Lieberman Vs Lamont(Winner)

[White_Male_Canada]

Place your bets. I`m hoping for Lamont. Even left-wing Lanny Davis is shitting his pants 8)

Liberal McCarthyism


http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008763

[chefmike]

LMFAO...sure you're hoping for a Lamont victory :roll: :lol: ...the neo-con neo-nazi right-wing extremist cesspool have already circled their wagons, tucked their chickenhawk tails between their legs yet again, and are desperately trying to save face...before the votes have even been counted! ROTFLMFAO! :lol: I couldn't care less who wins now...watching you repug pukes trying to save face before the votes have even been counted is priceless!! :P :P

It comes as no surprise that the neo-con neo-nazis and their other right-wing extremist cohorts are afraid...very afraid indeed...

'I'm not Bush,' pleads trailing Lieberman before vote



BY MICHAEL McAULIFF
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

BRIDGEPORT, Conn. - Joseph Lieberman, once a Democratic star, reached back to his political past as a prosecutor yesterday to deliver his "closing argument" in what could be his last campaign as a Democratic senator from Connecticut.
Lieberman, his party's nominee for vice president in 2000, is facing the prospect of losing a Democratic primary tomorrow to anti-war upstart Ned Lamont, a cable-TV millionaire. Lamont leads the senator 54% to 41%, according to the latest poll by Quinnipiac University.

"This is my closing argument to the people of Connecticut," Lieberman said after a speech at Bridgeport's New Vision Evangelical Ministries, where he was accompanied by D.C. Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton.

"It's not just about Iraq," Lieberman said, casting himself as a progressive who has fought for health care, Social Security, education and the environment.

Portraying Lamont as a political novice and an opportunist, Lieberman complained that Lamont has spent $4 million of his own money on a campaign of "smears" and "lies" to link the relatively conservative senator with President Bush.

"Look at me, folks - I'm not George Bush," Lieberman said, pointing to his 18 years in the Senate. He has vowed to stay in the race on an independent line if he loses the primary.

Lamont shot back that Lieberman's campaign is spending more and attacked Lieberman's record.

"What has that 18 years got us?" Lamont asked at a fire-department carnival in Orange. "I just don't think Washington should be just for those who are lifetime career politicians. How about a guy who started up a business from scratch?"

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/441478p-371823c.html

Rep. Bob Ney drops re-election bid By JOHN McCARTHY, Associated Press Writer
39 minutes ago



COLUMBUS, Ohio - Republican Rep. Bob Ney (news, bio, voting record) abruptly abandoned his bid for re-election Monday, becoming the latest Capitol Hill figure to fall victim to the Jack Abramoff scandal.

The six-term congressman insisted in a statement that he was innocent and said he was acting for the sake of his family.

"I must think of them first, and I can no longer put them through this ordeal," he said.

He is the second congressman to announce his retirement in the fallout from the probe. Former Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas resigned from Congress earlier this year, but Democrats have gone to court to block removal of his name from the November ballot.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060807/ap_on_el_ho/congressman_withdraws;_ylt=AvSv2fkH1JxvgNa.ATQmwIK yFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

Casey Leads Sen. Santorum in Pa. Poll


Aug 6, 4:30 PM (ET)


ALLENTOWN, Pa. (AP) - The latest independent statewide poll shows Democratic challenger Bob Casey with a slight lead over Republican incumbent Rick Santorum in their hotly contested Senate race.

The poll found 45 percent of the voters questioned supported Casey, the state treasurer, while 39 percent supported Santorum, the No. 3 Senate Republican.

The poll of 550 registered voters was conducted from July 31 to Aug. 3 by The Morning Call of Allentown and the Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion. The poll results carry a sampling error margin of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

The poll, which appeared in Sunday editions of The Morning Call, found 43 percent viewed Santorum favorably and 34 percent unfavorably, compared to a 42-38 favorable-unfavorable split in March.

Casey notched a 39 percent favorability rating and a 21 percent unfavorable score, compared with a 38-18 split in March.

