Friday, October 06, 2006

Lamont Attacks Lieberman on Hastert Stance

Hey, it's working for other Democrats. A recent release from the Lamont campaign is attacking Joe Lieberman over his stance regarding the resignation of Dennis Hastert, who has been called on to resign for his role in the Foley scandal. The Lamont campaign sent out this release today:
TWO DAYS AGO, LIEBERMAN CRITICIZED THOSE CALLING FOR HASTERT'S RESIGNATION: According to the 10/5/06 New York Times, Lieberman refused to call on Hastert to resign, and instead attacked those calling for his resignation as partisan. Lieberman issued a statement saying Congress should take its time in dealing with the situation, even though major news agencies have reported that this scandal has been covered up for months or years. Similarly, Lieberman on Don Imus's radio show refused to call for Hastert to resign.

LIEBERMAN YESTERDAY AGAIN CRITICIZED THOSE CALLING FOR HASTERT'S RESIGNATION: In remarks in Torrington yesterday, Lieberman again reiterated his attacks on those calling for Hastert's resignation, saying, "Right now I’d say this thing is spinning out of control, it’s become another partisan frenzy in Washington, that’s the wrong way to go at it."

Lamont, of course, is calling for Hastert's immediate resignation.

Democrats nationwide are benefitting from the Foley scandal, and this seems to be what Lamont is doing here. But maybe there's a legitimate gripe.

Lieberman said the following during the Lewinsky scandal:
In choosing this path, I fear that the president has undercut the efforts of millions of American parents who are naturally trying to instill in our children the value of honesty. As most any mother and father knows, kids have a singular ability to detect double standards. So, we can safely assume that it will be that much more difficult to convince our sons and daughters of the importance of telling the truth when the most powerful man in the nation evades it. Many parents I have spoken with in Connecticut confirm this unfortunate consequence.

If Hastert knew about Foley and covered it up, as is seeming more likely, then calling for him to take responsibility by resigning isn't just a partisan attack. He's the third-most powerful man in the country, and he seems to have lied or stupidly ignored the facts about this case.

Is that double-standard coming back? Imagine a high school principal knowing about a teacher who had relationships with the students. Imagine that the principal ignored the situation, perhaps only telling the teacher to knock it off. Wouldn't we want that principal fired?

I suppose the opposing argument is that we should deal with this with a level-headedness that wasn't practiced by anyone in 1998. I think it's too late for that.

Perhaps this is the opening the Lamont campaign has been looking for. If they can portray Lieberman as someone who is going easy on Hastert, then maybe they can start picking up a few points in the polls. Democrats nationwide are taking advantage of this situation. It remains to be seen whether it will put them, Lamont included, over the top next month.

Update: 9:07pm

I neglected to include Lieberman's response to Lamont's attacks:
“First, Joe Lieberman put out a strong statement on Sunday condemning Foley’s behavior as immoral and reprehensible, called for an independent investigation into the House leadership’s handling of the
matter, and said that if anyone knew about Foley’s predatory behavior and failed to do anything about it, they should be held fully accountable. (http://www.joe2006.com/blog_details.asp?id=85)

“That was three full days before Ned even bothered to make a statement on the matter. It is quite telling that Ned had nothing to say about this national outrage until he could find a way to attack Joe Lieberman about it — and that most of his statement focused on condemning Joe Lieberman instead of Mark Foley.

“Second, today on the Chaz and AJ morning radio show on WPLR, Joe Lieberman explicitly said that it if we learn that Speaker Hastert knew about Foley’s predatory behavior and did nothing to stop it, then Hastert should resign.

“In that interview and in his other comments on the matter, Senator Lieberman has argued that we need an independent investigation to determine not only what Speaker Hastert knew and did, but what other members of the House leadership knew and did, so that they would be held accountable as well if they ignored or covered up Foley’s behavior.

“Third, during his appearance Wednesday morning on the Imus in the Morning Show, Joe Lieberman clearly and forcefully denounced the House Republicans for being too partisan in their response to public criticism of their handling of the scandal.

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

If Hastert knew about Foley and covered it up, as is seeming more likely, then calling for him to take responsibility by resigning isn't just a partisan attack. He's the third-most powerful man in the country, and he seems to have lied or stupidly ignored the facts about this case.

