Lieberman – Lamont Debate And The WaPo
I'm (obviously to anyone who reads here with any frequency) not a real big fan of the way media covers a lot of stories these days. This Washington Post story about the Lieberman/Lamont debate is about the closest to the neutral ideal I have seen in a long, long time. It does not start with loaded sentences, it seems pretty fairly balanced and it describes the problem in Connecticut very well.
Lieberman headed into the night with vastly diminished party support after a nearly four-decade political career that included a turn as his party's 2000 vice presidential nominee. Earlier this week, he signaled that he will run as an independent this fall if he loses the Aug. 8 primary — a possibility, according to recent polls. Lieberman's agreeing to debate Lamont on television was interpreted by some political analysts here as evidence that he is worried about the primary.
Connecticut, with its large pool of Democrats and independents, has become a focal point for the opposition to the war in Iraq. Just as Republicans are feeling heat throughout the country for supporting an increasingly unpopular war, Lieberman and moderate Republicans from the Northeast are finding that backing the president's Iraq policy can cost them substantial support within their traditional base.
Three House members from Connecticut — Nancy L. Johnson, Christopher Shays and Rob Simmons — are considered among the most endangered GOP incumbents on the ballot in November.
Lieberman, 64, a three-term senator who once was praised by party leaders for his independent thought and civility of spirit, has become a lightning rod for Democratic animosity because of his unflinching support for the war and his rebuke last month of Senate Democrats' calls for either setting a deadline for withdrawing troops or reducing troop levels beginning later this year.
Lamont has relentlessly hammered Lieberman as a rubber stamp for the president's war policies. One well-circulated image of the Lamont campaign, featured on buttons and in a television ad, shows Bush embracing Lieberman after the 2005 State of the Union address and appearing to kiss him on the cheek.
Lieberman used his opening remarks in Thursday's hour-long debate to complain that Lamont "seems to be running against me based on my stand on one issue, Iraq, and he is distorting who I am and what I have done."
"Let me tell you some things that may surprise at least Ned but shouldn't," he added. "I know George Bush. I've worked against George Bush. I've even run against George Bush, but I'm not George Bush."
Lamont disputed Lieberman's charges that he has equivocated on the war and avoided taking tough stands, at one point snapping, "You're the only person in Connecticut who's confused by my position on the war."
At the end of it all, my reading is that Lieberman beat heck out of Lamont.
By TC@LeatherPenguin, July 6, 2006 @ 10:40 pm
I don’t know about “beat the heck out of Lamont,” but he sure as hell showed Mr. Mentos was not even close to ‘Ready For Prime Time.’
And combining a bit of Bentson’s “I knew Jack Kennedy” and “There you ago again” a la Reagan certainly showed who was the adult involved in this typical dog and pony show.
By Gaius, July 6, 2006 @ 10:44 pm
The nutroots are proclaiming a mega victory.
That’ll work.
Not.
By TC@LeatherPenguin, July 6, 2006 @ 10:49 pm
I called a friend in Insurancetown (Stanford) for his reaction, and he said “Really? They were on TV?”
Me: “you were watching the Yankee game, weren’t you?”
Him: “Like you weren’t?”
Me: “At least I was switching in between pitches.”
By Shawn, July 7, 2006 @ 6:53 am
Gaius, the story did seem neutral. Is the reporter new? Did he/she flunk out of journalism school? Doesn’t he/she understand American journalism? I believe the most damning thing for Lamont is that Lieberman stated that Lamont had donated to his campaign three times, even AFTER Lieberman’s position on the war had been established!
BTW, the Kossacks will use the Reaganesque quote against him (”See, he’s acting like a Republican!”)
By Gaius, July 7, 2006 @ 6:59 am
They already are. Mind you they sound exactly like children: “Look what HE did!”
If by “Republican” they mean “effective” they are correct.
By Black Jack, July 7, 2006 @ 1:01 pm
I watched the debate. Lieberman came off as the adult, but Lamont had more energy and was quicker and more direct in his attacks. Also, Lieberman seemed old and his face was a bit puffy, while Lamont gets points for health and vigor.
There was plenty of opportunity for partisans to see whatever they expected or hoped for. Although the decision goes to Lieberman he didn’t come close to giving Lamont a good shellacking, so Lamont can claim a moral victory, but only because Lieberman didn’t kick him around hard enough. Lieberman was going easy on Lamont.