, will be how the debaters are portrayed tonight and tomorrow on local media.
The dynamics are so tricky here. I kept wanting Ned to hammer Joe on being too close to Bush on key votes — and I thought he was going to do that toward then end, when he was cut off for time on that response. Of course, if you make that point to Dems, it undercuts Schlesinger’s point that Joe is just Kennedy and Clinton — and that connection is lethal to Republicans. At some point, the Lamont people had to make a choice about which of the opposing cuts they wanted to assist and which to avoid. Ned seemed to play it safe by generalizing the “I will stand up to Bush” angle without saying that Joe is the key cover vote for Bush on all the key issues.
I missed the first 20 minutes, so didn’t hear anything on Iraq/Iran.
Connecticut Bob @ 20
i’m so glad that nutmeggers will get a chance to see the debate tonight – that’s great news.
p.s. i made an mp3 audio rip of your most excellent interview. email me ( at speakeasy dot net ) if you want it.
I had to giggle at Lieberman’s surprise at Schlesinger’s “attacks”, commenting that he only expected them from the Lamont side. I mean, why wouldn’t he be surprised? All this time believing he was the republican of choice. And then his extended whining about all of meanies’ “lies” about him…
How could any in Connecticut really support this guy?
I’m sure Joe is mulling over the fact that “Crazy Eddie” has a ticking time bomb. If allowed, Joe would probably start waterboarding Schlesinger ASAP. I figure if news clips on CT TV focus on Schlesinger’s three one-liners aimed at Joe, Alan goes up 8 or 10 points, Lamont 1 or 2, and it becomes a much more interesting race.
The most important thing about this debate, is that it brings Schlesinger into the rest of the race in an entirely different light.
What about Ned responding to Joe’s constant harping on Ned’s attack campaign. Couldn’t Ned just say something like, that’s funny I usually just record what you say and play it back for folks to be sure they had a chance to hear you.
Ned needs to shut that Joe whine line down, imo.
I can’t agree with this. I thought Ned did great. He seemed straight forward, focused, passionate, and real. Schlesinger had a few good points, but he was a drama queen.
And Joe of course, was a total blowhard.
I hope Schles. does take points from Joe. And I think he will, he was lively at least, while Joe seems like something dragged out of the morgue and propped up. But I don’t wish that Ned was more like the Rethug. Ned doesn’t strike me as the kind of guy who’s playing for laughs. And with things in Washington and the world this F&* up, what’s to laugh about?
AnnieOh @ 26
I wonder if any of the MSM will note that Joe tried to inoculate himself from “Ned attacks” by attacking Ned!
It’s amazing that the Repub power structure is letting this dude screw up their deal, I smells a rat.
cbear @
21
John Casper @ 23
It makes sense, though. His campaign is truly of the internet age, financed by venture capital–his wife’s.
What is wrong with this picture? If one Republican is running against two democrats … the dems should split the dem vote and the repub should walk away with it. I can’t understand Rove’s thinking on this. If he had just thrown Lieberman under the bus right after the primary, Schlesinger might be leading and we’d hate Joe for being a spoiler instead of hating him for … well … being Joe. Well, we’d hate him for both reasons, but I digress …
Anyway, yes, it’s great that Schlesinger did so well and I’m eagerly awaiting the next poll, but let’s hope he doesn’t do THAT well, because the math is on his side – if all the Repubs and none of the Dems in CT vote for Schlesinger he wins in a landslide. Think about it.
Also, did you notice that Schlesinger slipped in a coded phrase to arouse the CT ditto-heads? He said “drive-by media” – Limbaugh’s favorite catch phrase.
Here’s my take on the debate. Ned had to debate two *wackjobs* Schless and Liarman. Ned could have come out swinging harder, but maybe he’s suffering from the impression that HoJoe has maybe some little bit of honor (lobbyists, Ned! go for the throat). Liarman’s defense of his record on social security was a doozy. I don’t get it. How can anyone lie and smile like that, unless they are pathological as cardshark Alan Schlessinger? Alan by the way, was thrown under the bus by Rell, but he’s here now baby!
