Breaking Down

Joe's bringing the stars into town, now isn't he?  Yesterday it was the creepy ex-pol Bob Kerrey, and today Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu is in Hartford.  Landrieu is probably the worst Democratic Senator in the caucus, with the possible exception of Max Baucus.  She's an utter Bush sycophant, even going above and beyond the reddish tinge of Louisiana.  If you're looking for a reason that New Orleans is still devastated today, you have to look to her utter failure of leadership in forcing Bush to do anything to deal with the situation.  She's a moral ghost, someone who won't fight for her city or her state because she wants to be loved by insiders.  Just watch her being destroyed by Anderson Cooper in the clip above.  I suppose it's fitting she's in town stumping for Joe.

It's rather stunning actually that Lieberman is going to talk about Katrina, since he rubber-stamped Michael Brown's confirmation and talked afterwards about how it was his duty to make sure the President's nominee got through the process.  He even defended Brown after the disaster, saying that it was up to the President whether Brown stayed at FEMA.

This is confusing, because this is not an issue that's good for him.  It might not be bad for him, though I suspect he won't look great in the press today and tomorrow since the Michael Brown confirmation is such an obvious mistake.  But I have to wonder why he's not just staying above the fray.  My guess, and I'm going to dive into psychology here, is that he's just emotionally devastated and needs comfort from his Washington allies.  He's being challenged for the first time in 18 years for his Senate seat, and he really hates it because his full record is coming under review.  Here he is yesterday backtracking on the idea that the invasion of Iraq has made the country safer, a point which became obvious when he and Bob Kerrey contradicted each other on that point at the presser.

Lieberman is a broken man.  He's now saying things like "A senator can only do so much. This is ultimately policy set by the commander in chief and his military." These kinds of statements totally undercut the idea that he has presented a new plan for Iraq, since he's acknowledging that he thinks Bush will continue to set military policy.

I'm going to the Rajun Cajun later today in Hartford to the Joe event at 1:30.  I'm fascinated by Senator Lieberman.  He's a brilliant, charming, and morally hollow politician who is caught in the midst of a changing country he is losing touch with.  It would be a tragedy, if he weren't such a narcisist.

I would watch for tightening polls in the next week or so.  It's getting closer, certainly closer than 17 points.

Tags: Alan Schlesinger, Connecticut, CT-Sen, Joe Lieberman, Ned Lamont (all tags)

Comments

37 Comments

Re: Breaking Down

Can't wait to cast my ballot for Ned.

Why oh why are so many of my fellow CTers voting for Joe?

http://www.theworstpresidentever.org

by HarpuaFSB 2006-10-26 07:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

"Lieberman is a broken man"

huh?

by AaronE 2006-10-26 07:58AM | 0 recs
Haven't you heard?

He was destroyed by a cartoon last week. He was exterminated by Lamont's primary election squeaker earlier. He was demolished by the CT Dem convention results. And he's always melting down, losing it, going off the deep end, etc, etc, etc just about every other day. And he'll be devastated when he gets back to the Senate and finds some of his Republican friends missing.

If you haven't heard, maybe you're just not reading the right blogs or something.

by RonK Seattle 2006-10-26 08:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Haven't you heard?

maybe i'm just not listening to Matt Stoller ;)

by AaronE 2006-10-26 08:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Haven't you heard?

Making up quotes to smear me with.  Wow, RonK, you've outclassed yourself.  

by Matt Stoller 2006-10-26 10:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Haven't you heard?

Seriously dude. Even I have expressed doubts on here before, but man, it seems like we can't have ONE thread on the CT-Sen race that doesn't have you bashing Lamont. What is your problem man?

by JewishJake 2006-10-26 01:07PM | 0 recs
Reality check

I find a total of threads touching on the CT Senate race in which I've offered comments ... and apparently none in which I've been critical of Lamont (though I haven't inspected every comment in those threads).

