Kos on MTP: Lieberman angry; very angry.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

He made the comment this morning and it started me thinking. I haven't really heard any actual Lieberman comments regarding Lamont or the Dem's disillusionment with him.

Does anyone know of any actual comments or criticisms that Joementum has made recently?

[Notoverit]

1. He said he didn't rule out running as independent -this sounds angry to me

[WiseButAngrySara]

11. Snicker! Why doesn't he run as what he is? A NeoCon Republican ...n/t

[JerseygirlCT]

2. I doubt you'd see any quotes from Lieberman

I think the usual tactic is to try to pretend that your primary opponent is so new and so unlikely to win that he's not even worth your notice...

I think it's telling that Lieberman's commercials up here have been getting pretty negative already WRT Lamont.

Yeah, I'd say he's scared. With reason.

[saltpoint]

3. I didn't hear the Kos interview. Did he cite sources inside Lieberman's

campaign? Or Connecticut newspaper reporters' observations?

Lieberman, at least in public, appears calm and collected over Lamont's impressive showing at the recent state convention, so if Kos has word that Joe's angry, it must be from a private source.

It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall at a Lieberman strategy meeting, though. I think Lieberman might be more surprised at Lamont's strength than angry at whoever for fueling it. And I wonder if his staff are urging him to stay in the race as a Democrat or if they are proposing he begin to gather signatures for an independent bid in case Lamont's surge continues and Ned wins the primary in August.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

9. To my memory, he said, "Lieberman is angry; very angry

." Yes, probably a private source because there have been no articles or interviews that I have seen, and I'm sure they would have printed here.

[saltpoint]

10. Well, geez. An old-school journalist would have insisted on a source,

or at least asked Kos for the source, and Kos could have said, "a source close to the Lieberman campaign," or something like that.

I want Lamont to win on the merits of his candidacy and what he offers to voters, not on vague, unconfirmed remarks by Kos.

I'm not a big Kos fan, truth be told.

On Lieberman: I can feel a kind of disappointment in his recent public remarks, a little mild shock that Lamont enjoys a surge of support. Fifteen percentage points separates them in the most recent poll -- and that sounds like a lot, but given Lamont's short time on the scene against an entrenched multi-term incumbent, I think it's a sign of trouble ahead for Holy Joe.

Just my take.

[lindisfarne]

29. I've got to agree with you on not being a big fan of Kos - I don't get why

he's seen as some kind of pundit?? I saw an interview with him and was not impressed, nor am I impressed with DailyKos. I started reading it and read it for a while, because everyone was referring to it, but eventually stopped because I just didn't see much value in it. I get a lot more from DU and a few other sites. When I heard about this "Kos conference", I just rolled my eyes.

[AnnInLa]

31. I saw the MTP with Kos, and

he did an excellent job of explaining why Progressives are not backing Joe. Russert prefaced the question by saying that the impression was that Progressives are against Joe because of his stance on the Iraq War. He asked why Progressives are then not actively working against Hillary, Biden and others who supported the war? Kos said the Progressives are against Joe because Joe constantly damages the Dem Party with his comments and his actions. He said Hillary, Biden, others do NOT constantly criticize the Dems like Joe does. He said there is NO litmus test (war), except who supports the Dem Party and who does not. Litmus is who works to strengthen the party, and who works to damage it. That is why Progressives are not supporting Joe. When asked if Joe wins the primary, will Progressives get behind him, Markos said, "of course."

You might not like Kos, but he was a brilliant and persuasive speaker for liberals on MTP, on Russert's other show (?), and in his interviews to the press during Yearly Kos.

[lindisfarne]

41. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion but I haven't seen anything

brilliant in him - somewhat intelligent, yes, but not more so than a lot of other people. What he said about why the progressives aren't backing Lieberman isn't anything new to me. He might be one of the few saying these things who actually gets covered by the MSM but that doesn't make it brilliant or unique - a lot of other people have already said these things and he's just repeating them.

I watched the Russert interview and it didn't change my opinion at all. I don't at all find him persuasive - if I hadn't come to these conclusions on my own by reading and listening to other (far more persuasive) progressives, I wouldn't be persuaded at all by him. He doesn't say anything new and I'm hoping he isn't considered the "face" of the progressives because I don't think he's going to sway people toward progressive views.
(http://movies.crooksandliars.com/nbc_mtp_markos_blog_strategy_060611a_240x180.mov)

Except I am surprised by this statement you quoted: "When asked if Joe wins the primary, will Progressives get behind him, Markos said, "of course." (I listened to the interview twice and couldn't find him saying this - maybe I missed it, or it got cut off).

