Lieberman/Lamont preview: “Tooled-up adolescents” edition

posted at 6:32 pm on July 6, 2006 by Allahpundit

From, of all places, the Guardian’s blog:

In the coming months and years, [Hillary’s] behaviour is, on present form, bound to attract the ire of the Democratic base, and its blogging cheerleaders. These tooled-up adolescents want someone who can take the fight to the Republicans; to show some balls and backbone. Instead they run the risk of lumbering the Demoncrats with an unelectable donkey like Russ Feingold, a leftist Senator from Wisconsin.

I think “Demoncrats” is a typo but I’m honestly not sure.

Newsweek interviewed Lieberman and the Freshmaker this afternoon. Freshy thinks it’s high time we pull out of the Sunni triangle, Osama’s recent comments notwithstanding. As for Liebs, he had some tough words for the nutroots:

Liberal bloggers have been attacking you pretty hard. What do you think of all that anger?
I don’t like it and I don’t think it’s healthy for our system. Speaking beyond [the attacks] toward me, we’ve seen two presidents, President Clinton and now President Bush, who’ve been the targets of just the worst vituperation and I’d call it hatred from people in our country. It’s not healthy for the country. Our politics is much too partisan. We see it in Washington. Part of why the politics is partisan is it’s a less mainstream group that dominates primaries in both parties and that’s not healthy. As far as the vituperation on the blogs—periodically my staff will show me some of it and I don’t recognize myself. It’s not me. The personal attacks are just outrageous.

Over at Red State, Mark Kilmer is firmly in Lamont’s corner.

The debate starts in less than half an hour on MSNBC. Comment here if you’re watching.

Update: Lieberman’s opening statement was stronger, echoing Lloyd Bentsen in saying he’s run against George Bush and he’s no George Bush. Lamont seemed nervous and gave some canned story about his teaching days. Now he’s hitting Lieberman about the lack of WMD — and praising Murtha.

Update: Lieberman’s hitting him as a flip-flopper on Iraq, saying he’d had multiple positions even on the same day. Lamont says he supports an absolute deadline for withdrawal within the next six months.

Update: Lieberman just referred to Lamont’s Iraq position as dumb. Har.

Update: Lamont just blamed Bush for Haditha.

Update: Lieberman uses a question about North Korea to criticize Bush’s policy. Lamont says NK is the most serious threat facing the United States today … and now he’s talking in platitudes about sharing intelligence and “constructive dialogue.”

Update: Lamont says he’s got grassroots support. Lieberman says the Democratic Party is and should be what it was in 1960. Now he’s slamming Lamont for calling him insufficiently Democratic when he votes with the left 90% of the time in the Senate. And he says Lamont’s supporters are poisoning the party. Nice. Now he’s telling Lamont, in an angry tone, to stop spreading untruths about his record.

Update: Lieberman accuses Lamont of voting Republican and using Republican campaign aides. Lamont scores a nice point by noting that he’s not the one who’s threatening to run as an independent if he loses the primary. Liebs says Lamont can’t win the general election and he wants the whole population to have a chance to decide. Lamont responds by hitting him on job loss.

Update: Lieberman says Lamont gave him three campaign contributions — after he took the position he did on Iraq.

I’m trying to be objective. Lamont isn’t bad, but Lieberman’s better.

Update: Lieberman keeps hitting the point, “Who is Ned Lamont?” Republican or far-left liberal? The point he should be making is that Lamont is cipher; none of his supporters support him, they merely oppose Liebs.

Update: The nutroots is freeping MSNBC’s poll: Lamont leads 69-27%.

Update: Lamont says Bush wants to “militarize” the border. If only. Lamont smacks Bush for saying that there are jobs Americans won’t do. Sweet. Lieberman’s rambling in his response; Lamont did better on this issue.

Update: Lieberman gets to ask Lamont a question now. He asks if he’ll release his state and federal tax returns in the interests of transparency. Lamont dodges him, says he’s released hundreds of pages of documents. He’s using the question as an opportunity to talk about scandals in Washington. Lieberman says he’s not answering the question and it’s an insult to the public.