In mid-June, a Quinnipiac University poll of 1,076 registered voters found Casey with a 52 percent to 34 percent lead over Santorum.

In the governor's race, the new poll found Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell holds a 16-point lead over Republican challenger Lynn Swann, compared with only a slight advantage in April. Rendell had support from 51 percent of those surveyed and Swann 35 percent, compared to Rendell's 45-39 lead in late April.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060806/D8JB52J00.html


SUCK IT UP!!!

[specialk]

Place your bets. I`m hoping for Lamont. Even left-wing Lanny Davis is shitting his pants 8)

Liberal McCarthyism


http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008763

You mean your betting on Lamont...since it wasn't even a horse race....put your cash on the favorite. Now if your praying the repug candidate can beat the new guy with Joe and Lamont splitting the dem vote ...........well........you better get a new God :lol:

Oh, and for the record I did my part today to send Joe to the showers :lol:

[White_Male_Canada]

As of about 10:30 pm est: Lamont considered the WINNER :

U.S. Senate - - Dem Primary

618 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 82.62%
Name Party Votes Pct

Lamont, Ned Dem 119,100 51.83

Lieberman, Joe (i) Dem 110,686 48.17

Wooo-Hoooo :claps

The idle rich zillionare and the DU/Kos kooks are victorious. Congratulations chef/k :lol:

:lol: :P :lol: :P

[chefmike]

From conservative Joe Scarborough...

Why Lieberman's Loss is the Democrats' Gain

The conventional wisdom for tonight's Connecticut primary seems to be that a Joe Leiberman loss will yank the Democratic Party so far left as to make other Democratic candidates unelectable this fall. The logic is laughable and similar to what I heard from Republican leaders in 1994.

That was the election year when the most conservative wing of the GOP took over the party and swept into power in the US Congress.

None would have predicted that outcome just two years earlier.

George Bush's loss to Bill Clinton in 1992 had put Republican operatives and strategists in a panic. They feared that Bush had been beaten like a drum because radical conservatives like Pat Buchanan, Phyllis Schlafly and Pat Robertson had hijacked the GOP Convention. So while Bill Clinton spent the next two years moving left, the Republican National Committee desperately sought moderate candidates that would talk, walk and vote like, say, Joe Lieberman. The goal was to blur all differences between Republicans and Democrats.

Because of that logic, I spent most of 1994 fighting Republican bureaucrats on the local, state and federal level who did everything in their power to elect my very moderate opponent in the GOP primary. A week before the primary, the Republican Congressional Committee campaign director let me know that I might as well give up. 1994 would be the year of the Moderate.

Yeah, right.

Within a few months of that conversation, scores of right-wing, knuckle-dragging, spear-carrying conservative barbarians like myself ran through our moderate Democratic opponents like Barry Bonds through a bottle of roids. It was ugly. Darting to the base was the ticket to victory for the Party of Reagan.

Fast forward twelve years and now we find many making the same misguided arguments, except this time they are giving their stupid advice to Democrats generally and Connecticut voters specifically.

Ned Lamont may be a pencil-necked geek, as Imus claims, but he is the type of candidate that will bring out the Democratic base in an off-year election. That is especially true this year because George W. Bush is even more unpopular than Clinton was when the GOP swept into
power.

My advice to Democratic voters this year is "Go left, young man!"

There may be hell to pay in 2008, but for now the only thing that should matter to you is seizing control of Congress. Do that for the first time in a decade and then you can start worrying about swing voters in the suburbs.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-scarborough/why-liebermans-loss-is-t_b_26811.html

[chefmike]

For Dems, Lamont Helps, and Lieberman Becomes a Clear and Present Danger

David Sirota

For months, Washington pundits, operatives and lobbyists have been issuing apocalyptic prophecies claiming that if Ned Lamont won the Connecticut Democratic primary, the Democratic Party will be severely weakened. But in very specific ways, it is clear this morning that the exact opposite is happening: that Lamont's win has strengthened the Democratic Party, and Joe Lieberman's selfish decision to ignore the democratic primary process and run as a candidate of one will weaken the Democratic Party.

Here's what I mean.