Markos says in the interview that Lieberman constantly undermines Democratic party objectives - this being the case, why would/should progressives get behind Lieberman? There were other statements he made in that interview which I don't agree with, in particular, the part about wanting Democrats who are centrists ("not Left, not Right" is what he said): Progressives, quite frankly, want Democrats who are more left, although in the interests of reducing Republican power, progressives generally will vote for a centrist Democrat.

Why would the progressives get behind Lieberman? Lieberman is a Republican who calls himself a Democrat - I'd be quicker to get behind Collins (Republican from Maine) or Lincoln Chafee than I would be for Lieberman.

[saltpoint]

35. Hi, lindisfarne. Similar situation for me. Often on DU someone refers

to a post there, so I'll go over and read it. I can pick up a few things on polls there and so forth, but I always come back here.

I want the "blogosphere" to thrive, and I don't begrudge Kos his success at all. But there are a lot of other people working in other areas of politics whose contributions are at least as significant.

[robinlynne]

4. well Joe, we're very very angry too....

[salin]

12. And Joe, your statement that you are 'keeping your options open'

in terms of a run as an independent were you to lose the nomination, sorta bugs democratic voters - as it indicates that while you want US to support YOU so that we can get a democratic Senate, that YOU would prevent a democratic Senate majority from occuring if you were not to win the nomination.

[charlie]

16. Didn't take much to show his true colors, did it?

An intramural challenge that the advantages of incumbency should allow him to swat aside has made him into a blackmailer. More sad than funny. So now he's bigger than the party that put him on the track to the White House. And his turn as president of the Democratic Leadership Council was what, a Kabuki dance? He's more than ever worthy of the epithet Holy Joe. The guy must think he's the messiah.

[robinlynne]

17. and I would add f u joe.

[BlooInBloo]

5. BlooInBloo on DU: Who gives a fuck about that has-been?

:rofl:

NEDRENELINE! NEDRENELINE! NEDRENELINE!


I've heard him explicitly refuse to commit to supporting the eventual Democratic nominee, whomever he might be.

I've heard him explicitly refuse to rule out joining another party.

[CatWoman]

6. you're fast becoming my favorite poster

:rofl:

:thumbsup:

[BlooInBloo]

7. awww.... shucks.... (blush) kicks pebble....

Thanks! You've long been one of mine!

:)

[robinlynne]

18. and so sweetly modest....

[UTUSN]

25. WHAT?!1 and I say WHAT?!1 n/t

[goclark]

24. If he became an Independent, what are his chances of winning?

Are they better?
I sure hope they are not better.

To think that I trusted that clown in 2000.

I bet he was carrying trade secrets to ROVE THEN.

[BlooInBloo]

27. They're excellent. But his seat come at a great cost:

He'll no longer be a Democrat, privy to the caucus, able to get fundage, and the like. Generally speaking, no one will care what he says - and for holy joe, that's gotta be the worst thing EVER.

I think it'll be truly cutting his nose off to spite his face - a pyrric vicotry.

Naturally, there are other opinions on the matter.

[oasis]

8. Someone please bail DU'sLieberman supporter out of jail so that he

may respond to the OP's question.

[applegrove]

13. If you are referring to me.. I only always said that Lieberman had a good

record other that they ways in which he has been demeaned by Bush and sucked into war. Lots of people got sucked in. Lieberman is not the most conservative of Dem Senators.

I no longer defend him because.. what is the point. This is a democracy and anyone has the right to run against him. If he looses... well.. then isn't that an example of how not to be sucked in. McCain too. Pretty much anyone Bush has touched has been turned into a turd. But I think that is the plan. Covetous people are running the WH. As long as they have oil dollars & war dollars pumping through their veins..who gives a shit what leadership has been diminished and which American issues have been so heavily slimed that cleaning them up may take two decades.

[oasis]

22. Actually no. I had another poster in mind, but thanks for the reply. (n/t)

:hi:

[Baukunin]

26. Lieberman's dismal record - not just the War! Senator

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_detail.php?sig_id=003434M

On Public Citizen's Campaign Watch, Lieberman not only scores below New England Senators such as Snowe and Chaffee, and former maverick McCain, but he is behind a Deep South "R"s such as Richard Shelby and is tied with Lindsey Graham. Who's worse, among the "D"s? Ben Nelson. He is, actually, one of the most conservative "D" Senators, tied with Deep South "D"s.

