by DemFromCT
The most surprising thing happened today. The WH has decided to politicize terror. The most partisan President in history has decided politics is more important than American unity. Mr. non-partisan, Joe Lieberman, appears to have been given fair warning by the WH so he could attack Ned Lamont for being soft on terror, GOP-style. Howard Fineman (Hardball) is convinced this will work, because he is always convinced anything the GOP ever does will work. Of course, there's this:
As the midterm elections approach, voters say they are much more likely to support a challenger over the incumbent candidate, according to a new FOX News Poll. In addition, "throw the bums out" is a popular choice when voters pick bumper sticker wording to describe the main reason for their vote for Congress this year. President Bush’s job rating is unchanged this month holding steady at 36 percent approval.
In fact, check here for some amazing numbers.
"Oh, dear. Everything changed today, though."
Really? Bush's policies have made us feel safer? Republicans now win because the British using the rule of law are better than we are at fighting terror? Not finding Osama and then allowing Al Queda to reconstitute is proof the gang that couldn't shoot straight should be given another chance?
Show me the numbers before you make that case. That's especially true for pundits like Fineman. Just because they say it doesn't make it so.
Americans are sick of this nonsense from politicians. It's the angry suburbanites and the irate middle that voted for Lamont and against Lieberman that are begging for this sort of thing to stop. That's why the congressional numbers are the way they are. The backlash this November is going to be very real.
The irony should not be lost on anyone.
[UPDATE]: More...
"Weeks before September 11th, this is going to play big," said another White House official, who also spoke on condition of not being named, adding that some Democratic candidates won't "look as appealing" under the circumstances. - AFP, August 11, 2006
I've never been a fan a Lieberman although I once made the mistake a couple of years ago of defending him as a loyal Democrat.
A big mistake, obviously, as his "independent" run proves without a doubt.
But all his snuggling up to Bush and enabling of the disastrous war and occupation in Iraq pales by comparison to his comments today:
So, Ned Lamont might as well be Osama's sockpuppet, according to the rancid Lieberman.
Joe, just switch parties already, will ya? Because there's not a remaining shred of anything that makes you worthy of being called a Democrat.
Posted by: Meteor Blades | August 10, 2006 at 20:36
Dems need to hit back hard, and not let the GOP and its prison bitches, e.g. Fineman, parrot the Rove line.
WHAT War on Terror? 140,000 Americans are bogged down in Iraq trying to figure out who's who in an Iraqi civil war, while Osama bin Laden still prances around in his gold lame' robe making videos, and his followers come up with clever new ways to blow up airliners.
If that is a war on terror, someone forgot to tell the terrorists. Our candidates and spokespeople need to be out there making that point, not letting Bush set the terms of the debate.
Posted by: al-Fubar | August 10, 2006 at 20:56
There have been a ton of statements from Senate leaders to lamont, alluded to by Matthews and Fineman in the segment.
The media reports what the media wants to report.
Posted by: DemFromCT | August 10, 2006 at 21:00
Good post DemFromCT.
This old and tired raise the threat level - terrorism, terrorism song can only play for so long before it gets so stale that the dial has to be turned.
What is most instructive is that Bush and Cheney and Rove are a one note band. Unfortunately the American people want a real band that can play at least a few more notes. And finally it seems the Dems are catching on that they don't need to hide when the Cheney bear shows its face or march in step when the Bush one note band comes marching through.
To me the Tester, Lamont victories and the change of tune by Jane Harman when there was a real primary challenger were seminal moments in this electoral season. It showed that Dem candidates that unabashedly took clear positions in sync with the majority of Americans in broad daylight while drawing crisp contrasts with the failure of Bush and his Repub minions on national security including Iraq and terrorism garnered the support of the majority of Dem voters. Lamont even proved that many Indys and those frustrated and apathetic would come out of the woodwork and became Dems to vote for change. Lamont even more showed utmost courage and decency to have on the stage with him on victory night Maxine Waters, Sharpton and Jackson who supported him when no other establishment Dem would have the guts to support him. He did not triangulate after victory. This is the kind of character we need in our elected officials.