You state "If Hastert knew", so do we know if he knew. Don't always believe what you read in the paper either. Most papers are known to have their own agendas. Maybe Joe is doing the right thing and waiting for all the evidence to come out.

Maybe just maybe someone wants to know all the facts and not just the person political party....

Mr X said...

Ned Lamont will do anything and say anything now Because he is a desperate man who knows he is losing the US Senate Race. Reality is beginning to set in and the money (except for his own) is drying up.

Ned's Message is falling on deaf ears and The Liberals beating the Immediate Withdrawal from Iraq drum isnt resonating with most of us voters who will be supporting Lieberman.

Of Course Ned is going to jump on Lieberman about Hastert Anything to get some publicity. A desperate man who knows his campaign is on fumes and fading fast.

CommonSenseDem said...

Lieberman's words are used out of context. He didn't call on Hastert to resign immediately because he believes that an independent investigation should be done before anyone is asked to resign.

On Fox 20 (or whatever it is in CT) last night, they had a preview of this week's "Beyond the Headlines" with Lieberman. Lieberman flat out says that IF IT IS DISCOVERED THAT HASTERT KNEW BEFOREHAND, THEN HE SHOULD, WITHOUT QUESTION, BE ASKED TO RESIGN.

Lamont is twisting words to grasp at anything that could possibly bring Lieberman down. The fact of the matter is, however, Lieberman's stance on this issue is good. He's basically saying, "Before anyone (of either party) is asked to resign over an issue, there should be an independent investigation."

Once again, Lamont is reaching...
Let's see, if this were a Democratic member of Congress, would Lamont have the same reaction? I think not. If this were a Democratic member of Congress, would Lieberman have the same reaction? Yes. Enough said.

Anonymous said...

So Lamont campaigns with Jackson, Sharpton, & Kennedy and he's questioning Liebrman? Wow!!!

J said...

I agree with the comment from the oxymoronic guy (commonsensedem). Lamont is grasping.

His support peaked during the primary. That election proved that there are about 146,000 wackos in CT. If your only message is that "this other guy stinks", you might quickly attract a limited number of supporters. (Those who think he stinks too.) But, how do you get the support of other people if you don't stand for anything else?

The lesson here is that a negative message can carry you only so far.

Anonymous said...

Lieberman was nominated at his party's convention earlier this year by the coke snrting mayor of Bridgeport, John Fabrizi, and Lieberman has never called for fabrizi to step down. This statement on hastert is consistent with his values, he values votes from anybody who will get them for him. Blunt and Boehner have taken a tougher stance than Joe but then they are looking at moving up in the Congressional food chain. I wonder what Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell are praying for and about these days.

CommonSenseDem said...

By the way, have you guys ever been to www.beyonddelay.com?

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) (Lamont's buddy), is listed as one of the TOP 20 most corrupt members of Congress! http://www.beyonddelay.org/summaries/waters.php

Um, yeah..Lamont should really be making suggestions about Congressional resignations!

J, FYI--

First, I'm a woman (not a guy). And second, I don't think it's oxymoronic to think that you can be a democrat and have common sense. My common sense perspective is that while we should have a good healthy discussion about this mess in Iraq, challenging Joe Lieberman is a total waste of time, money (well, just Ned Lamont's money) and energy and a total distraction from many other important races where we could actual win seats.


I know there are many that disagree with me, but that is my perspective on common sense as it applies to POLITICS (not policy).

Patricia Rice said...

Hi Bruce....I miss your commentary. How's negative Ned been doing lately? Have you noticed that some Democratic candidates are asking not to have LaMont/DeStefano signs on lawns with theirs? Looks like you extreme liberals really did a good job to help the party. Of course, you and I both know which party you helped but we'll just keep that our little secret:)

Brian said...

Here is a short excerpt from something I wrote recently last month.

A politician such as Connecticut 's own Joe Lieberman will criticize and distance himself from the Bush Administration (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld) during election time when he knows he needs additional votes for re-election when he has been their number one supporter up until the mid-term elections. All I can say is that I'm outraged and, in addition, pissed off that my tax money is going to support this man's self-serving re-election causes. When intelligence reports come out this week clearly stating that the Iraq war is getting much worse and that our country is less safe, how should anybody respect the people in power in this country?

