(PHOTO) Sore Loserman trying to replace The Kiss with The Hug

[Greeby]

Link for pic in case it doesn't work
http://lamontblog.blogspot.com/2006/07/hug.html

[bryant69]

1. Calling him Sore Loserman is a Republican thing

It refers to the fact taht they tried to get the votes counted (as opposed to capitulating immediately). I'm not sure that's a usable insult.

Bryant
Check it out --. http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Greeby]

4. I don't know, it's been nearly 6 years

And as Lieberpuke is the Republicans best friend, maybe we should be using it more

[leftchick]

5. it really is sort of an ironic nickname

as I don't think old joe really felt bad at all about losing.

[beyurslf]

14. After he loses the primary and ignores the Dem vote to run as an

Independent, I think Sore Loserman sounds about right.

[Submariner]

2. Poor Joementum will soon be Joememory

[elehhhhna]

11. I like " j'HO "

[Cyrano]

3. Clinton is so charismatic that Lieberman didn't notice

the pee on his shoes until he got home.

[ChiciB1]

6. I Asked This Question Before But Got No Answer... What Did It

mean when they said that Clinton's visit (help) to Lieberman was tantamount to "sprinkling fairy dust" on his campaign.

Could someone please tell me if this was sarcasm or an anointment statement? I found it to be a very weird comment made by MSNBC, on their crawl last week!

[ChiciB1]

8. I Guess I Was The Only One Who Noticed This... n/t

[efhmc]

12. An anointment statement on the surface because of Bill's draw, but

really not going to chance anyone's mind. That is my personal assessment.

[Neecy]

7. There was a blurb on Kos about these buttons....

One of Lieberman's campaign staffers was seen passing out bags of these buttons, but when it was pointed out that they lacked the Union bug the campaign suddenly disavowed them! They lie like their boss.

[charlie]

9. If that's a hug

then the kiss was tonsil hockey.

[efhmc]

10. Did you read this comment and if so what do you think of it?

"i hate to puncture your bubble, but all you Ned supporters seem to be grossly overestimating your candidate's chances of success on Aug 8th. Here is a NY Times article that hopefully brings you down to sobering reality.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/27/nyregion/27lieberman.html?ex=1154145600&en=8504218db1bb5986&ei=5087%0A

As the article makes clear, the fact of the matter, a small 3% of people in the nation matter more than the 97% remaining because they wield disproportionate control of money and votes, the critial fuel for a politician's success in life.

'A loss of Jewish support could hurt the party’s chances of regaining control of Congress in November, those Democrats say'.

So chuckle all you want about Lieberman's ineptness, but the 97% of people in this state or for that matter, don't matter. Thinking otherwise is to go back to your bubble and think rich thoughts."

What I get from this is that joe controls all the Jewish votes for Democrats and if he goes, so will they. Say what?

[calico1]

13. I can't find the comment..

I'd like to hear what other CT DU'ers think. I think a lot depends on how high the Jewish turnout is and if most of them will hold thier nose and vote for him as that lady in the article states or if they are angry enough to vote for Lamont. I think that with the war raging in the ME some voters who may have thought of voting for Lamont may now be thinking they should reelect Lieberman because they still see him as a strong pro Israel Senator. I hope I am wrong........