Thursday, August 03, 2006

Lamont on Blogs: An Inconvenient Truth


"Lamont brushed past reporters Wednesday night in Bridgeport, saying: "I don't know anything about the blogs. I'm not responsible for those. I have no comment on them."

Yes Ned, you do know about blogs. In fact Ned, you said:


"I’m very appreciative of the blogs. I’m coming at this race as a bit of an outsider, with not high name recognition, and who cares passionately about the issues, but when I talk to the mainstream media, it’s all about process and money and delegates. It was the blogs who said, “Hey, there are compelling issues out there, and let’s see how Lamont stands.” Whatever the blogs’ reputation, they opened the door to more serious discourse than the mainstream media did."

So what happens to Ned Lamont under pressure? He lies.

Lieberman Assails Lamont Over Supporter's Blog Post, By Dan Balz, Washington Post Thursday, August 3, 2006.

Ned Lamont: The Truthdig Interview, Posted on Apr 25, 2006, By Blair Golson.


Sergei said...

Tell me, is Ned now responsible for everything anyone writes about him on the blogs?

Is he supposed to say he knows all that is taking place on the blogs at every single minute?

Nothing here. Move on. Lets talk about relevant issues which matter to voters and of which the Lieberman campaign almost refuses to embrace.

Anonymous said...

Let's see:

yet another very dishonest attack from Turffy - surprise, surprise.

I think that the point was not that he is unaware of blogs in general, but that he does not keep track of everything they do, nor does he have any say over what they do or do not post. His point, I would imagine, is that neither he nor the campaign approved of the picture (why would they??) and as such he was saying that he doesn't have control over what they do.

Good luck shifting the story, though - your absurd atacks on Ned in the past have really helped stem his momentum.

tj said...


You're really picking at straws here. I know you like Lieberman, but is this how to boost his candidacy? Make a strong case for your guy but not this.

Sorry, another jello spot on the sinking Lieberman ship.

cgg said...

How is that a lie? When you're on the campaign trail 24/7 there isn't much time to read every single thing every blogger has written.

Anonymous said...


Sure-Racebaiter Hamsher is pure as the driven snow and Ned, well he's Ned.

I guess we'll just disregard the fact that Ms Hamsher directed one of Ned's commercial. Or that Ms Hamsher has practically devoted her blog to destroying Joe. Or that Ms Hamsher along with Spazeboy and Lowell Wieker spent an afternoon with Colin Mcenroe pumping up Ned. Or that Ms Hamsher has rented a place in CT, along with her fellow out of staters, to capture the "revolution". Lets' conveniently forget that Ned only recently dropped his membership in an "exclusive" Greenwich country Club. And who was that strange person in an earlier Ned commercial--Markos???? Yes, Ned knows nothing, nothing about blogs.

Anonymous said...

it's not like hamsher, tom swan and rick melita didn't leave the Temptations concert together the other night in New Haven.

Hamsher plays the politics of personal attacks, and I knew she would cross the line at some point.

And Ned, what can you expect from a politician - especially when according to the qpiac poll, 60% are voting against leiberman not for ned.

pathetic blue dems.

bluecoat said...

I beleive thatWTNH Channel 8 has the source of Lamont's comment, which to me appeared to be on the fly He needs to clarify what he meant but to suggest he lied is just truffgrrl being turffgrrl.

Anonymous said...

Like Lieberman's campaign strategy, turfgrrl's attacks are increasingly flailing and desperate. They're both going down with the ship.

justavoter said...

Well that picture was taken down and that is that.
There are more pressing issues facing out state and our nation we need Universal Healtcare,stop privatization of Social Security which Leiberman was not opposed and which Republicans like Bush support.
We need to focus on Global Warming and Environmental issues,better Education for all kids,War and Peace issues like i.e. Iraq etc.
There are real issues that need to be talked about Turfgrrl's latest diversion from real issues just shows that she cannot not del with the real issues just like a Leiberman hack.
Again just a reminder who will win August 8th.
Ned Lamont who is focused on the issues which Leiberman supporters would like to divert voters away from social issues and deal with non issues called negative attacks on Ned thats all the Lie supporters know .
Turfgrrl knows how to do.
Joe Lieberman is going to lose Tuesday on Primary day and ned has people voting for him not just because they are voting against Leiberman but now they see they have a true alternative that they like instead of Joe.

clb72 said...

Still waiting for a statement from NAACP expressing outrage about the photo. Oh wait, I'm assuming that opinions of African Americans count here, and it's not just about scoring political points.

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

I am very much bemused by this "Oh, well, tut tut" attitude toward Hamsher. I can only imagine the reaction if, say, someone tangentially related to Nancy Johnson's campaign had posted something this grotesquely offensive. The hypocrisy simply boggles the mind.

bluecoat said...

according toJackson, Sharpton campaign for Connecticut candidates By SUSAN HAIGH AP Political WriterLamont's spokesperson Dupont-Diehl said, "We are appalled by this. As soon as we found out about it, we were asking that it be removed."