I don't recall posting any criticism of Lamont in dailyKos, where I'm more active, either.

by RonK Seattle 2006-10-27 09:25AM | 0 recs
P.S. That's out of over 360 Lamont-related threads

Seriously, dude.

by RonK Seattle 2006-10-27 09:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Haven't you heard?

Ron was right on in his impression of you. quit making baseless claims about people you disagree with and we'll quit "smearing" you with them.  You ruin the credibility of the blogosphere with your classless, sensationalist style and I'm going to call you on it every time.

by AaronE 2006-10-26 02:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Haven't you heard?

Look, there is a difference between disagreement and flat out trolling, which is what Ron is doing. It is one thing to question Matt; it is an entirely other thing to just bitch everytime the subject of Lamont comes up and attack everyone who isn't super negative about the Lamont race.

by JewishJake 2006-10-26 02:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Haven't you heard?

we make fun of matt for his predictable ad hominem style; not his optimism about lamont.

by AaronE 2006-10-26 03:00PM | 0 recs
Quotes? Please show me where I attribute

... any quote -- real or fabricated -- to Matt Stoller.

Damn! Now I've got that Carly Simon tune stuck in my head.

by RonK Seattle 2006-10-27 09:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

Landrieu is, above all else, an idiot. I still remember how, during the Alito confirmation, she implored Democrats to stop wasting time trying to derail his confirmation and instead focus on the far more important task of passing legislation to save New Orleans.

Well, not that saving New Orleans wasn't and isn't important, because it clearly was and is. But did it not occur to her that opposing the nomination of a far-right ideologue to a seat on the nation's highest court, that he would probably occupy for the next 20-30 years, and which might not only affect the future of her precious city, but the future of the entire country, might be the teensiest bit more important?

And did it not occur to her that by speaking out publically in favor of Alito, she was not only undermining Democrats' effort to block his nomination, but also undermining her own support within the Democratic caucus for her own pet causes, including saving New Orleans, and giving yet more power to a president and party that clearly didn't give a damn about it?

Landrieu isn't just a sell out to the GOP, but a politically stupid one at that. The woman has the brain of a chipmunk--and looks like one too.

by kovie 2006-10-26 08:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

Kind of like her man Joe, I should add. Rodents of a feather flock together...

by kovie 2006-10-26 08:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

Matt,

I hope you can ask Sen. Landrieu and Lieberman about S.3711, 'A bill to enhance the energy independence and security of the United States by providing for exploration, development, and production activities for mineral resources in the Gulf of Mexico, and for other purposes.'

I know you oppose the bill but it's Sen. Landrieu and Louisiana's #1 priority and the entire state delegation and LA state government is counting on the bill passing. The LA state legislature has already passed a bill dedicating all the future revenues from the anticipated leases for coastal restoration (ie hurricane buffer).

Recently Gov. Blanco sued in concert with environmental groups and the US Interior Dept. settled to ensure more stringent environmental reviews of new energy leases. This seems like the adult, responsible thing to do. Norway is a social democrats paradise and relies on clean, responsible drilling.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/25/us/25d rill.html?ref=us

Sen. Landrieu called S.3711, "It is historic for Louisiana because our state is finally on the road to receiving a sizable portion of the revenue generated from oil and gas production off our shores, The bill (S.3711) gives Louisiana the necessary resources we need to restore our eroding coastline, build strong levees, and protect our people and infrastructure from future hurricane damage."

http://www.cityofvidalia.com/custom/webp age.cfm?content=News&id=1470

Sen. Lieberman not only opposed S.3711, he voted against cloture on the bill. Cloture passed 86-12 with a majority of both parties supporting the bill. Lieberman couldn't be bothered to show up and vote on final passage.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congr ess/109/senate/2/votes/217/
mas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:s.037 11:

This is the #1 priority for Louisiana and has bipartisan support within Louisiana to pass. Why is Sen. Landrieu working to re-elect somebody who not only opposes S.3711, but opposed even allowing it to come to a vote.