Lieberman feigned interest in another "DU" issue yesterday. Depleted uranium. Thanks to Ned Lamont being hot on his heels, he's finally recognized, after 15 years, that Bushies have poisoned Iraqis and U.S. soldiers both, and contaminated the country for eternity.

[newyawker99]

30. Hi Baukunin!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[BlooInBloo]

28. Holy crap! I think you just found his campaign slogan!!!

"Lieberman is not the most conservative of Dem Senators. "

:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:

I've heard of damning with faint praise, but that just beets awl!

:rofl:

[Bombero1956]

14. a quote from today's paper

"My opponent is running against George Bush and the war in Iraq, which doesn't take much courage in a Democratic primary" "I've been an opponent of most everything George Bush has done, but I'm not going to play partisan games our with national security." I think Joe forgot what opponent means.

[oasis]

21. Iraq War=National Security.

:wtf:What next Joe.... Osama is Saddam?

[ima_sinnic]

32. he apparently STILL doesn't "get it" (n/.t)

[IDemo]

15. Joe Lie'b caught on tape:

http://www.gargaro.com/MaRvInWaVs/angry.wav

[robinlynne]

20. oh well, bye bye senator.

[Robbien]

19. Then you haven't seen any of Lieberman's attack ads

Which grossly misrepresented Lamont's voting record. The kind of attack ads which Lieberman wrote in his autobiography were actions which are despicable and dishonorable. Of course Lieberman was reacting to attack ads directed against him in a previous campaign. But I guess if Lieberman does it himself it is okay.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

23. No, I live in Florida.

Our pre-election season has been blessed with daily Kathryn Harris sightings: riding a horse in full makeup and skin tight sweater...cuddlysnuggling up to jeb and junior who both have recently given her the cold shoulder...lunching with the pugly ladies at the local country club. Daily msm coverage, and she still can't buy a clue or a vote.

[UTUSN]

33. I wish Joementum had been a little angry when debating CHEENEE n/t

[porphyrian]

34. How can anyone tell when Joe's angry?

What, he mumbles?

[Larkspur]

36. See Daily Kos diary "Joe Lieberman's meltdown"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/22/22526/1054

It's got links to the radio interview Hartford Courant reporter Colin McEnroe had with Joe Lieberman back in March. Lieberman really comes off whiny in that interview.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

40. Oh, ok, that was sort of angry I guess.

Not exactly Zell Miller angry, but certainly angry for Joe. Say, he should really be more careful about being misquoted. If he didn't really say what they thought he really said...well, shucks, a fella could really be misunderstood and lose an election over something like that.

[shance]

37. This is a waste of space. Is this their top priority at the Kos?

How stupid and silly when there are real issues to be addressed.

Oops. My bad. Marcos got an interview by Plame conspirator and Neocon sellout Tim Russert yesterday, so now Marcos is MOVIN ON UP.

Get ready for real quality coming down on the Kos.

[Emit]

38. I caught most of the MTP interview

and, No, this isn't their top priority at Kos -- the Lieberman q&a was part of a broader topic. The bigger topic focused on the Kos Convention in LV, and, overall, discussed liberal bloggers and political activists: "The blogosphere, the Internet, Decision 2006 and 2008." In addition to Kos, Byron York of nationalreview.com, Jonathan Alter author of "The Defining Moment", and Amy Walter of The Cook Report were on.

Being primarily a DU reader/poster, I feel that Kos is doing us all a great service. I go there only on occasion, and have no great affinity to that site. But, Kos's message and attempt to validate liberal bloggers, message board users and netroots activism, IMHO, is an important part of the current populist movement.

The transcript is here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13189411/page/3/

Video Here: http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?f=00&t=m5&g=e10461f7-89e1-415c-aa58-80d1b6f8066e&p=angietest

I just finished reading "Crashing the Gate" by Jerome Armstrong and Markos. While my first impression was that it was pretty "light," about half way into it I realized that the intent was more about an introduction to the populist, netroots movement and how it is making its mark on the DC Democratic establishment (it also derides the current Democratic establishment). It's worth a read -- it's quick to finish. And, for what it's worth, Kos and Jerome make several references to Democratic Underground -- at least three favorable references that I recall.

[shance]

39. Thanks Emit. You make good points.

n/t