Breaking … FBI raids the home of Curt Weldon’s daughter, and one of her friends !!!!!!
The picture used of Lamont makes him look like the 40 year old virgin.
Get that Kiss Float back on the road!
Eureka Springs, AR @ 28
That’s a great idea for handling it.
I thought Ned did fine, but definitely Alan will get some support from his debate skills. Joe, was Joe…a petulant, whining, liar!!! Ned does need to relax just a bit, perhaps smile more, but each performance gets better. I was glad he would not allow the debate to become mired in defending his business, credentials, voting record (such trivial pursit!) etc. I felt that some of the questioners were most definitely pro-LIEbersnake, or at the very least, Rethugs ‘R Us!
CLK @ 37
It’s back! Check http://www.spazeboy.net for photo and video
BTW, Kirby did an amazing job live-blogging the debate on our blog, and Spazeboy did the same on his. Give him a shout out.
For those of you who worry that Ned wasn’t quite tough enough, Arianna Huffington notes that Ned has hired some of the mainstream, DLC political consultants who have softened our message everywhere. Maybe Ned caught a break with Schlesinger but hope is not a strategy. I’m glad he spoke up for redeployment despite whatever his new advisers might have told him. He has to continue to stand for something and be tough — Lieberman hasn’t forgotten how to do that. Here’s the link to Arianna’s comment:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..31755.html
Realist @ 7
Yep, it’s one of their many defining characteristics that Joe seems to have picked up. Honestly, one of the things that turned me off of the NPR panel shows was not just that they had right-wingers telling blatant lies, but that everyone would politely let them say their piece, and then they would interrupt anyone who disagreed with them when they were talking.
At the Webb-Allen debate, they shoulda had a cutoff for Allen’s mic. He frequently ran a bit over the end of his time, but a couple of times he would just not shut up until he had said his piece (usually some inane attempt to equate Webb with Hillary Clinton), the time bell be damned.
Sunlight at 41 — I love Arianna, but that’s an inaccurate interpretation of what she was saying — it was a warning to Ned to not go down that road, not a declaratory sentence that he had done so and wasn’t coming back from it. If you’d ever spoken with Tom Swan, you’d know better than to think that Ned was getting advice from namby pamby consultant types. *g*
I’m wondering if giving Schlesinger a little money might be a good idea. Anyone know if he is getting any cash from republicans?? Is he doing a lot of ads?
obsessed @ 33
Schlessinger has a huge skeleton, gambling. Some casinos don’t even let him in. I suspect back when the CT GOP assumed Joe would win easily, they couldn’t find anyone better.
Joe’s got the passive-aggressive sanctimony thing down to a fine art.
But Ned, IMO, can and should use the time-limit incident as a metaphor. Joe agrees to rules about time, then uses all of his up and wants more. He’s been in the Senate for 18 years, but complains that it’s unfair if anyone attacks his record. He loses the Democratic primary, and insists on running again in the general election.
This country is on the wrong track, and we’ve had it dramatically demonstrated in the past couple weeks that a big part of the problem is a Congress with a sense of entitlement, one that’s more concerned with protecting its own perks and power than in doing what the American people need done.
Joe Lieberman has been part of that Congress for 18 years, and it shows. It’s time for a change.
Schlessinger’s best line: “Your time is up, Joe — no pun intended.”
I don’t get it.
I think Lamont may as well go ahead and start criticizing the Dem leadership, linking Joe to the ineffectual Democratic leadership who let us get to where we are and who, I gather, strung Lamont along and persuaded him to pull his punches.
One other point Joe raised during his immigration response. He suggested a lame duck session for this pro torture anti habeas congress would be a good idea on the immigration issue. They had an entire year with this issue on the front burner.
Why in the heck would anyone who claims to be remotely independent think a lame duck session would be a good idea? One more round at the treasury trough…
Joe may not show up for the next debate.
“But Ned, IMO, can and should use the time-limit incident as a metaphor.”