Lamont's win will strengthen Democratic unity: In 2002, Republicans ran Rep. Pat Toomey against Sen. Arlen Specter. Though Toomey lost, GOP strategists knew the race was no waste - it reinforced to other GOP officeholders that if they veer from the conservative line, they could face a primary challenge. That has helped the GOP build and maintain unity, and that's the very same thing that will happen now that Lamont has won the Connecticut primary. As Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) admitted, Democrats everywhere now have a very clear example of how aiding and abetting the right-wing agenda of George W. Bush could land them with a challenge from their own voters at home. Lamont's victory means that there will be more Democratic unity on the critical economic and foreign policy votes in which so many Democratic lawmakers previously peeled off (the energy bill, free trade deals, Iraq, the bankruptcy bill, estate tax, etc.), supported the GOP and undermined the Democratic Party's effort to have a real message.

Lamont's win fuels the anti-incumbent narrative heading into the 2006 elections: The Washington Post this week released a poll showing that anti-incumbent feeling among voters is at a historic high - a terrific situation for Democrats in advance of the 2006 elections. Lamont's victory adds to that storyline, as his campaign was ultimately a story of anti-incumbency, especially since it played off of a Lieberman candidacy that the Hartford Courant showed was openly bought-and-paid for by Washington lobbyists. This is clearly why Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman is giving a speech today to attack Lamont. Mehlman will claim that Lamont's Iraq position, means Democrats are "weak on terror" - even though polls show Lamont represents the position of the vast majority of Americans, and polls show Democrats now have an advantage over Republicans on fighting terrorism. What Mehlman is really doing is trying to distract attention from the powerful message of Lamont's victory: namely, that there is a seething, widespread public anger at incumbents in Washington.

Lieberman's new rhetoric (which is the same as his old rhetoric that drew him a primary challenge in the first place) will be used as the GOP's weapon: On ABC's Good Morning America today, Lieberman justified his abandonment of the Democratic Pary by claiming "the Democratic Party has taken -- has been taken over by people who are not from the mainstream of America." He recited this RNC talking point, even though polls have consistently shown that Lieberman is far outside of the mainstream on core issues like Iraq, Social Security, health care and trade. In fact, that's exactly why he lost. But now, Lieberman is going to be running around repeating this line from now until election day - and people like Karl Rove, Ken Mehlman and every GOP candidate in America is going to be calling Lieberman a "good Democrat" who is supposedly proving their attack points on actual Democrats.

Lieberman's move will draw huge resources away from Democratic efforts to win Congress: With grassroots organizations like Moveon.org, Democracy for America and progressive donors strongly committed to Lamont's candidacy, Lieberman's move will draw away critical resources from battleground states/districts that Democrats need to win Congress in 2006. Put another way, Lieberman's move - because it jeopardizes Democrats hold on the seat - will have a severe impact on diverting scarce resources for a Democratic victory in 2006. Perhaps this is what Lieberman, who has made his name embracing George W. Bush, really wants. After all, another GOP win of Congress will help further the Bush agenda that Lieberman has been so happy with. But it could damage Democrats' ability to win Congress - which is exactly why Lieberman's move is making Republican donors so happy.

These are the reasons why Democratic officeholders have to stop tip-toeing around the Lieberman issue, and stop trying to soft-touch Lieberman because "he's such a nice guy and we've been cocktail party friends with him for so many years." It is the reason that DLCers and former Lieberman friends like Sens. Evan Bayh (D) and Hillary Clinton have quickly embraced Lamont. Because they - and hopefully all of their colleagues - are realizing that Lieberman now represents a very clear and present danger not just to the progressive policy agenda, but to both the short-term and long-term electoral goals of the Democratic Party.

this article, and its related links to the facts quoted, found here-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/for-dems-lamont-helps-a_b_26853.html

[chefmike]

It's a Great Day to Be a New Democrat
Trey Ellis

How many more times could I or dozens of other progressive bloggers beg the inside-the-beltway Democrats to please, pretty please with sugar on top, stand up and fight? How many more times could we whine for Beltway Democrats to stand up and catch up with the majority of Americans and the vast majority of Democrats who want out of this obscenely disastrous war?