Is the Senate about the people's business or friendships of Senators in a club? If Sen. Lieberman is so much about seeking bipartisan solutions, how can he oppose this bill in the face of the Katrina tragedy, his own incompetence overseeing FEMA and DHS, and the bipartisan consensus of both parties.

That doesn't sound independent minded to me, it's sounds cruelly out of touch.

by joejoejoe 2006-10-26 08:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

Sounds familiar. Remember when Lieberman was in "meltdown mode?"

by PantherDem 2006-10-26 08:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

Let me apologize to the rest of the country and the world for living in a state that elected Landrieu as senator. There are many of us here in Louisiana that battle for better candidates. We stay here and fight the good fight - battling ignorance, corruption, racism, and superstition.

Unfortunately in Landrieu's senate race we had the choice between her and now Republican Congressman Bobby Jindal. An example of Jindal's mindset is that he was involved in exorcisms while he was in college. That's just the tip of the iceberg - he's so far out there that there aren't yet diagnoses to describe his thought processes and actions. He was John Breaux's bitch (another sleazy politician that would have made the perfect modern day Republican).

That said Landrieu is the worst of the worst. Let's hope she disappears from the political scene as soon as possible.

by Tboy 2006-10-26 08:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

"Unfortunately in Landrieu's senate race we had the choice between her and now Republican Congressman Bobby Jindal."

What are you talking about? In 2002, Landrieu ran against Susan Haik Terrell.  Jindal ran against Blanco for governor a year later.

by oyster 2006-10-27 09:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

What's the turncoat Salazar doing?

Is he too chicken to say?

by zappatero 2006-10-26 08:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

Matt-

Your recent posts about this race are right on, I think. I'm here in CT too, waiting for the wave that is developing everywhere else and wondering why it hasn't developed here as well. In talking to "low information voters", they are tired of the relentless TV advertising and the negativity. Question is: are the independents getting turned off enough to stay home? and if so, doesn't that end up making the vote in CT a battle of the bases?

by councilman 2006-10-26 08:27AM | 0 recs
Well, "a week or so" is all Lamont has

What's going to make the polls move now if the debates had no effect?

by Drummond 2006-10-26 08:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

I just put up #5 in my "I'm A Democrat" series at YouTube.  The first four were up at Kos the other day.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KpmzDe8t ek

I think I could have used Sen. Lieberman to play the Republican.

by britethorn 2006-10-26 09:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down
Matt,
Please keep the spotlight on daily. This is, quite simply, the most important race in the country. Unfortunately, many think it is just a contest between Lieberman and Lamont; however, this race is about the very soul of American politics. The real issue isn't about Iraq, or the economy, or health insurance, or any of the issues that are at play in other congressional races. This is about whether the people elect their representatives or whether the corporate money interests elect their representatives masquerading as our representatives. This is about the incumbency protection racket, so shamefully propped up by Landrieu and others. It isn't just another race.
by grayslady 2006-10-26 09:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

disagree.  if we don't win VA or TN, this race won't matter much at all.  

i despise JoeforLieberman, and voted for a Republican against him in 88 (never again voted GOP), but despite his sliminess, i don't think this is the most important race.  Connecticut is pretty darn blue most of the time, and I am not worried it's going to go red.  

by chiefscribe 2006-10-26 10:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

This isn't about red or blue, and CT isn't blue--it's purple. This race is about you being able to choose your representatives rather than having them selected for you by Schumer, Reid and the lobbyists. It's far more important than VA or any other race.

by grayslady 2006-10-26 11:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

Connecticut is pretty darn blue most of the time, and I am not worried it's going to go red.

It's red if it's represented by Connecticut for Lieberman.  

It is probably easier for most liberals to find areas of agreement with the average redneck representative than with Joe Lieberman.  You would have to go to the deepest red area of Mississippi to find any comments as crass Joe Lieberman offering that a rape victim could hop a taxi to another hospital for emergency contraception. These kind of comments are as odious as Limbaugh making fun of Fox's Parkinson's disease.