Why should anybody vote for Joe Lieberman when he came out with speech just moments after these reports were leaked stating that we should stay the course in Iraq or else our security is at the terrorists' control? Our country isn't safer...airport security is still a joke, our ports aren't any safer than they were five years ago and the homeland security program is just a cause for more pork barrel projects lobbyists thrive on

Brian said...

Stop drinking the wannabe republican koolaid people who are using this blog please for god's sake!!!.....

I guess the new code word for prescribing a level of professionalism and accountability in politics is calling it NEGATIVITY if you are on the OTHER SIDE.

I want to say to you all of you on this blog that you know the whole negative blah blah blah argument is total and complete bullshit.
What negative is I will tell you clearly . It's a weak senator who doesn't stand up to a bullshit-republican adminstration.

Wait Joe Lieberman is that weak senator as well as part of the problem because he enables-supports these criminable policies by the Bush Adminstration.

Saying Lamont will do anything for attention is really saying Joe Lieberman can't effectively do the job himself, so Ned Lamont will do it for him. That is the common sense the United States Senate needs, in which, Lieberme doesn't demonstrate.

Ned Lamont's education and medicare policies along with his REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE will bring a new innovative brand of thinking.

One last thought on negativity!! There is nothing better when the Lieberme campaign wants to trash Clark and Lamont for standing up to thier bullshit claims on the war.

Okay, Joe you know more about the war than the professionals who create the intelligence reports.

Anonymous said...

"A politician such as Connecticut 's own Joe Lieberman will criticize and distance himself from the Bush Administration "

You are aware that Joe pretty much votes the Democrat party line 90% of the time correct?

The Democrat party is eating it's own trying to oust a SITTING Democratic senator who votes pretty much the full party line aside from Iraq.

That.. really says a lot.

BTW- I'm really bent some scum keep stealing my Joe signs off the front lawn, I have a rude surprise waiting for the lawbreakers the next time it happens.

P.S. If the Speaker of the house is required to step down for a non-scandal I think Nancy Pelosi should step down for refusing to testify under oath what she knew about those e-mails for months.

Anonymous said...

"Why should anybody vote for Joe Lieberman when he came out with speech just moments after these reports were leaked stating that we should stay the course in Iraq or else our security is at the terrorists' control? Our country isn't safer..."

Oh?

Seems to me there has not been a major attack on US soil since 9/11.

Anonymous said...

"Ned Lamont's education and medicare policies along with his REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE will bring a new innovative brand of thinking. "

Innovative? You mean socialist don't you?

Joe has years of real world experience in politics compared to Ned.

The same Ned who bashes WalMart while holding onto thousands of dollars in Walmart stock?

Anonymous said...

I agree with Brian, we have a bullshit senator who will support unaceptable policies. Everybody, stop drinking the republican koolaid supplied by Karl Rove. If your happy with stay the course (failed war-healthcare-engergy policies) and a couple hundred thousand more soilders getting thier heads blown off. You must rethink why voting is part of our democracy and constitution. Voting for Joe Lieberman is wrong and anti-american. I hope you are all satisifed with gay child pedophiles running around the whithouse. Atleast, Ned Lamont will open his mouth and stand up for his American family values.

Brian said...

Joe is wrong on the war and many other policies. Yea joe go vote for torture. Our country isn't any safer..the same amount of shit that got through the airports and ports before 9/11 still does. Go tell the soilders and innocent civilians in Iraq who are dying everyday. There is so much evidence that supports it. If you are mad that the dems are selling out thier own, then why didn't joe win the primary. Right he lost because the democratic party doesn't believe in supporting bullshit policies. You may not agree, but when you party votes you out....you are always wrong. I don't believe in whinning and cryaing after when you lose the primary. Joe Lieberman is a self serving baby and the majority of the dems I know are voting for change. (NED LAMONT)

Anonymous said...

If anybody wants to bash Lamont for having a non direct holding of walmart stock with his goldman sachs broker. YOU NEED TO GET A LIFE! At least Ned Lamont believes in changing this pathetic republican congress and will bring all his ideas to the table.

If you believe voting for a man who supports legalizing torture, giving away billions to oil companies in the form of criminal tax breaks, and is Dick Cheney's number one man for supporting a fake war. Then I say you are voting for voting in another village idiot.

Anonymous said...

"failed war"

Failed- How so? 50+ million people freed from tyrannical governments is a failure?