Update: Lamont asks if, as Liebs said 18 years ago, it’s time for a change in Connecticut. Liebs says no because he hasn’t stopped working for the people the way Lowell Weicker did — who’s now supporting Lamont.

Update: Liebs cheeses out in his closing statement, saying how he and Connecticut have “laughed and cried together.” Lamont says he doesn’t want people voting against Lieberman, he wants them voting for him. His close was better.

John Harwood makes a good point afterwards: Lieberman used “there you go again,” a famous Reagan line, and accused Lamont of flip-flopping several times, which the GOP bludgeoned Kerry with in ’04. He’s using Republican debate tactics, in other words — a fact which I’m sure Lamont’s campaign will be emphasizing tomorrow.

He also used a variation of Bentsen’s famous line against Quayle, though.

Final MSNBC poll was 73 to 25. Video coming up.

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


I’m from CT and can’t tell you how unnerving it is to drive down the street and see campaign signs for the likes of Ned Lamont. Can anyone tell me who the Republican party candidate in this election is? That’s right, I thought not. Why? We have the best chance in years to win an election (and a senate seat) in one of the bluest states in the country with the liberal vote divided between Lamont and Lieberman. If the Republicans need a candidate, they should call me at 203-879-3200. I will run. If nothing else, I will make sure Ned Lamont does not win, mark my words.

RobertCSampson on July 6, 2006 at 7:03 PM


Wish I had the chance to see this… too bad it isn’t being shown on a real network.

I hope you guys get some video up.

Watcher on July 6, 2006 at 7:11 PM

Watching it now, Lamont looks like a scared gopher, BSD in full flower.

bbz123 on July 6, 2006 at 7:17 PM

Oops, BDS

bbz123 on July 6, 2006 at 7:18 PM

AP “Demon crats” – thanks for pointing that out :)

RobertCSampson, Alan Schlesinger is the Republican candidate:

Entelechy on July 6, 2006 at 7:19 PM

Anyone have the fortitude to follow the liveblogging at a lefty site? Kos, Hamsher? I’m curious, but also weak and frightened.

Alex K on July 6, 2006 at 7:22 PM

Oh my God, if Fresh doesn’t narrow those eyes a bit I’m going to freak out.

Okay, I guess he’s getting better now.

Alex K on July 6, 2006 at 7:23 PM

I’m not a fan of Mr. Lieberman’s policies, but he’s right about the extremes of the parties choose the candidate. It’s too bad, because it forces everyone running to act hard-left or hard-right.

These tooled-up adolescent…

Unfair! You left out all of the angry aging hippies!

Kevin M on July 6, 2006 at 7:23 PM

I’m aware of that Entelechy. The fact that you had to look it up is my point exactly.

RobertCSampson on July 6, 2006 at 7:26 PM

Kos is lowering expectations:

I won’t liveblog. Others can do that. But note that Lieberman has been doing this sort of things for decades. This is Lamont’s first real debate.

mikeyboss on July 6, 2006 at 7:30 PM

Leiberman “Ned Lamont has contributed 3 times to my campaign since I posted my opinion on Iraq” or words to that effect. That’s a punch that will land if he keeps pushing it.

Creed on July 6, 2006 at 7:33 PM

“Look at my record and deal with your reality of it”
Good one Liebs!

bbz123 on July 6, 2006 at 7:36 PM

I’m surprised Lamont is not doing better at finding other ways Lieb is insufficiently liberal/Democrat. A lot of Lamont supporters have pointed out that it’s not just the war Lieb bugs them on, but so Lamont is letting this debate sound like two Democrats who disagree on one issue, except the pro-war guy has more experience.

Alex K on July 6, 2006 at 7:36 PM

Yeah, Kos is out and Firedog Hamsher started liveblogging but got tired or something around 7:20 after a hilarious Tom Delay “joke”. What happened to all the excitement?

Alex K on July 6, 2006 at 7:43 PM

Both are doing fine, and though Lieberman is perhaps a bit more talented at debating, the main reason he’s killing Ned is that he is an actual Senator and Lamont’s a nobody, eg Lieb rattling off all the major interest groups who support him over the nobody. Their policy differences are unclear except for an issue that was decided in March 2003 so what’s left is a choice between an actual Senator and some guy who got a lot of money from the netroots.