For weeks leading up to the spectacular Lamont victory the same centrist Democrats that have lost us the last several elections were whispering to outlets like the Times and the Post that a Lamont victory would be an unmitigated disaster for the party. According to them it would prove that the unwashed, hysterical rabble had hijacked the Democratic party and, like the Jacobins, wouldn't rest until every head, including their own, were severed and lolling in a basket.

For years now I just could not wrap my head around Beltway Democratic timidity. Bush's poll numbers started sliding to around Saddam's job-approval rating among the Kurds and yet still so many Beltway Democrats treated him like the reincarnation of Eisenhower. Then it hit me. Those timid Beltway Democrats must be suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome." They have been captured and subjugated by Republicans for so long that they can no longer imagine a world not under Republican control.

I'm hoping that today's Lieberman loss will jolt them back to reality. The people demand nothing less than a coherent, defiant stance on Bush's awful war and they will reward the bearer of said message with victory.

Today's Democratic grassroots win is the beginning of the end of Republican hegemony and Democratic centrists need to either snap out of their stupor or prepare for their own forcible retirement.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/trey-ellis/its-a-great-day-to-be-a-_b_26836.html

[JRon]

The best part about all of this is that now Lieberman (hopefully) will not run for pres in 08.

So, definitely a plus for Dems.

[chefmike]

Beyond Chutzpah: Cheney Implies Terrorists Are Happy Lieberman Lost

At a time when the real enemies in the war on terror have reared their murderous heads (exploding shampoo? no need to sex that up), to hear Dick Cheney and company using illogical, over-the-top, fear-mongering rhetoric conflating Ned Lamont's victory with the war on terror is as deeply offensive as it is jaw-droppingly outrageous.


Chutzpah doesn't even begin to describe the Vice President of the United States suggesting that the outcome of the Connecticut primary might embolden "al Qaeda types". Sure, and the final tally on So You Think You Can Dance will really give them the greenlight: "Travis beat Benji? The infidels must die!"

The argument is as phony as Joe Lieberman's claim that he's running as an independent for the sake of his party and his country.

The GOP message machine knows how ludicrous it is to keep tying the war in Iraq to the war on terror, but they also know how effective it has been. So there they go again, with Cheney claiming that Lieberman was "pushed aside because of his willingness to support an aggressive posture in terms of our national security."

Cheney knows damn well that, far from making us safer, "an aggressive posture" on Iraq has had the exact opposite effect. In a survey of 100 top foreign-policy experts (both Republicans and Democrats), 84 believed that we're losing the war on terror and 87 thought Iraq has had a negative impact on our efforts to defeat terrorists.

Here's the bottom line: Ned Lamont ran against the war in Iraq, a war that Joe Lieberman vehemently supported -- and still supports. A war that 60 percent of Americans are against. A war that is the defining foreign policy initiative of the Bush administration -- an initiative that has been an abject failure on every level. A war that has put the GOP's back against the electoral wall. So it's firing back with it's favorite weapon -- fear -- trying to make the case that being against the war somehow makes Lamont soft on national security or, as RNC chair Ken Mehlman put it, "a leading proponent of the isolationist, defeatist, blame-America-first philosophy."

Talk about desperate. So do Cheney/Rove/Mehlman really believe that 60 percent of the public are blame-America-firsters? Or that because 60 percent of us agree that Iraq is a disaster, we somehow don't have "the will" to, in Cheney's words, "stay in the fight and complete the task" of taking on the terrorists -- and thus are encouraging al Qaeda types?

Of course not. They know being against the war in Iraq doesn't mean you are against fighting the war on terror. It means you are against a failed policy that has created more terrorists than it has killed, that has cost America 2,591 lives and $305 billion dollars, that has thrown Iraq into a bloody sectarian civil war, and that has so lessened our standing abroad that we are unable to be a real power broker in an exploding Middle East.

You want to know what really emboldens our enemies? It's not Ned Lamont beating Joe Lieberman; it's the idea of an impotent United States so over-extended and bogged down in Iraq that it has been pushed to the diplomatic sidelines.