Completely agree. Ned can use footage from the first debate, L4L didn’t respect the limits then either. It’s a boundary issue and L4L doesn’t have any.
Joe seemed stunned at the end, when they wouldn’t let him talk over the limit, because he has gotten away with this so many other times.
Here’s a limit: 3 terms. Mr. Lieberman, your time is up.
HeirofPatriots @ 38
How about: Like George W. Bush, Joe can’t stand to hear that someone thinks he’s wrong about anything. I think Joe is wrong about a lot of things. He calls that an attack.
ReneND @ 44
I live in CT and I haven’t seen any Schlessinger ads. As much as I like his attacks on Joe, I could never give a nutwinger like that a cent, not even for strategy.
ecoast @ 48
I think you’re correct. I suspect there will be a lot of discussion about this inside
Joe’sL4L’s head.Christy Hardin Smith @ 43
Christy I am glad to hear this. I’ve decided never to give money to any candidate who hires any of those DLC consultants — Carville and McCurry are at the top of my list.
The earlier Hartford Courant story about Lieberman ducking questions about whether he supports the Republicans or Dems for Gov and Congress is now on national news — at MSNBC.
Lieberman mum on who he supports
I think this is the story line that combines with the Schlesinger soundbits– “Joe is another Hillary and Ted Kennedy” to help unravel Joe. He can’t be both Republican supporter and liberal Democrat — and not clarify where he stands. The message that beats Joe is about trying to be all things to all people => disingenuous => dishonest => unprincipled.
If Ned’s folks want some hard commercials, they should ask, “Who is Joe Lieberman, and what does he stand for? What has he become, other than someone who will say anything to stay in power past his time?”
LindaR – That sounds exactly like Ned! But, it hasn’t stopped Joe from using his rediculous Ned always attacks poor me line.
Well, I’m sure Schlesinger would appreciate any contributions, but mostly he needs to get better numbers before the national Republican organizations will pony up for him.
I expect after this week when Alan hit’s high teens/low 20s, he’ll start getting some serious bucks and THEN we’ll see him have a much bigger presence here.
I’m going to recut his interview and do about a minute of his best reactions. I wish Ned was half as animated as Schlesinger.
What’s up with Ned’s campaign? Here’s a DKos comment going on about the postcard thing and how lame it is:
http://www.dailykos.com/commen…..1/01/69#69
I hope the campaign is not as screwed up as that comment makes it sound. I bagged on the postcard stuff when it was announced here at FDL and we haven’t heard anything about it since then. I’m not in CT and so I don’t get much on-the ground reports. All I can do is wring my hands and worry from a distance. But I’ve never felt good about the idea of putting any significant amount of hope or energy into those postcards. They were and are just a throwaway gimmick that’s (at best) harmless.
Weldon story :
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..HNlYwNtdHM
Christy said Please use this thread to talk about the CT Senate debate and the need for a change in Washington.
Diane Benson is campaigning against Don Young in Alaska. He’s the last man standing from Jack Abramoff’s wounded A-Team. That’s considering that Conrad Burns is on his way to a temporary retirement until he becomes Bob Ney’s cellmate. NOBODY in DC deserves to be booted more than Don Young, the person most responsible for the creation of a quasi-slave sweatshop empire in the Northern Marianas.
Two ways to find out more about Diane Benson. There’s Part I of my article about Benson at Howie Klein’s Blog:
http://downwithtyranny.blogspo…..g-for.html
or Diane Benson’s campaign web site:
http://bensonforcongress.com/
you can donate there or at egregious’s fdl ActBlue page:
http://www.actblue.com/page/egregious
egrtegious has raised over $6,200 for ActBlue candidates, mostly through fdl! Big hand for egregious!!
This is priceless, from yesterday’s Anchorage Daily News:
Friday afternoon we got a call from Rep. Don Young’s campaign wondering if the Daily News was treating letters about the congressional race with an even hand. The campaign manager said he knows people from across the state send in letters supporting Don Young.