Alex K on July 6, 2006 at 7:54 PM

Is it me or does freshie look like Frankie Muniz from Malcolm in the Middle?

Creed on July 6, 2006 at 7:55 PM

I can’t believe Lamont said “poppycock”. That’s just crazy talk…even from an absurdly leftist political-wannabe like Ned.

bambam on July 6, 2006 at 7:59 PM

The lady who asked about the illegal immigrants reminded me of Lily Tomlin. Just thought I should point that out.

Alex K on July 6, 2006 at 7:59 PM

Um, Hamsher seems to have blogged steadily, maybe I had a browser problem going. Unsurprisingly, she thinks Lamont won.

Alex K on July 6, 2006 at 8:14 PM

Kos admits: “Lamont has looked more nervous and less polished than the old pro Lieberman.” But he says Joe is a rude jerk.

Alex K on July 6, 2006 at 8:18 PM

Kos admits: “Lamont has looked more nervous and less polished than the old pro Lieberman.” But he says Joe is a rude jerk.

And by more nervous and less polished he means bug-eyed, bat shit fuggin’ crazy.

B Moe on July 6, 2006 at 9:00 PM

LOL (and I dont use those letters lightly) at B Moe’s comment.

commissar on July 6, 2006 at 10:06 PM

Kos, “says Joe is a rude jerk”. Pot, meet kettle. Kos calling someone a rude jerk is like Kim Jong Il saying Saddam was a tyrant.

Bellicose Muse on July 6, 2006 at 10:22 PM

Is Connecticut a state where anyone can vote in the primaries regardless of their party affiliation?

Run Joe, Run!

rightside on July 6, 2006 at 11:31 PM

I watched the debate, and I live in the wilds of Nevada. I thought that Lieberman was defensive and arrogant, so was the other guy. What the debate brought home to me was that if the democrats ever regain the majority, we’re in for a world of hurt. One other thing I don’t understand is the republican love affair- from the comments I have read here-with Lieberman. The man is an America hater just as much if not more than his opponent! What gives?

calnevari on July 7, 2006 at 12:47 AM

Rightside- Unaffliated voters may vote in party primaries in Connecticut.
I don’t know if Repubicans can vote in Democratic primaries or vice versa.
And yes, this unaffiliated voter is going to vote for Senator Lieberman.

Abigail Adams on July 7, 2006 at 10:40 AM

Does anyone here believe that we would even know the name Ned Lamont if Lieberman had stayed quiet and followed the party template? Lieberman, on Iraq, rose above partisanship, and I respect that. Before any of you start hugging him as the next Zell Miller, recall who’s running mate Lieberman was in 2000.

Doug on July 7, 2006 at 1:45 PM

Doug- the Dem fanatics have had it in for Lieberman since he denounced Bill Clinton on the Senate floor in 1998,during the debate on impeachment proceedings.

Supporting President Bush on Iraq was the last straw I guess.

Abigail Adams on July 7, 2006 at 1:50 PM

I’m gonna say it one more time because no one is listening. Joe Lieberman is still.. Ned Lamont or not.. a screaming liberal none of you should be thinking of supporting in any way shape or form except possibly the candidate of last resort if it appears Ned Lamont is going to win. The proof is in the pudding..

Gang of 14, F from the NRA, Family Entertainment Protection Act, voted against much of the Bush tax plan, supports stem cell research, Endorsed by the following, Senator Barbara Boxer, Senator Chris Dodd, Senator and Minority Leader Harry Reid, CT Representative Rosa DeLauro, CT Representative John Larson, all Democratic CT candidates for U.S. Congress, both Democratic CT candidates for Governor, the League of Conservation Voters, CT Planned Parenthood (the pro abortion organization) , UNITE-HERE, The Human Rights Campaign (gay rights organization) , the CT AFL-CIO, and lots of other liberals and their institutions. The man is a liberal democrat.. please stop already.. How do you think he voted on all of the issues of the past year?

RobertCSampson on July 7, 2006 at 4:03 PM