It appears you’ll be able to comment. Please understand this is at least in part, a trap. ...
They are going to take whatever questionable comments might appear and pass them off in press releases to discredit our grassroots supporters who actively participate in politics online.
They’ve done it repeatedly w/ comments on other blogs, and they know your disappointment in his un-yielding support for President Bush and the status quo will likely manifest itself on joe2006.
Sure… express your disappointment. Tell him he’s wrong on the issues you care about if you must. Just know he isn’t listening, and anyone that crosses the line is either doing our effort no good, and I’d guess is probably even a Connecticut for Lieberman Party supporter trying to discredit you.
This post was actually commented upon by Dan Gerstein in his initial blog posting, and labelled "cynical."
Gloriously, four days later this piece appeared on the Lieberman blog:
Is this the Lamont campaign's idea of civil discourse?
"Joe Lieberman probably killed more Americans by Rubber-Stamping Brownie for FEMA than we lost on 9/11. They're still finding corpses now."
(Posted in our comments by LiebermanForLieberman at 1:23 pm on 09.06.06 - )
I have been checking out the Lieberman blog, and so far the big story there is the huge number of comments, most of which seem to be anti-Lieberman. The net is not his friend.
The blog itself is not bad, although the color scheme is kind of depressing. It is similar to the Lamont campaign blog in that each takes pleasure in attacking the other, and that each serves as a rallying point for Lamont supporters. There's a difference in tone and general atmosphere that I can't quite pin down. Both blogs have a lot of energy, but the Lieberman blog seems a lot more defensive and angry. In part, this is probably because Tim Tagaris is speaking to friends and supporters, while the Lieberman bloggers are at odds with most of their readers.
Then again, maybe the blogs are just reflecting the general mood of each campaign.