Our response: We can’t print what we don’t get. We haven’t received any letters supporting Don Young. We have been getting letters supporting his Democrat opponent Diane Benson regularly, and we’ve only run a sampling of those letters, not all of them.
http://www.adn.com/opinion/let…..4082c.html
So, I read the liveblogging and missed the debate, and I wanted to make a meta-comment if I might. The GOP candidate seemed to generate a lot more excitement here than Lamont.
I didn’t see the debate. Maybe Lamont was presidentially above the fray, delivering a quietly inspiring performance instead of fireworks. But it sure didn’t sound like he was closing the deal with the 35% of Dems who are still voting for Lieberman. It seems to me that has to be his first point of strategy in these debates.
I certainly understand that a point for Schlesinger is a point for Lamont. But Schlesinger sounds like kind of an erratic, flaky guy–not someone I’d want to depend on. Wouldn’t it be healthier to work from the strategy that a point for Lamont is a point for Lamont?
none #58 – Sorry to disagree with you but as I understand the postcards are sent by friends and family to friends and family. Folks will read them and discuss under such circumstances.
Eureka Springs, AR @
28
My take also. Speak a little slower and smile wide and look L4L in the eye when slamming!
ET at 60 — HAHAHAHA! Oh, that is too amusing. I bet the Young campaign folks are seething — not so much because of the letters (even though that has to worry them, motivation-wise), but because the newspaper printed something about their whiny phone call. *g*
Am I wrong or did Jane cut back her aggressive support for Ned after she met with Bill C.?
Joe Lieberman is a lousy debater. Today’s performance only confirmed what has been apparent since the Cheney fiasco in 2000 and the Iowa embarassments in 2004. The primary reason for this is that the only thing he really believes in is that Joe Lieberman is an indispensable man in the political affairs of our nation. As such, the only thing he has to sell is himself. Talk about having a short and shoddy inventory.
commonsense at 65 — you are wrong. Check the tabs for “Lamont” and “Lieberman” to the right hand side of the blog, and see just how wrong.
Connecticut Bob @ 57
I don’t think Schlessinger’s animation helped him much. He hasn’t come across as “serious” for the job and his performance didn’t help him any, except for those who like the “maverick” act. Performance wise, Ned needs to stay a straight shooter, talk slower and be less anxious so the dry humor etc can come out. Lieberman has a slow comfortable way of speaking, no matter how unpleasant he is, and Ned needs to match that pace and tone to a certain degree so Lieberman doesn’t like he’s lording it over Ned.
Connecticut Bob @ 57
Bob, I doubt the Republican Campaign Committee will send or encourage more donations to Schlesinger, unless there is a miraculous upsurge in support — something I see as unlikely. Recall that Republicans focused all their dollars in New Jersey on a “moderate” Republican that voted against Bush a few times, and starved the “genuine conservative” (whatever that means). And that candidate was far closer in the polls than Schlesinger is.
They’ll put their money into the campaign with the best shot at beating Ned, and right now, that’s still Lieberman. They have no qualms about cutting the far right candidate off at the knees if it helps them stay n power. What they can’t control is how may Republicans are attracted enough to Schesingler to vote for him. The only scenario I can see in which the Republicans saddle up for Schesinger is if Lieberman’s campaign suddenly tanks, and it becomes a genuine three-way race in which the Dem vote, instead of the Republican vote, is deeply split.
wrt to the interview — there’s a piece right in the middle where Schlesinger attacks Joe’s integrity — that’s choice. There’s another piece towards the end where he attacks Joe for being a Hillary-Kennedy liberal. These two pieces get played to different audiences.
commonsense @ 65
Yes, you are wrong.
Professor Foland @ 61
I think that boosting Shlesinger is a great strategy. He is a little erratic, yes, but Joe having to defend his right flank will also begin to affect that remaining 35%.
Joe has two primary talking points: he works for bipartisan solutions (which we all know tranlates into rolling over for the Republicans) and that Ned is supposedly running an attack campaign.
Clearly targeting Joe as someone who will say anything is one key element. Tag the “bipartisanship” angle as waffling.