Its time to stand up to the Rovian politics of hate and division. Its time to stand up to the false ideology of Bush and Cheney. Stay the course is no longer an option. The American people are standing up for change. And the Dems have a historic opportunity to ride a tsunami. All they need to do is follow the lead of those at the tip of the spear of change. Jon Tester and Ned Lamont exemplify that tip.
Posted by: ab initio | August 10, 2006 at 21:06
what kills me is that the Dems haven't picked up the OBVIOUS talking point.... the Bush administration has been aware of the threat posed by liquids in carry on luggage for YEARS...let only today did they choose to DO something about it -- inconveniencing tens of thousands of travelers in the process...
Why, if Bushco was SERIOUS about national security, did they wait until it was ALMOST too late?
Posted by: p.lukasiak | August 10, 2006 at 21:41
Dems tend not to be as good at punchy sound bites. I hear too many repeating the Rove language, "stay the course," which sounds good even though it doesn't mean a thing when you're stuck in a ditch.
Having said that, I do wonder if a boy-who-cried-wolf effect will play out now. The impression I'm getting is that - unlike just about all the terra threats we've heard trumpeted for the last five years - this one was the real deal: Serious guys with a dangerous plan. (Remember those pathetic "terrorists" a few weeks ago in FL or wherever, who asked an FBI informant to get them uniforms? Terrorist uniforms? Riiiight.)
Most people aren't news junkies, and most working-class people aren't frequent flyers - they won't tune in just to find out whether you can take soft drinks on a plane or not. After so many terror-alert stories over the years, what will make them pay more attention to this one?
Still, Dems need to learn not "framing" but plain blunt language.
Posted by: al-Fubar | August 10, 2006 at 21:44
American People to Bush, et al.
Fool us once, shame on you, and uh uh you won't fool us again!
Posted by: David in Burbank | August 10, 2006 at 22:09
That Matthews-Fineman segment amazed me, DemFromCT. They did indeed note that Democrats were responding forcefully to the Republicans' line by pointing out that Bush's policies had actually made us less safe; and yet Fineman ended by warning that the Democrats had better respond forcefully to the Republicans' line...sheesh.
It did seem, however, that the tone wasn't as dismissive as usual; in fact, they struck me as pretty agitated. It made me wonder if some little part of them isn't increasingly aware of reality, and of what's at stake in these elections. Though that was probably just my delusion talking...
Posted by: rj | August 10, 2006 at 22:15
It's the bloody shirt. It worked for for the Republicans for a half century after the Civil War. They are hoping they get just a decade or so.
Posted by: knut wicksell | August 10, 2006 at 22:30
Here's the beginning of a great piece from the Jesse Lee--but go read the whole thing and get the links.
Posted by: emptywheel | August 10, 2006 at 22:33
MB
That is one of the most despicable statements by a politician. Accusing Lamont of aiding and abetting terrorists is so below the belt it is not funny.
Loserman has lost it. And a sore loser he sure is to stoop to such a level of dishonesty.
The CT voters will humiliate him in Nov. He can get as Rovian as he wants with a campaign from the gutter but he is on the wrong side of history and more importantly his loathsome character is out in the open.
I only have contempt for him.
Posted by: ab initio | August 10, 2006 at 23:01
i don't know if people outside of CT appreciate it, but Lamont ran an exceedingly upbeat campaign, particularly compared to Joe. The only controversial commercial was Lieberman morphing into Bush, which hit very close to home.
In that regard, it's fascinating that Sen. Morality decides to ape the R attack machine and (verbally) morph lamont into bin laden, just like the Rs did with Cleland.
i really don't think that will go over well here. Joe is still runnning for Senator from America.
Posted by: DemFromCT | August 10, 2006 at 23:45
I notice that the Brits have not followed the American example of shipping off the suspected "terrists" to GitMo, or perhaps renditioning them to Pakistan for, uh, gentle questioning, nor failing to inform them of the charges and keeping them away from lawyers. Seems that the Brits have a rather odd reaction to this global war on terror, like conforming to due process of law. And itsn't it odd that they're conducting the whole thing like a criminal investigation? That is, they are gathering evidence. And gathering evidence for what? Well, gasp! A trial in a court of law. Can you imagine?
And the first thing out of the chute in America is the walking corpse of the Homeland Security Dept Chertoff standing up there reading the script Karl Rove wrote for him, and then there was Attorney General Gonzalez with his little boy smile reading another iteration of the same script.
Bizarre that the Brits are the ones who figured it all out, without the slightest contribution from any of the "global war on terra" geniuses in the American government.
Oh, I can hardly wait till November. All these clowns will finally see the handwriting on the wall. And payback's a bitch.
Posted by: John Palcewski | August 10, 2006 at 23:50
I notice that the Brits have not followed the American example of shipping off the suspected "terrists" to GitMo, or perhaps renditioning them to Pakistan for, uh, gentle questioning, nor failing to inform them of the charges and keeping them away from lawyers. Seems that the Brits have a rather odd reaction to this global war on terror, like conforming to due process of law. And itsn't it odd that they're conducting the whole thing like a criminal investigation? That is, they are gathering evidence. And gathering evidence for what? Well, gasp! A trial in a court of law. Can you imagine?
And the first thing out of the chute in America is the walking corpse of the Homeland Security Dept Chertoff standing up there reading the script Karl Rove wrote for him, and then there was Attorney General Gonzalez with his little boy smile reading another iteration of the same script.
Bizarre that the Brits are the ones who figured it all out, without the slightest contribution from any of the "global war on terra" geniuses in the American government.
Oh, I can hardly wait till November. All these clowns will finally see the handwriting on the wall. And payback's a bitch.
Posted by: John Palcewski | August 10, 2006 at 23:52
8/10:
Great Blog Mass Murder.
Posted by: Memo | August 11, 2006 at 09:41
Unka Dick warned us about those "al qaeda types" and nobody has said for who is responsible for the latest "foiled plot", but it's bound to be Iran and/or Hezbollah.
It's quite ironic that the Cheney administration implies that they are protecting us sheeple and are the only ones that CAN protect us from those dreaded brown-skinned "Islamofacists". So why should we be afraid?
This elevated terrorism alert is nothing but foreplay for a body thumping WARGASM. Ooooooh baby, kiss me, i think i'm cuuuummmiiiiiinnnnnn.....good night.
Posted by: Undeniable Liberal | August 11, 2006 at 11:18
Unka Dick warned us about those "al qaeda types" and nobody has said for who is responsible for the latest "foiled plot", but it's bound to be Iran and/or Hezbollah.
It's quite ironic that the Cheney administration implies that they are protecting us sheeple and are the only ones that CAN protect us from those dreaded brown-skinned "Islamofacists". So why should we be afraid?
This elevated terrorism alert is nothing but foreplay for a body thumping WARGASM. Ooooooh baby, kiss me, i think i'm cuuuummmiiiiiinnnnnn.....good night.
Posted by: Undeniable Liberal | August 11, 2006 at 11:20
Unka Dick warned us about those "al qaeda types" and nobody has said for who is responsible for the latest "foiled plot", but it's bound to be Iran and/or Hezbollah.
It's quite ironic that the Cheney administration implies that they are protecting us sheeple and are the only ones that CAN protect us from those dreaded brown-skinned "Islamofacists". So why should we be afraid?
This elevated terrorism alert is nothing but foreplay for a body thumping WARGASM. Ooooooh baby, kiss me, i think i'm cuuuummmiiiiiinnnnnn.....good night.
Posted by: Undeniable Liberal | August 11, 2006 at 11:20
Unka Dick warned us about those "al qaeda types" and nobody has said for who is responsible for the latest "foiled plot", but it's bound to be Iran and/or Hezbollah.
It's quite ironic that the Cheney administration implies that they are protecting us sheeple and are the only ones that CAN protect us from those dreaded brown-skinned "Islamofacists". So why should we be afraid?
This elevated terrorism alert is nothing but foreplay for a body thumping WARGASM. Ooooooh baby, kiss me, i think i'm cuuuummmiiiiiinnnnnn.....good night.
Posted by: Undeniable Liberal | August 11, 2006 at 11:20
asian gay sex -
Posted by: bolino | December 23, 2007 at 19:52
http://bigcockspornxxx.blogspot.com/
Posted by: www | January 30, 2008 at 03:25
http://bigcockspornxxx.blogspot.com/
Posted by: www | January 30, 2008 at 03:26
big cocks porn xxx
Posted by: www | January 30, 2008 at 03:28