What Lamont's victory should really do is embolden Democrats to aggressively counterattack the Republicans' scare tactics nonsense. (It would help if the MSM reacted to the GOP drivel by treating it with the contempt it deserves instead of dutifully reporting it as if it contained even an ounce of logic or sanity.)

John Kerry effectively counterattacked the Republican's scare tactics nonsense today -- and every Democratic leader should do the same every day, without fail, until the message finally breaks through the static. The thwarted London attacks, said Kerry, "expose the misleading myth that we are fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here. In fact, the war in Iraq has become a dangerous distraction... Nearly five years after the attacks of 9/11, we are not as safe as we can and must be... The 9/11 Commission's recommendations to secure our most vulnerable infrastructure remain virtually ignored. And homeland security funding has been cut for cities like Boston and New York."

One of the main reasons this has happened is that Congressional Democrats have failed to hold the Bush administration accountable for taking its eye off the national security ball in order to pursue its imperial adventure in Iraq. It's worth noting that the ranking Democrat on the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee is none other than Joe Lieberman, whose belief in bipartisan comity has kept him from holding the White House's feet to the fire. No wonder Karl Rove wanted to help him out, and Dick Cheney feels so concerned by his defeat.

Cheney and Rove know that this battle is for all the marbles. If Democrats can't effectively repudiate the GOP's fear-mongering strategy of linking Iraq to national security, they can kiss 2006 -- and 2008 -- good-bye.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/beyond-chutzpah-cheney-i_b_26971.html

[chefmike]

New Zogby Poll

In his nationally televised concession speech after losing to primary challenger Ned Lamont this week, Connecticut Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman announced he would continue his re-election bid as an independent, He appealed to people across the country to send their support - and maybe a campaign contribution - to his headquarters.

A new Zogby Interactive poll shows he shouldn't waste too much time waiting by the mailbox.


An overwhelming majority of Democrats - 79% - nationwide said they are glad that the three-term senator was defeated by Lamont, who ran a powerful anti-Iraq war campaign. They also said Lamont's victory over one of the few pro-war Democrats in Washington makes them optimistic they can win control of at least one of the two houses of Congress in November.

Our interactive survey, including interviews Wednesday and Thursday with 1,229 likely voting Democrats, also highlighted what Democrats across the country said they want to hear from their candidates--a resolute opposition to the war. More than three-quarters of Democrats (78%) said they want candidates who oppose the conflict. Just 6% said they think their Democratic candidates should support the war. Another 13% said they want their candidates to take a middling stance somewhere between support and opposition.

While Republicans may have used the war for political success in 2002 and 2004, Democrats are ready for their turn at the plate this November, and they see the defeat of Lieberman as the first step - 62% said they believe the results of the Connecticut primary will hold national implications for the elections coming up this fall.

And they expect those implications to favor them - 70% said they think the Lamont victory makes the Democratic Party stronger heading into the important election season.

Until this week, Democrats had mostly failed to define themselves in this midterm election, but the Lamont victory may be a turning point for them. Their collective voice is now loud and clear.

Our poll shows the war is creating a unity in the Democratic Party, and the Lamont candidacy both fed off that unity and helped it grow stronger. In a curious way, Joe Lieberman also helped unify the Democrats - an overwhelming majority (71%) said they were unhappy with his decision to run as an independent in the November general election.

Which means there aren't many Democrats left to write support letters to Joe - let alone checks.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-zogby/new-zogby-poll-reveals-th_b_27064.html

[White_Male_Canada]

New Zogby Poll


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-zogby/new-zogby-poll-reveals-th_b_27064.html

Zogby !?

Our Call
Zogby International's 2004 Predictions
(as of Nov. 2, 2004 5:00pm)


2004 Presidential Election

Electoral Votes:

Bush
213

Kerry
311

Too Close To Call
Nevada (5)

Too Close To Call
Colorado
Seems democrats win polls but Republicans win elections :P

That all said,there are more independants in Connecticut than there are democrats. You kooks chose Lamont,an idle zillionare who inhereted his wealth and owns(ed) stock in Walmart ! :lol: And to cap it all off,Lamont is the great-nephew of Corliss Lamont, WASP plutocrat fund-raiser for Stalin. :P

Lieberman will win as an independant. Gauranteed.

