New Haven Independent

Posted by: Rep. Pat Dillon | June 27, 2006 3:34 PM

Well, you've been going overboard imho. Lamont's candidacy is that he is not Lieberman, yes?

Posted by: TrueBlueCT | June 27, 2006 4:19 PM

You can't judge this ad without understanding Joe Lieberman's Republican credentials.

First and foremost are his poll numbers. Among Republicans, Joe is has an astronomical 65-70% approva rating. However, Joe's Democratic numbers are 20 points lower, at a worrisome 45-50%.

Second is the fact that Republicans, via the National Review's William Buckley, and his BuckPAC, helped to elect Lieberman in the first place. Returning the favor, Lieberman attended the NR 50th anniversary party, at which he, along with Rush Limbaugh, were seated as guests of honor --on either side of Buckley. His two good friends, Rush and Joe. Yeck.

Third you have the countless times DC Republicans bring up Joe Lieberman's positions in support of their own. Like his vote for the Bush Energy Bill, or his vote to confirm Alberto "Torture is Legal" Gonzales as America's attorney general. Or his vote for the Bankruptcy Bill, or for CAFTA. Or for keeping our troops in Iraq.

Then you have his friendships with right-wing hate-mongers such as Sean Hannity, whom Lieberman counts as a family friend. "A wonderful American" Joe called Hannity. Yet he criticized President Carter for sitting next to Michael Moore at the 2004 Dem convention.

So knowing some of this, you then have to ask yourself, Why do Republicans Love Joe Lieberman?

Because he carries their water!

As such the ad is completely appropriate.

Posted by: Donna | June 27, 2006 4:25 PM

I think the Lamont ad is fantastic. Shame they couldn't have worked in "the kiss," too, though. But they're probably holding that one in reserve.

I'd bet a lot of people are totally unaware the Joe actually said out loud that people who criticize the President are literally endangering the nation (and gee, I thought the right to criticize our government was it's very cornerstone! Silly me!). Well, now they know. It's a damning statement from Lieberman. It was when he said it (it's what apparently prompted Lamont into the race in the first place), and it's even moreso now.

Posted by: John Zengerite | June 27, 2006 11:40 PM

As you recognize, now that Lamont has gone negative, it has made it a tad bit more awkward to attack Lieberman for going negative per se. You have to distinguish the negativity, endorse your guy's negativity and then attack the other guy's.

Now, Mr. Bass is indeed trying to be fair- and he disclaims with his bias.

But certainly, when we get into the realm of distortion photography debates, I hope Mr. Bass is demonstrating his trademark sense of humor here. Morphing ads are designed to short-circuit the voter thinking process in the same spirit of the use of the phrase "cut-and-run" and the word "Halliburton." Ned Lamont, the thinking-man's candidate, could certainly do better than this ad.

Also, beware the use of such technology that can be turned against you. Joe Lieberman could turn right around in the fall, go to the same video graphics vendor that Lamont used, and do the same thing. He could morph Lamont into a nationally-known Democrat who represents brave extremism. Like Russ Feingold. Hold on, my thinking is again muddled. This is an exclusive offensive weapon for Ned Lamont! He has the corner on voter psychological warfare! (Who's handling Ned's psy-ops? Anyone know?)

Morphing technology was probably first used to dazzle the moviegoer in that Terminator movie where the new Terminator could morph himself into any human figure. Michael Jackson made a video later that year called "Black or White" that really pushed the technology out there- if you saw it, you'll remember.

Morphing hit political advertising just in time for the 1994 mid-term elections, when every Republican media consultant was morphing every Democrat, every opponent, perhaps their cats, dogs, aunts and uncles into the visage of Bill Clinton.

So Ned Lamont follows in the prestigious trail of the Terminator, Michael Jackson and Newt Gingrich's 1994 footsoldiers on his path to glory. A fine tradition continues.

One suggestion for the strategists at the Lamont camp: Lowell Weicker is not just huge, not just a huge resource, but a huge resource for marketing tactics. As a director of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., (again, I kid you not) Weicker can tap into the brain of Vince McMahon and the other whizzes that cracked into the juvenile mindset and come up with some really mindblowing visuals for the Lamont campaign. Morphing is so 1990s- aren't Connecticut voters ready now for 21st century garbage?

Posted by: TrueBlueCT | June 28, 2006 6:16 PM

Zengerite--
It's not that Joe goes negative. Who cares? But that when he goes negative, all he does is lie.

If he's not careful, people will start calling him Joe Lie-Bear-Man.... It's really pathetic what he is doing, particularly when Joe worked so hard to put himself forward as a "man of integrity".

Posted by: Donna | June 29, 2006 12:58 PM

Zengerite, you said "He could morph Lamont into a nationally-known Democrat who represents brave extremism. Like Russ Feingold."

Considering that most of Lieberman's recent laughable claims about Lamont amount to "he's a Republican," if he started morphing Ned into Russ, he'd make a fool of himself. Not that that would be anything new for Joe's campaign, but still.

Posted by: Tom | June 29, 2006 8:35 PM

Lieberman has no integrity, so it's hardly surprising that he is running deceptive ads.

Even before the war, it was obvious that the Bush Administration was lying about WMDs in Iraq. It was well-known that Al Queda and the Baath Party were mortal enemies.

Yet, Lieberman parroted the absurd claims that Iraq's government had WMDs, was developing a nuclear program, and was supporting bin Laden. How can anybody trust the guy?

Posted by: cwhig | July 1, 2006 1:07 PM

What amazes me is that such a cautious politician has painted himself into such a dangerous corner.

Why did Lieberman start talking about running as an independent, months before the Democratic primary?

Why is he attacking Lamont for, in effect, precisely the sins of which Joe himself is most guilty?

And who is he trying to win over with the appeal to class warfare?