No one likes a whiner. Ned needs to equate Joe’s “he’s attacking me” talking point in the voters and MSM mind with whining. “I gives him the truth and he whines that it’s hell.”
Salon.com War Room:
CT Bob — oops — I meant Rhode Island’s Chafee. Not New Jersey. Oh well, I’m from California.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Poli…..id=2573626
ABCNews has the AP debate review.
scarecrow @ 70
You are probably comparing Jane’s peak intensity, practically living with the campaign, just before the primary to her solid and steady, ongoing, enthusiastic support and daily blogging for Ned Lamont.
Silly to consider supporting Schlesinger. He’s nuts, a gambler. And look at how widely we’re reporting on the Repubs who bankroll Holy Joe and the Pennsylvania Green candidate.
Not a good strategy.
Sparcatus @
72
Professor Foland @ 61
I agree with Prof. Foland. Alan Schlessinger is really flaky. Point for point for Ned: lots of appearances, lots of phone calls, ads and constant debuking of the Liebermyth while offering people an alterntive a la Sirota. I think Ned made a good point about the subsidies a lot of corps receive. Somehow HoJoe never answers those questions. I wonder why. HoJoe needs to answer for his lobbyist support as well.
Blank Kludge @ 75
Thanks Blank. I thought it was a very positive review for Ned.
RGJoe won’t debate again unless the rules are changed. Giving each candidate 17 minutes total is an odd format, and it’s pretty clearly stacked against RGJoe. I bet he won’t show up unless there’s a different format.
Funny thing is, he probably liked being in the middle, between Alan and NED, but it ended up looking like RGJoe stood for nothing, between two principled candidates. Especially at the end, when NED called for Alan to stand up, be principled, forget what the bosses say, and campaign on what he believes, like NED has and will. RGJoe sputtering on a run-out clock is a great metaphor for all his failures as Connecticut’s Senator.
Come home, NutmegGOPers! Come home to Alan!
Oh and most of all Lieberman’s sanctimonious little passive agressive act (as Swopa so aptly put it) needs to be exposed in such a way he can no longer hide under that comfortable mask.
new thread
Christy – Thanks again for the live blogging. I recorded the debate for viewing later but would rather be here while listening to the audio on the first run through. *s*
And also to add to what others have said about Alan Schlessinger: What guarantee do we have that he wouldn’t spend every cent at the Mohegan Sun (or was he banned from there already) under the name Alan Gold?
new thread. Apparently, Lieberman 4 Lieberman needs a better candidate.
Cujo359 @ 85
707!!
old gold @ 66
I disagree. Catfish Joe had Ned on the ropes with his innocuation technique at the start of the debate, until Ned and Schlesinger triangulated his narrow ass.
IMO, Ned is going to have to defuse the ” help, help, he’s attacking me, he’s attacking me” defense pretty damn quick as it can be very effective for the low-info voter.
However, a continued strong showing by Schlesinger could provide Ned with a political SODDIT (ask Christy) defense.
Joe’s main line of attack is the “I’m so bi-partisan”, which can also be effective and I wish Ned would hammer the dung out of him on that bullsit.
Maybe something like this:
“Fine Mr Lieberman, but if your bi-partisanship is so effective then why have you failed miserably to do X,Y, or Z?
Finally, Ned needs a couple of laugh lines.
I like, “Joe, you ignorant slut” as a nice start, (and perfectly illustrative of Joe’s moral and intellectual character), but Ned may want to go with something slightly less Gibson-like.
Swopa at 40
Well said! Send it to Lamont.com.
that’s good, or he could just point out that we are in this mess because of enablers (aka bipartisan senators) and we could use A LOT MORE partisanship (aka oversight).
America has a problem!
http://www.liebermeforme.com
JOE must GO!
I love the cartoon on liebermeforme.com, LOL.
Perhaps I am wrong about Jane, BUT subtleties abound in politics. I hope I’m wrong & she returns to her uber-aggressive well-thought & written attacks on holy-joe.
VOTE NED BECAUSE HE’S NOT JOE!