Hope you don't get stuck with Lieberman for 6 more.  We New Yorkers will for sure get 6 more with our own DINO.  

Best,  Terry

by terryhallinan 2006-10-26 01:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

I think I fail to see how Landrieu, who was praised on this site not too long ago for spanking President Bush on the Senate floor, is "a moral ghost" and the "worst Democratic senator in the caucus" besides Baucus.

You're just pissed that she's supporting Lieberman.  You probably don't have to worry about her getting elected again, as the Democratic Party is going to be dead in LA for a while to come, but come on.  She won by what, two thousand votes in first election and ten thousand in her second?  Of course she has to support the President on some of the issues, it's what the voters in her state want that matters, not anyone outside the state.

I can't wait until Nov. 8th, so we can stop reading vicious personal attacks against our own because of the CT Senate race.  Jesus.

by MyDD Fan 2006-10-26 09:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down
Landrieu got a  lot of criticism during Katrina.
It's not just the Lieberman thing.
by Pravin 2006-10-26 09:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

Killed 96 troops so far this month, huh Joe?

Bet you're damn proud.

by Bush Bites 2006-10-26 09:17AM | 0 recs
sure

And maybe the polls will really tighten on Nov. 8th or 10th.  Give it up, Matt.  The best thing we can do now, distasteful as it is, is to kiss Joe's ass so he stays in the caucus.

by tuffie 2006-10-26 09:34AM | 0 recs
Re: sure

If you are going to let an idiot like this, why not bribe any other moderate junior republican  and promise them seniority?

Where do you draw the line?

by Pravin 2006-10-26 09:59AM | 0 recs
What If Lieberman Resigns?

Matt:

Sorry for being off-topic, but what would happen if:
(1) Lieberman gets reelected to Senate;
(2) Democrats take Senate with 1 seat margin;
(3) Rumsfeld forced resign;
(4) Bush nominates & Lieberman accepts SecDEF job
(5) Republican(?) CT Governor appoints....

Please verify (5) for yourself since I have no clue what the official procedures are.

For the sake of the Democratic Party, maybe Lamont could make this an issue?

by INTP 2006-10-26 09:37AM | 0 recs
F*** the polls

There is very little chance Lamont will catch up with lieberman. The main tactic should be in mobilizing Lamont's likely voter base to the polls on election day. If they are not thinking along those lines, then you might as well concede defeat.

by Pravin 2006-10-26 10:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

"If you're looking for a reason that New Orleans is still devastated today, you have to look to her utter failure of leadership in forcing Bush to do anything to deal with the situation."

Oh. Landrieu is responsible for not "forcing" Bush to do deal with the situation?

I suppose the Dems are responsible for not "forcing" Bush to deal with Iraq, too? Right?

Are they all moral ghosts, too?

Actually, Landrieu is pulling out all the stops in an attempt to get an oil royalty revenue stream to restore LA's coast-- the most rapidly diminishing land mass in the world.  

Stumping for Lieberman is highly dubious, no question, but in Louisiana she is regarded as liberal-- no matter what she does.

by oyster 2006-10-26 10:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down

Lieberman is a broken man. He's now saying things like "A senator can only do so much..."

Is it hurting him in the election, though?

This is confusing, because [Katrina] is not an issue that's good for him.  It might not be bad for him, though I suspect he won't look great in the press today and tomorrow since the Michael Brown confirmation is such an obvious mistake.

How are you so sure the press will notice?

by Silent sound 2006-10-26 11:19AM | 0 recs
Joe..Breaux Substitute?

maybe mary's getting a little lonely in the cloak room since Breaux sold out, I mean retired

by Frogger 2006-10-26 11:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Breaking Down
yeah, he is so "broken" that he is leading by
a wide margin. i don't understand do the Dems
in CT not support the guy they voted for in the
primary ? and why are they supporting a DINO
like Lieberman ?
by itaintover 2006-10-26 12:18PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------