Posted on 08/10/2006 1:47:10 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
WASHINGTON // Former Sen. John Edwards was the first national Democrat to congratulate anti-war candidate Ned Lamont on his primary victory over Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, but the phone call wasn't really about Connecticut.
Edwards is aggressively pursuing his party's presidential nomination, and his call was a reflection of Lamont's emergence as a liberal hero and nod to the new reality of this election year.
Anti-war fever is raging. Democrats, especially those on the left, are angry and aroused, and candidates ignore them at their peril.
"People want change," said Connecticut Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, a recent entrant in the 2008 presidential chase. "That's really what voters, I think, were saying more than anything else."
Dodd, who campaigned for Lieberman, warmly endorsed Lamont yesterday. He cautioned against reading too much into Tuesday's vote, then added: "Obviously, the Iraq war is a major issue and the ignition behind all of this."
...... Attempting to drive the wedge deeper in the Democratic split, Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman said Lamont's victory was evidence that Democrats have become the party of "retreat and defeat." Lamont might have aided his critics' efforts to portray him as an extremist by letting the Rev. Al Sharpton and the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson - two of his party's most polarizing figures - stand shoulder-to-shoulder with him at his primary night victory celebration.
....Democrats and some independent analysts questioned whether the vote in Connecticut, one of the most liberal states in the nation, would have significant spillover effect on other contests this year. But they said the Lieberman-Lamont race had put a national spotlight on the pressures that Democratic presidential candidates are facing and on the party's continuing struggle to deal with the war.
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
As usual, the LIBERALS timing has given them a black eye.
The Dims are completely out of touch with the reality of the covert war by proxy of Islamofascism against America, the Jews and Western civilization.
Islam is at war against us and we're surrounded by naive, if not stupid ignorant, traitors in our midst actively working with the enemy.
The Dims will be the death of us all.
From London:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/10/nreid10.xml
John Reid rounded on judges, politicians and commentators yesterday for failing to grasp that today's terrorists pose the greatest threat to the civilised world since Adolf Hitler.
In his first speech on national security since becoming Home Secretary, Mr Reid said he had already found that those who should be "foremost in recognising the serious nature of the threat just don't get it".
Portraying himself as a hardliner on security and immigration issues, Mr Reid said Britain was now in constant danger from the same breed of "unconstrained" terrorist that was causing mass bloodshed in Iraq.
Addressing the think tank Demos, he said judges, British politicians and commentators had all failed to realise that liberties enshrined in the 20th century and bolstered after the Second World War could not all remain intact if today's high-tech, global terrorists were to be thwarted......
Rove is using his mind control device on the Liberals. We couldn't pay the liberals to choose an agenda better suited to alienating the majority of the voting American public.
Ned Lamont is a protest vote. They're really after Bush but he's not running for anything, so they're going after anything and anyone who is seen as being anything remotely like him.
This morning's news kinda puts the lie to their position, dontcha think?
Yes. It sure does.
Indeed!
Dodd
Gore
Kerry
Clinton
Egads!!
Being so-called anti-war today is like being anti catching criminals. Islamo-fascists are criminals writ large (Al-Qaeda, etc) who need the apparatus of our armed forces as well national security orgs to combat them. Some libs think we can go back to the days of Clinton and send a few FBI agents around the world to catch terrorists. That kind of thinking (or non-thinking) led directly to 9/11.
Happened in the 1930's FDR and the rest of the ignorant liberals allowed Hitler to come to power in Europe by playing the isolation game. It is the same game that they want us to play again... Hell the GOP should be out speaking about the where we would be if we had not acted... Emphasis on acted vs. not acting or quiting or pulling back or retreating or cutting and running or cowering or isolating ourselves or emboldening our enemy or any other way you want to cut the Dem solution to this problem.
I've lurked at FR for a long time, and finaly registered this AM.
Here in occupied CT, the GOP candidate just ain't gonna win - with or without Joe splitting the democratic vote. He's apparently got some big problems(political and legal) and gets little or no press.
My wife and I have actually discussed forming Republicans for Leiberman. Given the choices - he's definitely the better of the 3 candidates. Believe me - if the Republicans ever had a chance to knock off Leiberman/Lamont - this is the year. It just ain't gonna happen and I'd rather go with Joe, than Looney Lamont.
What do think CT Freepers?
Vote for Lieberman of course.
It does, but of course the Left will keep their collective heads in the sand, and say there is no connection between Iraq and the WOT.
Hold your nose and vote for Joe.
I'm from Illinois and plan to send Lieberman a letter of support with $ contribution.
Welcome to FR!
This was a topic of discussion in the DUmmie FUnnies yesterday. I'd say that Lieberman has a pretty good chance of winning the election given the number of registered Independents in Connecticut (I'm from Illinois).
What the MoveOn/Soros/DU/KOs crowd haven't realized yet is that 48% of registered Democrats still voted for Lieberman, regardless of his stance on the war. No, this doesn't mean that they all support the war, but they're a pretty good indication of a good Democratic base going into the election. It should be far easier for Lieberman to shore that up with Independents and cross-over Repubs than for Lamont to do so with his far left dogma.
It's going to be interesting to watch.
Your right, the Republican candidate has no chance. Looks like I'll be voting for Joe come Nov.
I can't imagine having Lamont as as Senator.(Todd is bad enough)
I'll even consider putting a sign up to P*ss of the Lamont supporter down the street.
I believe that a LOT of Conn. Dim-O-Bulbs woke up on Weds. morning and learning that they had booted Lieberman out of office (at least his Dim-O-Bulb sponsored office) and tried to figure out what they had done. Electing someone from the moonbat wing of the Dim-O-Bilb party was NOT their smartest move and, IMO, today's story from London should provide them with a new pot of coffee to smell.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.