Joebituaries
August 8, 2006 at 8:47 am
The Washington Post isn’t waiting around for all that boring voting stuff to offer Post-mortems in today’s Ned Lamont vs. Joe Lieberman Connecticut Senate primary. Another day, another front-page story on what it means for politics and the Democratic Party that Lieberman lost. Of course, they’ll have to wait for actual voting results to come in tonight to help fill out the story line.
The Balz in Lieberman’s court, just like the 2004 presidential campaign at the Iowa State Fair.
Sonny Jurgenson said,
August 8, 2006 @ 9:10 am
“The Balz in Lieberman’s court” — Extreme Mortman, on today’s Washington Post “Joebituary.”
TexasRainmaker.com said,
August 8, 2006 @ 4:32 pm
If only the Kos kids had as much confidence in the outcome. Instead, they seem to be retreating in the face of another possible election loss.
Phenobarbarella said,
August 8, 2006 @ 6:21 pm
Oh, please. Dan Balz’s comments are filled with the usual qualifiers “if,” “should (Lamont win)” and “might.” To call this a pre-emptive declaration of victory for Lamont is as silly as saying that a story linked from that page, titled “Lamont’s Lead Slips on Eve of Primary” (and printed on page A3, not H-37 or similar, which you might expect if the WaPo really had gone in the tank for Lamont) is a pre-emptive obituary for the Quixotic Lamont campaign. The argument could as easily be made for that as for your silly assertion above.
Then again, conservatarians of a certain stripe - one might even be tempted to call them Liebertarians - seem rather fond of the whole notion of pre-emption in general, which might explain your seeming fascination with it as regards the Post’s coverage of this undeniably significant race.
annie said,
August 8, 2006 @ 9:36 pm
I think more people would have voted for him, if only he would stand up straight. His posture defeats him.
Jamie McArdle said,
August 8, 2006 @ 9:49 pm
I can’t agree, Phenobarbarella, with the equivalence you draw between a front-page story about Lieberman’s being “out of touch” with CT voters and hewing too close to the Republican party line and a third-page story about Lamont’s maverick final-hours strategy of not publicizing all his appearances (”too disruptive,” he says) and spending chunks of his personal fortune to run against an incumbent whose grip on the seat has been slipping. The difference in tone is subtle but, to my ear at least, present.
It’s not unreasonable to assume Lamont would win the primary, based on pre-primary polls. It’s just ironic to present Lieberman as a kind of combination emperor-wannabe and sad sack, when six years ago he was part of the “American Dream Team,” before the count is in.
John Blake said,
August 8, 2006 @ 10:42 pm
For partisan purposes, we hope that Lamont with extreme-leftist help defeats Lieberman by a low margin –say, 2 to 4%– in today’s Connecticut primary, and that Lieberman as an Independent then beats Lamont by an equally small margin come November.
First off, this emboldens the Kossites to inject McGovern virus into the infantile-regressive D-rat body politic, rendering the planarian node of that august assemblage susceptible only to more cornflakes at breakfast: I.e., the Gore/Kerry/MzBill stem-cell nominated in 2008 will go the way of its precursor 36 years before.
Second, a Joe Independent trouncing of Lamont’s Billionaire Boys’ Club (these days, a typical D-rat coterie) would not only tend to neuter Kos, Soros et.al., but preserve an –admittedly small– grain of sense in our Olympian Senate chamber at the expense to D-rats of a loyal caucus member (though Big Joe would of course make nice to Tom Daschle’s back-stabbing successors even as they plunge daggers through his toga on the very Chamber steps).
On the realist side, Rick Perry for President, 2008 - 2016, followed by Jeb Bush (Bush III) in 2017 - 2024. To date, we’ve had a run of three consecutive 2-term Presidents only once (1800 -1824); four would be unprecedented. But by 2024, the atmospheric effects of ocean warming since the 1850s will have buried the Western Hemisphere under layers of glaciation scheduled to persist over 120,000 years.
Patricia Dumas said,
August 13, 2006 @ 6:14 pm
Dear Joe,
From one yenta, to another, I say to you “give it up”!. Seriously.. You look bad, the jig is up. Accept it. My goodness..I don’t want another Jew out there to look bad.. and for now, you look like a sore loser,with newly found republican friends in your bid as an independent.
Give someone else a chance. You lost. You had a great run, and a great life- the people of CT have spoken to you.
Retire and have fun–(I won’t say to “Miami”) cause my dad always told me not to make fun of our own kind.
Sincerely,
P. Dumas
a jew from Jersey