Charles Gaba said...

I agree that it's rediculous for Lamont to state that he "doesn't know anything about the blogs." Obviously the blogosphere has been a major force in his candidacy, and Hamsher has certainly been a major player in his campaign, paid or not.

On the other hand, he's absolutely correct that he is not responsible for what a private individual says or does on their own dime. Putting up the blackface photo was an extremely stupid thing for Hamsher to do (especially so close to the primary, when every development will be pounced on with a fine-toothed comb), but what's more important is the Lamont campaign's response to it--which was to request that it be removed, which it was.

Now, one could argue that Lamont should openly condemn the photo and/or disassociate himself from Hamsher completely, but that's a different discussion.

FactChecker said...

"I guess we'll just disregard the fact that Ms Hamsher directed one of Ned's commercial."

Really? Which ad was it and what is your source for this?

BRubenstein said... this all you got? Is this the best you can do?

Anonymous said...

You guys are all missing the point, which is lost because of Turfgrrl's accusation that Lamont lied.

Here it is: when put on the spot before the press for the first time, Lamont panicked. At best, he missspoke (even his ardent supporters must admit that he does know something about blogs) and at worst he purposely chose not to be forthright and honest.

To me, it seems that he just wanted to avoid the issue, instead of standing up and taking it on headfirst.

This is an interesting manuever, for two reasons: (1) this is the guy who said he will stand up to George Bush, but he won't stand up to the reporters; and (2) the "deer-in-the-headlights" act demonstrates that he is not ready for prime time, and we need a Senator who is ready.

Perhaps this is just a minor misstatement; but I tend to think it is more troubling than that.

turfgrrl said...

Mystery Solved: Why did Lamont's eyes bug out during the debate?

Because he had to read cue cards to find out what his answer was supposed to be.

Anonymous 1:23 asked the relevant question about Lamont's ability to "think on his feet". If he can't answer a simple question about something that has been an integral part of his campaign since the first day, then how can anyone expect him be an effective politician?

TrueBlueCT said...

Would Joe Lieberman own everything Turfgrrl publishes on this blog?

Let's hope not!

Honestly Turfy, this race is shaping up to be about huge national issues. For once in my lifetime Connecticut has the chance to actually "lead" the nation.

And you want the final weekend to be about what some out-of-state blogger did?


BRubenstein said...

Trueblue...thats all turfgrrl has...god forbid we discuss Joe's Iraq War record...and the other issues and votes he did against the base of the party.

turfgrrl said...

truebluect & brubenstein -- Really now, CT is not leading the nation, CT is lagging the nation in just about every measurable governance category. You guys really think that they way to change Washington iDC s by swapping out one guy who votes Dem 90+% of the time with another guy who will vote 90+% Dem. What does that really tell the nation?

It tells the nation that to some CT Dems it is more important to oust a centrist Dem than oust Republican congressional candidates. In short, it tells the nation that what Lieberman says in tv, is more important than what he actually does. Even more important than what Bush's administration does.

I am incensed that the "issues" that have sucked the oxygen out of every other race this cycle have been about Joe Lieberman instead of rightly focused on how this country is heading in the wrong direction.

If you are really such "true blue" Democrats then how about getting off your "rant boxes" about how bad Joe Lieberman is, and putting a little more effort into how Shays, Simmons and Johnson have voted for Bush over the people of Connecticut.

bluecoat said...

turffgrrl says CT is lagging the nation in just about every measurable governance category so keep Joe in office?

turfgrrl said...

bluecoat -- Short answer: Does replacing Lieberman change anything for CT? My answer is no. Does replacing Shays, Simmons and Johnson help get a Democratic majority in Congress, restore checks and balances to Washington and thus improve CT's congressional strength? My answer Yes. Longer answer is more nuanced and I'll hit the highlights, or lowlights according to some, in the future.

BRubenstein said...

My answer is yes..getting rid of Joe will change alot in ct...for the better...we would have a senator who i and a majority of others would agree with and be proud of...lets face it trufgrrl..joe is through now....8/9/06 is STEP 2...

turfgrrl said...

brubenstein-- If by change you mean open the door for a Republican Senator, then I can see your reasoning. But no, I disagree that Lamont will be a "blue-er" Democrat than Lieberman. Connecticut voters, as in the majority, have rejected both parties. I think that tells you where the shift left will take you.

Anonymous said...

Turrfgirll conveniently left out the inconvenient that puts the Lamont comment in the context of..."no comment":

Lamont spokeswoman Liz Dupont-Diehl tried to distance the campaign from the photo and said campaign manager Tom Swan had called Hamsher and asked that the picture be taken off the blog. "This was not the campaign's doing," she said. "We find it offensive and inappropriate. We asked that it be taken down, and it was."

But Dupont-Diehl said the campaign will not bow to the Lieberman campaign's demand that Lamont cut any ties with Hamsher. "She's not part of the campaign staff," Dupont-Diehl said. "She's an independent blogger covering the race."