Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Nation weighs in on the Ned Lamont.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-02-06 11:02 PM
Original message
The Nation weighs in on the Ned Lamont.
Apparently Ned is not the Unknown Millionaire that some fringe far right loonies have labeled him. :shrug:


So why is the challenger seemingly so at ease with just a few weeks to go before the primary? Why is Ned Lamont smiling? "I love being in this race," the candidate declares, without a hint of irony, to the crowd at an Indian restaurant in downtown Stamford after a long evening of answering questions he has answered a few hundred times before. That's the secret of Ned Lamont. He is not merely the "cable TV millionaire" reporters mention when seeking a shorthand description for the 52-year-old former newspaper editor, public radio host, local elected official, telecommunications entrepreneur and Democratic donor who was drawn into the race against Lieberman only after more prominent war foes begged off. Rather, he is a self-admitted political junkie who, like a rock critic who finally forms a band, has been waiting a very long time for this chance in the spotlight. Maybe a lifetime. After all, it's in his blood.

Lamont's great-grandfather Thomas Lamont, whose partnership with J.P. Morgan created the family fortune that has provided a firm financial base for Ned's business and political endeavors, was one of Woodrow Wilson's negotiators on the Treaty of Versailles. Ned's great-uncle Corliss was a leading figure in the American Civil Liberties Union and a founder of the National Emergency Civil Liberties Committee who successfully sued the Central Intelligence Agency in a groundbreaking challenge to domestic spying--and who would no doubt be proud of the Senate candidate's support of Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold's proposal to censure Bush for authorizing warrantless wiretaps. Lamont's father, Ted, an economist, helped administer the Marshall Plan after World War II and served with George Romney--Massachusetts Governor Mitt's liberal dad--in Richard Nixon's Department of Housing and Urban Development.

"Our family always has believed in international cooperation, that the way to achieve a safer and freer world is through hard-working diplomacy and a good respect for the opinions of other countries in getting the job done, rather than seizing the military option too soon," Ted Lamont told a Connecticut reporter after his son announced the Senate candidacy. For his part, Ned Lamont speaks about the broad sweep of American foreign policy over the past century in the familiar language of someone who sat down for family dinners with those who shaped it. So when he talks about the war in Iraq, it is not as a shrill critic but rather as an old-school liberal internationalist who cannot believe that George Bush and Joe Lieberman have rejected diplomacy and smart strategies like containment for cowboy adventurism and neglect of fundamental realities in the Middle East. "This war is way outside the historical norm," Lamont says, arguing that the Administration has adopted "a go-it-alone strategy, a sense that we don't need allies, we don't have to listen to the rest of the world. That's contrary to the American tradition, and it's really not in our self-interest."

This reaction to Lamont is one that Lieberman failed to anticipate when he noticed that a "Greenwich millionaire," as his increasingly shrill campaign ads label Lamont, was nipping at his heels. Shaken by the seriousness of the challenge, Lieberman has tried to dismiss Lamont as a "single issue" antiwar challenger backed by loony-left bloggers, while his backers have taken to hysterical grumbling, like that of the DLC's Wittmann and Steven Nider in a recent Hartford Courant column, about how "far too many Democrats view George W. Bush as a greater threat to the nation than Osama bin Laden."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Tandalayo_Scheisskopf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-02-06 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. Anything and anyone...
That makes a shithead like Marshall Wittman grumble hysterically is doing God's work.

Marshall, if you are lurking, a modest proposal:

Bite me.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-02-06 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. lol
:spray: :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. LOL
X2

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarkDevin Donating Member (529 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 01:06 AM
Response to Original message
3. But Bush *is* a greater threat to the nation than Osama bin Laden.
Edited on Thu Aug-03-06 01:08 AM by MarkDevin
Bush and his far-right weirdos have done more damage to my country than a thousand Bin Ladens could dream of wreaking. That's why I hate the right (and its enablers) as much as I do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Every time Whittman or Bullmoose crank out another loser handbook,
Edited on Thu Aug-03-06 01:26 AM by LincolnMcGrath
All the worshipers come out of the woodwork to curtsey to the dlc group think propagandists.


All 3 of them. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatWoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
5. "Greenwich millionaire"
my response: so fucking what?

Isn't Joe a millionaire?

His wife seems to be doing pretty good.

Why is Joe attacking Lamont for being a millionaire, but not Bush?

I don't recall any articles about Lamont getting his money by looting the US treasury, as is the practice of the Bush clan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. "Why is Joe attacking Lamont for being a millionaire"
I could ask the same of some of the more delusional Joe backers out there.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatWoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. are they the same people
Edited on Fri Aug-04-06 08:57 PM by CatWoman
who keep posting racist Michelle Malkin anti-McKinney video? :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. I would have to say
yes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jonnyblitz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. who else?
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
8. Funny, we mostly hear about "loony-left bloggers" on the internet itself.
It's ironic that the desperate far-right/Independent Party backers have to come on message boards, sit behind their keyboards, and then accuse Lamont supporters of "sitting behind their keyboards."

Am I the only DUer noting that irony?

It's the same dishonest hypocrisy they use when they accuse Lamont of being rich- as if Liberman & the DLC are all lower income types.

While I'm on the subject- I also have to notice that these right-leaning bloggers dont like point by point refutations or detailed arguments-once they engage a Lamont supporter or someone they label as "far left"- it is all just short, terse insults and name calling.

I hope Lamont wins- I'll certainly be sending him more checks.

Great article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. "Terse insults and name calling" ?
Whomever could you be referring to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-07-06 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. kicking your observations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-07-06 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. The primary is tomorrow.
If you've been putting off sending in a donation, send one now, instead.

http://www.nedlamont.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-07-06 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. comment on this re- cegelis v duckworth
i must mention on this point that i saw firsthand the damage that was done to the christine cegelis campaign in the il 6th district by well orchestrated web attack.
here at du, at kos, and several other political boards, the trolls came out of the woodwork, spouting the same bullshit talking points, bludgeoning all comers. to me, it was clearly the work of paid posters, intended to sink the campaign. maybe it could be argued that it gave the contest a national presence. but i know that it sucked a lot of positive energy out of supporters, wasted a lot of time of both volunteers and staff, and in the end, of course, christine lost.

we have to find a better way to combat these kind of attacks. goliath is pounding us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warrens Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-07-06 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
15. Martin Peretz just called Corliss and Ned Stalinists
Herr Rove is calling in ALL his chits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 28th 2014, 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC