Monday, June 26, 2006

On Killer Bees and Lamont

In an imaginary conversation with a rational Lamont supporter, I asked them what will happen if the war ended. Well that's not going to happen until Ned Lamont gets to the Senate, they retorted. And of course that's when Newsweek broke the story that a plan drafted by new Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki asked for a time table for US troop withdrawal. Then on Sunday the NY Times touts the leaked plans by General Casey Jr. to reduce combat brigades from the current 14 to 5 or 6 by the end of 2007. This means that the Bush administration is looking for a way out with a quick declaration of victory. Just in time to bolster all those GOP congresscritters who desperately, when not seeking housewives, seek some positive war on terror news or conversely scary news in America to energize some sort of voter pulse.

Meanwhile deep inside the Honeycomb Hideout, the nucifera-roots were busily engaged in typical hive activity. With google as my intrepid guide, I entered "killer bees" as my search term and discovered:

Though their venom is no more potent than native honey bees, Africanized bees attack in far greater numbers and pursue perceived enemies for greater distances. Once disturbed, colonies may remain agitated for 24 hours, attacking people and animals within a range of a quarter mile from the hive.--Attack of the "Killer Bees"

Which brings us to the strange phenomena of what happens when a critical post of Ned Lamont appears. Instead of unique and diverse debate, a chorus of similar posts flood the comments. I suppose this obsession with guarding the hive is important when a candidate can't really differentiate what he would vote on differently than the candidate he's challenging. In a blind vote test, for example, a rational Lamont supporter would not be able to tell the difference between Senator Lieberman's and Senator Dodd's voting records. The difference is that negligible. The only fuel that is driving the Lamont candidacy is Lieberman and his steadfast conviction that for National Security reasons, we must continue our occupation of Iraq and continue the war on terror. Lieberman helps this along by writing and talking about this convictions, not realizing that he's trapped in the no win position of walking into a swarm of angry bees fueled by head hive Daily Kos.

So what happens if Bush out manuoevers Kos, and starts that troop pull out? What will the Lamont candidacy look like? Well, it'll look a lot like Lieberman's. Lamont has yet to define what he would vote on differently than Lieberman. Sure, maybe Lamont would spend more time saying the daily kos talking points, but is that really a good reason to vote for someone? Is that the fundamental rational of a Lamont supporter; that Lamont will echo the daily rants on daily kos? Let the buzz begin.

9 comments:

Gabe said...

Turfgrrl - If you ever want to talk to a rational Lamont supporter, just ask me. There is no reason to dream up a conversation...

Gabe said...

D_R - recognize snark. I was not taking a shot at Turfgrrl, just letting her know I was available for actual conversations... ;)

Genghis Conn said...

Satire, TrueBlue. Satire.

And if I called Joe Lieberman and his supporters a bunch of weasel-chewing dirtbags? You'd be fine.

Gabe said...

D_R - No harm, no foul...

tparty said...

Genghis Conn said...
And if I called Joe Lieberman and his supporters a bunch of weasel-chewing dirtbags? You'd be fine.

And you would be going against your own code of "civility":

---

Please don't:

--Call someone an idiot, or another name
--Insult someone else's intelligence, loyalties or beliefs in a personal way (it's okay to disagree, not to insult)
--Make disparaging comments about someone's life outside of blogging
--Make fun of another poster
--Accuse someone of being a staffer for a rival campaign
--Be a jerk

ctkeith said...

Turdgrrl,

I stand by what I said and am proud of who I am.

Can you say the same,Jackie,or do you need to hide your Conflicts of interest by remaining Anonymous?

Gabe said...

For the record...

According to the Q-Poll 23b, for the people who said that Lieberman does not deserve to be re-elected, the largest answer as to why was his position on the war (20%, 30% of Dems).

Second largest? Combine Too conservative/Right wing/Too Republican with Too Close to Bush - 18%, 24% of Dems.

That is the obvious difference between Lieberman and Dodd and it doesn't show up when looking at 5,000 votes (70% of them procedural).

ctkeith said...

Turdgrrl,

You chose to make this thread about outing me even though I never even commented on it.

My names out there for all to see and google away to see if my motives are pure.

Isn't only fair that now you put yours out there and see if you can stand the same scrutiny?

You asked to be a front pager here because you wanted the spotlight.Lets see if you can take the heat that comes with the light.

ctblogger said...

Oh Turfgrrl,

I tried as hard as I could to not comment on you but you're so dishonest when ctkeith replied to your singling him out (although he didn't comment in this post).

To say you just picked that quote out of the air is just laughable (which is just in par with your amaturish post).

See ya on the 8th :-)


If you can't take the heat, then maybe you shouldn't be posting here.