Options

Republicans using attempted terror attack to their advantage

JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
edited August 2006 in A Moving Train
Aww, poor Lieberman lost the CT democratic primary...See what he and Cheney have to say about the winner, Ned Lamont. Ya know, I knew they'd spin the whole thing to gain votes...

From http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/14/lamont.ap/index.html
Anti-war candidate finds attacks 'offensive'
Opponent, VP charge that withdrawal would give terrorists a victory


WASHINGTON (AP) -- The thwarted terrorist airline plot in Britain is sparking a bitter new round of finger-pointing in Connecticut's bruising Senate race.

Democratic nominee Ned Lamont, the anti-war candidate who toppled Sen. Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut primary last week, said he was surprised by Lieberman's and Vice President Dick Cheney's claims that his views on Iraq could embolden terrorists.

"My God, here we have a terrorist threat against hearth and home, and the very first thing that comes out of their mind is how can we turn this to partisan advantage. I find that offensive," Lamont said in an interview Sunday with The Associated Press.

After British officials disclosed Thursday that they had stopped a terrorist airline bombing plot, Lieberman warned that Lamont's call for a phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq would be "taken as a tremendous victory" by terrorists. (Full Story)

Cheney suggested Wednesday that Lamont's victory might encourage "the al Qaeda types" who want to "break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task."

Lamont said Lieberman's swipe at his candidacy "sounded an awful lot" like Cheney.

"It surprised me," he said. "It seemed almost orchestrated. It's sort of demeaning to the people of Connecticut. ... I thought the senator and the vice president were both wrong to use that attack (strategy) on the voters of Connecticut."

The Lieberman camp Sunday brushed aside Lamont's comments.

"All Lieberman did was point out an important difference between his approach to national security and Ned Lamont's, which is what campaigns are all about," said Lieberman spokesman Dan Gerstein.

Cheney spokeswoman Lea Anne McBride said Lamont was the one seeking to score political points with terrorism.

"Sounds like he's the one playing politics at a time the president is trying to build national unity and cooperation in fighting a determined and murderous enemy," McBride said.

Lamont's upset victory last week, fueled in part by liberal bloggers, was viewed by many as a referendum on Iraq and President Bush's handling of the war. The debate has put his candidacy in the national spotlight.

Lamont, who was in Washington for appearances on two Sunday TV news talk shows, is reaching out to the Democratic Party establishment for help in what is expected to be a bruising general election fight against Lieberman.

Lieberman urged to drop out

Many top Democrats, including national party chairman Howard Dean and leading senators, have abandoned Lieberman, the party's 2000 vice presidential nominee. They have lined up behind Lamont in the general election, a three-way fight that includes Republican Alan Schlesinger.

Some Democrats are urging Lieberman to drop his independent bid to clear a path for Lamont.

"It would be better for the Democratic Party, it would be better for the people of Connecticut, it would be better for the country" if Lieberman got out of the race, Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, said on ABC's "This Week."

Lamont said he had no idea whether Lieberman might reconsider his candidacy. Of the possibility Lieberman could play the role of the spoiler, he said, "It's not helpful."

Lamont also said he doubted that Republicans would find a stronger candidate than Schlesinger, who trails far behind both Lamont and Lieberman in recent polls.

"My hunch is they're not going to do that," Lamont said.

Lamont, 52, said he had no plans to tailor his campaign message in the fall race to appeal to independents or moderates in both parties.

"I'm not changing my message one iota now," Lamont said. "It is a message that resonates. It's not just Democrats who think that we need real change in Washington, D.C."

Lamont, who has estimated he's worth $90 million to $300 million, spent about $4 million of his own money in the primary. He said he doubted he would have to provide a similar cash infusion for the general election, but he vowed to remain competitive in fundraising.

"We're not going to be badly outspent," said Lamont.

Lieberman has about $2 million in campaign funds for the fall race after spending roughly $5 million during the primary, according to campaign spokesman Gerstein. "We will raise enough to win," Gerstein said.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Options
    chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    democrats using iraq war snafu to their advantage... it's called politics.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • Options
    floyd1975floyd1975 Posts: 1,350
    Joe Lieberman is not a Republican.
  • Options
    JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    Their both dems...hence the democratic primary. But Lieberman is buds w/ Bush & Cheney and supports the war. Something most dems aren't in agreement with....
  • Options
    Jeanwah wrote:
    Something most dems aren't in agreement with....


    Something most Americans aren't in agreement with by the way.
    "Bombs dropping down. Please forgive our hometown"
  • Options
    floyd1975floyd1975 Posts: 1,350
    Jeanwah wrote:
    Their both dems...hence the democratic primary. But Lieberman is buds w/ Bush & Cheney and supports the war. Something most dems aren't in agreement with....

    Most Democrats voted to go into Iraq. This war is about the only issue that Lieberman and Cheney agree on. Maybe it should have been phrased "these two politicians using attempted terror attacks..." since 50% of your subjects are not Republicans.
  • Options
    not4unot4u Posts: 513
    zstillings wrote:
    Joe Lieberman is not a Republican.

    he reminds me of palpatine from episode I
    we don't want war, but we still want more?
  • Options
    AbuskedtiAbuskedti Posts: 1,917
    chopitdown wrote:
    democrats using iraq war snafu to their advantage... it's called politics.

    Perhaps that is what Politics has become. But there are many words that better describe it. Its a damn shame that is what politics means and a wonder why so many continue to participate
  • Options
    know1know1 Posts: 6,763
    Newsflash!!!! That's what politicians do.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • Options
    not4u wrote:
    he reminds me of palpatine from episode I

    Yeah no doubt!
  • Options
    AbuskedtiAbuskedti Posts: 1,917
    know1 wrote:
    Newsflash!!!! That's what politicians do.

    and you still vote for them? Is this what you want them to do?
  • Options
    chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    Abuskedti wrote:
    Perhaps that is what Politics has become. But there are many words that better describe it. Its a damn shame that is what politics means and a wonder why so many continue to participate

    that is exactly what politics has become. It is no longer an avenue to work for some good or to develop strategies to better the american society. It has become a game to develop strategies to help each party WIN and raise money. Each side now only exploits the others weakness and has no real leadership in a direction. We have a philosophy in this country as being reactionary not being true leaders, b/c it's safer to react to something (terror strike etc..) than it is to lead on some things. It seems like the process of politics has changed, it's now only about the result of one party winning to make the other party look bad.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • Options
    know1know1 Posts: 6,763
    Abuskedti wrote:
    and you still vote for them? Is this what you want them to do?

    Nope. I don't vote for them. I can't in good conscience...which is what I answer to.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Sign In or Register to comment.