But hey, I`m still cheering you guys on. Keep hitting that self-destruct button sport :lol:

[specialk]

[quote="White_Male_Canada That all said,there are more independants in Connecticut than there are democrats. You kooks chose Lamont,an idle zillionare who inhereted his wealth and owns(ed) stock in Walmart ! :lol: And to cap it all off,Lamont is the great-nephew of Corliss Lamont, WASP plutocrat fund-raiser for Stalin. :P

Lieberman will win as an independant. Gauranteed.

But hey, I`m still cheering you guys on. Keep hitting that self-destruct button sport :lol:[/quote]



Let me take this time to share some advice for the Pinhead extrordinaire. Sonny, you'll find it advantagous in life not to let your mouth overload you ass!!!

On tuesday, you were hoping Lamont would win. Today, you hate him, and predict Lieberloser will win. GET YOUR BULLSHIT STRAIGHT junior :P :P :lol: :twisted:

[chefmike]

Sounds like more right-wing nutjob flip-flopping to me... :lol:

NewsMax.com editor Christopher Ruddy says Zogby is the "most accurate and respected of national pollsters." Rush Limbaugh calls Zogby his "favorite pollster."
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/10/27/63011.txt

On March 16, nationally syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh instructed his listeners to disregard Zogby International poll results -- showing that a large majority of U.S. troops in Iraq think the United States should withdraw from that country within a year -- because the poll was funded by the Le Moyne College Center for Peace and Global Studies -- an organization that "has the word 'peace' in it."

Limbaugh told his audience: "[A]nytime an organization has the word 'peace' in it, throw it out. It's just a bunch of long-haired, maggot-infested, dope-smoking, FM peace-types that have an agenda."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603200001

[White_Male_Canada]

That all said,there are more independants in Connecticut than there are democrats. You kooks chose Lamont,an idle zillionare who inhereted his wealth and owns(ed) stock in Walmart ! :lol: And to cap it all off,Lamont is the great-nephew of Corliss Lamont, WASP plutocrat fund-raiser for Stalin. :P

Lieberman will win as an independant. Gauranteed.

But hey, I`m still cheering you guys on. Keep hitting that self-destruct button sport :lol:




Let me take this time to share some advice for the Pinhead extrordinaire. Sonny, you'll find it advantagous in life not to let your mouth overload you ass!!!

On tuesday, you were hoping Lamont would win. Today, you hate him, and predict Lieberloser will win. GET YOUR BULLSHIT STRAIGHT junior

Your razor like intellect is as sharp as ever/sarc off.

Of course, we want the democrats to self-destruct internally. Lieberman can only run as an independant,not a democrat,and naturally Conn.,being in the northeast is to the radical left(witness Zillionare Lamont).Being a rational person,unlike you, I do not expect the Republican to win there.

I do expect the democrats to eat their own in a civil war,exposing their true nature as the party of capitulation and surrender,thereby moving moderates nationwide to re-elect most Republicans and energizing the base.Nobody likes war,but given stone cold reality and hard facts people usually vote with their heads.

You`re perspective is too narow and ideologically, too extreme. Be patient and watch the DNC show it`s true colors.See it repudiated come November.

Gotta love the kook neo-marxist McGovernites. Haven`t learned a thing since `72.But maybe you were still at your mommies teet. 8)

[specialk]

That all said,there are more independants in Connecticut than there are democrats. You kooks chose Lamont,an idle zillionare who inhereted his wealth and owns(ed) stock in Walmart ! :lol: And to cap it all off,Lamont is the great-nephew of Corliss Lamont, WASP plutocrat fund-raiser for Stalin. :P

Lieberman will win as an independant. Gauranteed.

