The biggest lesson is to think two moves ahead. This loss (and abandonment by the party) was heartbreaking - but the lesson to be learned from Joe is about power. He learned to think two moves ahead after the recount in 00, and he saw here that Repubs would vote for him by a 10-to-1 margin in the main election, and that Rahm & co. would support him, afraid not to if they won. We will not be able to control Joe - but NED SHOULD RUN for Congress in 08 or work with Dean. I'd be thrilled. The real question …
All 11 comments by...
popom
-
-
Yeah - that's Connecticut for you - liberal, progressive - but small-town-minded. The Youtube ad I made tried to go right at the heart of that - maybe there's little better Ned could've done, but I hope we haven't heard the last of him - or of the CT netroots movement!
Posted to Learning From Lamont
-
Angelo: You are a horse's ass. Israel, America, and religious people often behave in evil ways, but your comment reduces everything into one hysterical anti-Jewish screed which shows off the lowest instincts of humanity. I don't usually resort to ad hominem argumentation, but since everything is conflated in your skull to the one issue, there will be no reasoning with you. Go away, you abject idiot.
Posted to Learning From Lamont
-
Angelo - If you read the posts to which you comment - if you listen instead of just haranguing - if you try to engage people in dialogue in the current conversation instead of stealing it toward you own agenda - you'll find that Sirota wrote a good piece about election power and politics in Connecticut. What you wrote has some bearing on that, of course - about as much as, say, the Boston Red Sox, the movie Shrek, and the writings of Gertrude Stein. "My beloved Israel?" Actually, I'm deeply angry at Israel and AIPAC, at Wolfowitz and any politician …
Posted to Learning From Lamont
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/washington/14israel.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Posted to Learning From Lamont
-
Angelo - Continuing my thread - had enough? - 1. You are a chickenshit. Second time you referred to me indirectly by waiting until some other psycho concurred with you, instead of responding to my argument. Some John Brown you are! 2. You are an idiot. Jeez, I can't believe I'm responding to someone who can't spell, who uses "it's" for "its," "breath" for "breathe," "profoundity" for "profundity," who doesn't even know what a screed is. I'm not being elitist because of your grammar, but because that, plus the callowness of your argument, makes it evident that you get your ideas …
Posted to Learning From Lamont
-
Angelo - Yes: 17. that you can't read. Here's what else you missed: 18. "you guys": sounds very Ross Perot. I'd mentioned quite clearly that I am not a guys. Same goes for "kill Palestinians": never killed one, sorry. Are you hearing those voices in your head again? Stop boxing with shadows already. 19. I said I agree with you to a normal degree. "most hated on the planet": Mindless support for Israel when she acts as reprehensively as she has is, well, reprehensible. 19. Again, you missed the fact that I apologized in advance for criticizing your spelling; I only …
Posted to Learning From Lamont
-
boston08 - It's terribly sad. "But as Mr. Lieberman claimed a healthy lead in polls, Mr. Reid reached out to him. " Politics. http://www.myleftnutmeg.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=4641 In response to your earlier comment, I'd created a web commercial for Ned which was designed to try to appeal to GOP voters. My friend's car was stolen outside my house when we were filming it. By the time the ad was made, though, the campaign had devolved into a stretto: a vote for Joe is a vote for more war. I doubt however Ned was marketed, though, in light of Tim's writings in the article above, …
Posted to Learning From Lamont
-
Blondemike - You're having a reading problem as well, even though you sound more reasonable and articulate than Angelo. I welcome "legitimate criticism of US blank checks to Israel" and agree with both of you that it's wrong. However, his criticism was not legitimate - it was a wild broadside - and it was not appropriate - this being a response to an article about Lamont's failure to win rather than on US foreign policy in the middle east. Lamont's job was not to attack blank checks. His job was to become the Senator for the people of Connecticut. I didn't …
Posted to Learning From Lamont
-
boston08: I couldn't have said it better myself, and I mean that literally: I would've lost my cool. It's rare to find reasonable words, reasonably spoken.
Posted to Learning From Lamont
-
It sounds like we all have problems with Israeli apologists (liberal or conservative) and obnoxious people (liberal or conservative). But again, blondemike, by reducing it to Israel, you miss boston08's point: "is another debate" "if get hung up on that, you're missing the big picture" "if you don't like it, tell them" I do agree that politically by and large we don't disagree, it's just a matter of tone, context, and the appropriate forum to have a debate.
Posted to Learning From Lamont
- Joined November 10, 2006
- Last Visit November 16, 2006
Other Profiles
IN THESE TIMES COMMUNITY MEMBERS
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
Turning a Wall Street Giveaway Into a Rescue for All Americans
- 9.
- 10.
RSS Feed