8/09/2006

NED AND JOHN

Sometime in the next few days, or at least well before September 12, some reporter is going to think to ask Ned Lamont to take a position on Hillary Clinton's anti-war primary challenger, Jonathan Tasini, who's so far mustered a small, small fraction of the media attention and political support Lamont has achieved. There are all kinds of reasons Tasini's gotten far less traction. Clinton is both somewhat more progressive and far more politically savvy than Lieberman, and she doesn't have quite the taste for controversy he does. Jon Tasini has less money than God. When the question comes, I suspect Lamont will back Clinton. First, he'll be trying to extract all the help he can get from the Democratic Party establishment - which did its best to clear the way for Bob Casey (successfully) and Joe Lieberman (unsuccessfully) - in squeezing Lieberman out of the race. Second, he'll be trying to sell himself to folks who didn't vote in the Democratic primary or voted for Lieberman as a moderate with an MBA. What seems worth noting about Lamont's rhetoric of the past few months is that the animus he summoned was almost always directed at Republicans individually or collectively, at incumbent Washington as a whole, or at Joe Lieberman individually. It was hardly ever directed at incumbent Democrats as a group. There was little to compare to Howard Dean's "I want to know why so many Democrats are..." lament of a few years ago. It was an insurgent campaign, no doubt - and a truly impressive one whose results bode well for progressives everywhere with the audacity to expect better than the neoliberal/ neoconservative brand of centrism. But it was a carefully targeted one which took clever advantage of Lieberman's stalwart outrageousness and singal willingness to give/ take bait like few others. Lamont could of course surprise us announce that he was, say, going to endorse whoever won the New York Senate primary and not endorse Clinton before that. But I doubt it. And assuming he does endorse Hillary Clinton, it'll be interesting to see what kind of reaction he gets.

3 Comments:

Blogger aahpat said...

Your observation of Lamont's basic reticence about criticizing the Democratic Party is very cogent and important if folks really want change from the Democrats.

News stories about Hillary giving money to Lamont cement his loyalty.

$$Clinton$$$Murdoch$$$Lamont$$$$

8/11/2006 11:08:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The point should be made that one of the biggest things lamont's insurgency is based on is the idea of party loyalty, so we shouldn't be surprised if party loyalty's what we get. My guess is Lamont's gonna be an establishment Dem pretty quickly...just one with certain policy positions and an attitude toward his own party that will keep the base happier.

8/15/2006 02:26:00 PM  
Blogger aahpat said...

Once again proving the prophetic truth of George Washington's farewell address as the first spresident of the United States.

George Washington:

"Let me now take a more comprehensive view, & warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the Spirit of Party, generally."
http://mysite.verizon.net/aahpat/pol/gw.htm

I would rather wrte-in "NONE OF THE ABOVE" than vote for some party slug that does not represent my constitutional values of civil liberties, human rights and social justice over right wing family values of division, denunciation and exclusion.

8/17/2006 02:27:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home