But hey, I`m still cheering you guys on. Keep hitting that self-destruct button sport :lol:




Let me take this time to share some advice for the Pinhead extrordinaire. Sonny, you'll find it advantagous in life not to let your mouth overload you ass!!!

On tuesday, you were hoping Lamont would win. Today, you hate him, and predict Lieberloser will win. GET YOUR BULLSHIT STRAIGHT junior

Your razor like intellect is as sharp as ever/sarc off.

Of course, we want the democrats to self-destruct internally. Lieberman can only run as an independant,not a democrat,and naturally Conn.,being in the northeast is to the radical left(witness Zillionare Lamont).Being a rational person,unlike you, I do not expect the Republican to win there.

I do expect the democrats to eat their own in a civil war,exposing their true nature as the party of capitulation and surrender,thereby moving moderates nationwide to re-elect most Republicans and energizing the base.Nobody likes war,but given stone cold reality and hard facts people usually vote with their heads.

You`re perspective is too narow and ideologically, too extreme. Be patient and watch the DNC show it`s true colors.See it repudiated come November.

Gotta love the kook neo-marxist McGovernites. Haven`t learned a thing since `72.But maybe you were still at your mommies teet. 8)

No pinhead, I registered in 1970 to vote, while you were a "cumstain to be" :lol:

See you in Nov. fool :P

[White_Male_Canada]

That all said,there are more independants in Connecticut than there are democrats. You kooks chose Lamont,an idle zillionare who inhereted his wealth and owns(ed) stock in Walmart ! :lol: And to cap it all off,Lamont is the great-nephew of Corliss Lamont, WASP plutocrat fund-raiser for Stalin. :P

Lieberman will win as an independant. Gauranteed.

But hey, I`m still cheering you guys on. Keep hitting that self-destruct button sport :lol:




Let me take this time to share some advice for the Pinhead extrordinaire. Sonny, you'll find it advantagous in life not to let your mouth overload you ass!!!

On tuesday, you were hoping Lamont would win. Today, you hate him, and predict Lieberloser will win. GET YOUR BULLSHIT STRAIGHT junior

Your razor like intellect is as sharp as ever/sarc off.

Of course, we want the democrats to self-destruct internally. Lieberman can only run as an independant,not a democrat,and naturally Conn.,being in the northeast is to the radical left(witness Zillionare Lamont).Being a rational person,unlike you, I do not expect the Republican to win there.

I do expect the democrats to eat their own in a civil war,exposing their true nature as the party of capitulation and surrender,thereby moving moderates nationwide to re-elect most Republicans and energizing the base.Nobody likes war,but given stone cold reality and hard facts people usually vote with their heads.

You`re perspective is too narow and ideologically, too extreme. Be patient and watch the DNC show it`s true colors.See it repudiated come November.

Gotta love the kook neo-marxist McGovernites. Haven`t learned a thing since `72.But maybe you were still at your mommies teet. 8)

No pinhead, I registered in 1970 to vote, while you were a "cumstain to be" :lol:

See you in Nov. fool :P

Can`t wait.

Put up or shut up ?

Democrats take over the House and Senate this november, I leave HA for life.Never to return in any form or nickname. Democrats fail to do just that, you leave HA for life ,never to return in any form, manner or nickname?

TAKE THE BET ?

I DARE YOU, AND YOUR BUTT-BUDDY CHEFMIKE.

GO AHEAD TAKE IT . But being the gutless wonders and neo-marxists we all know you guys are , we know what your reply will be.

[specialk]

That all said,there are more independants in Connecticut than there are democrats. You kooks chose Lamont,an idle zillionare who inhereted his wealth and owns(ed) stock in Walmart ! :lol: And to cap it all off,Lamont is the great-nephew of Corliss Lamont, WASP plutocrat fund-raiser for Stalin. :P

Lieberman will win as an independant. Gauranteed.

But hey, I`m still cheering you guys on. Keep hitting that self-destruct button sport :lol:




Let me take this time to share some advice for the Pinhead extrordinaire. Sonny, you'll find it advantagous in life not to let your mouth overload you ass!!!