"failed healthcare"

Like Hillarys? I seem to recall her holding up one of those plastic cards during a speach indicating I'd have one someday...

"engergy policies"

We have all the dem talking points going on this post. Rove, failed healthcare, failed war, failed energy plan, etc.

Do you have anything of substance to bring to this discussion?

"I hope you are all satisifed with gay child pedophiles running around the whithouse."

This.. from the party that endorses gay scoutmasters and Gerry Studds, simply too rich.

The hypocracy is astounding- On one hand whe have a gay Republican who gets outed for having internet CHAT with an 18 year old and on the other we have a gay Democrat who bangs a 17 year old male paige and gets three standing ovations.

Frankly sir, you disgust me.

Anonymous said...

50 million people freed. We are talking about Iraq, not some holy mission where you died and came back from the dead. Have you been alive for the last four years. Stop listening to Sean Hannity and his frivilious claims on how George Bush is the second comming of Jesus.

I'm confused, almost 400 billion dollars have been misguidely spent and over 133,000 innocent civilians have died. That doesn't even include the terrorists we have created which kill our soilders daily.

Your arguments have no substance and shows you have absolutley no clue what you are talking about. Every foreign policy expert and professor in the world who studies these issues SAY BUSH is wrong. Those following this race say Joe Lieberman is part of the massive problem.

In my opinion, the most Amreican thing to do is criticize this president and Joe Lieberman who supports these bullshit policies. I'm only one of the hundreds of thousands of indiviuals who will vote for change. VOTE NED LAMONT. Ned Lamont gets it. Experience Joe Lieberman has wasted all his experience on serving his own personal gains. Enough of Joe Lieberman. Enough!!

Anonymous said...

JUST MUST GO!
JUST MUST GO!
JUST MUST GO!

I agree with the pro-Lamont posts. Joe Lieberman is part of the massive problem, in which, self servingness, is more important than producing results for the American people. Joe doesn't care about the working man or woman. When he was in Hartford this summer shooting the movie ( or buying manufactured support) for his doors to doors campaign. Residents of Hartford all said they where shocked to see Lieberman and haven't seen him since the last Connecticut senate election.



Joe you are a gruesome boob for disagreeing with the intelligence reports. You say its wrong and unamerican to disagree with the president. Well unlike the president the intelligence reports have INTELLIGENCE!!

Anonymous said...

Nothing like when republicans want to save their own butts. In one month we will have a democratic majority congress. Thank you!!

Shadow said...

When will these anti-Lamont propogandists realize how stupid they sound calling him a fringe or extreme candidate?

For months, at least 60% of Americans have believed Iraq was wrong to go into in the first place, and the numbers in CT are much higher. By every measure, Lamont represents the majority viewpoint, not an extreme left viewpoint.

It was bad enough when you guys pulled this stuff before the primary, now the guy wins and you guys are STILL calling the majority of the American public extremists. And if Lamont wins the Senate seat in November, he'll still be called the extreme left senator. And if every Republican were to be thrown out of office, you'd still call him be an extreme left senator. And if the entire country were to turn on neo-con policies and support Lamont, down to every person but you, you would still be alone standing outside the door in the cold calling him a fringe extremist nut.

And that is why, my friends, when it comes to this argument, that NO ONE believe ANYTHING you guys have to say.

disgruntled_republican said...

Brian, you say tax money is going to support this man's self-serving re-election causes....

How exactly is that happening?

Anon 905-

In one sentence you state You must rethink why voting is part of our democracy and constitution and in the VERY NEXT SENTENCE you say this: Voting for Joe Lieberman is wrong and anti-american. I hope you are all satisifed with gay child pedophiles running around the whithouse.

Ya, that makes a whole hell of a lot of sense. It is my right to vote for whom every the hell I want. If you have a problem with that, try to stop me. I vote at 8am on Nov 7 at Prudence Crandall School in Enfield.

Anonymous said...

If anybody is a disgruntled republican living in ct, please vote for alan schlesinger. Joe Lieberman is a republican, as if. Alan is going to get atleast 8-10 percent of the vote on election day. It sucks that Lieberman will be anywhere from 5th to 8th on the ballot in most towns. That will cost him 3-5 percent of the vote. There is no doubt this will be the textbook case used for future elections regarding the issue of ballot postion .