On tuesday, you were hoping Lamont would win. Today, you hate him, and predict Lieberloser will win. GET YOUR BULLSHIT STRAIGHT junior

Your razor like intellect is as sharp as ever/sarc off.

Of course, we want the democrats to self-destruct internally. Lieberman can only run as an independant,not a democrat,and naturally Conn.,being in the northeast is to the radical left(witness Zillionare Lamont).Being a rational person,unlike you, I do not expect the Republican to win there.

I do expect the democrats to eat their own in a civil war,exposing their true nature as the party of capitulation and surrender,thereby moving moderates nationwide to re-elect most Republicans and energizing the base.Nobody likes war,but given stone cold reality and hard facts people usually vote with their heads.

You`re perspective is too narow and ideologically, too extreme. Be patient and watch the DNC show it`s true colors.See it repudiated come November.

Gotta love the kook neo-marxist McGovernites. Haven`t learned a thing since `72.But maybe you were still at your mommies teet. 8)

No pinhead, I registered in 1970 to vote, while you were a "cumstain to be" :lol:

See you in Nov. fool :P

Can`t wait.

Put up or shut up ?

Democrats take over the House and Senate this november, I leave HA for life.Never to return in any form or nickname. Democrats fail to do just that, you leave HA for life ,never to return in any form, manner or nickname?

TAKE THE BET ?

I DARE YOU, AND YOUR BUTT-BUDDY CHEFMIKE.

GO AHEAD TAKE IT . But being the gutless wonders and neo-marxists we all know you guys are , we know what your reply will be.


You knew I was going to say, go fuck yourself???..........you are a genius as well as a pinhead :P

[chefmike]

So canadian chickenhawk cracker is going to make a bet on a total slam dunk(remember that term from anywhere?) of both houses by the party of the progressives....here's a chickenhawk who must have studied at the Katherine Harris University of "we'll find a way to sabotage it or die trying"(and we should all be so lucky)...

So not so fast canadian cracker...just in case the Bush supreme court inteferes with this election also, or we have more voter discrepencies as in Ohio....maybe we'll add something regarding monkeyboy's approval ratings at the time of the November elections...and perhaps the number of civilian and military casualties by then in the Iraq fiasco...now there's a bet that will make a neocon chickenhawk shill think twice, eh...

You're not fixing a canadian cockfight here, cracker...save that for your inbred buddies in the local militia group...

[White_Male_Canada]

So canadian chickenhawk cracker is going to make a bet on a total slam dunk(remember that term from anywhere?) of both houses by the party of the progressives....here's a chickenhawk who must have studied at the Katherine Harris University of "we'll find a way to sabotage it or die trying"(and we should all be so lucky)...

So not so fast canadian cracker...just in case the Bush supreme court inteferes with this election also, or we have more voter discrepencies as in Ohio....maybe we'll add something regarding monkeyboy's approval ratings at the time of the November elections...and perhaps the number of civilian and military casualties by then in the Iraq fiasco...now there's a bet that will make a neocon chickenhawk shill think twice, eh...

You're not fixing a canadian cockfight here, cracker...save that for your inbred buddies in the local militia group...

Put up or shut up ?

Democrats win majorities in the House and Senate this november, I leave HA for life.Never to return in any form or nickname. Democrats fail to do just that, you leave HA for life ,never to return in any form, manner or nickname?

TAKE THE BET ? The neo-marxist left talks a big talk. Are you confident or just full of bullshit and hot air like your butt-buddy specialk? He revealed himself to be so lacking in confidence of the McGovernites/DNC he balked and ran away like a scalded dog.

Take the bet , or are you just a little pussy too? :lol:

Now we`re seeing true colors ! 8)

[White_Male_Canada]

I see 1 , no 2 , no wait , I see at least 3 multi-millionares :lol:

And all 3 are neo-marxist kooks who demand joe blow give up his wages to the government. Strange how these hypocrites don`t just give their millions to the IRS as gifts and set a shining example of how neo-marxists should live. :lol:

[specialk]

Truth is Pinhead, we can't afford to see you lose, we need you. Your not going anywhere fool, Chef and I own you! :P