.Lieberman, on the Offensive, Links Terror Threat and Iraq
Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut seized on the reports of a terror plot yesterday to attack Ned Lamont, his Democratic opponent for re-election, saying that Mr. Lamont’s goal of withdrawing American troops from Iraq by a fixed date would constitute a “victory” for extremists.
“If we just pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England,” Mr. Lieberman said at a campaign event in Waterbury, Conn. “It will strengthen them, and they will strike again.”
Mr. Lamont, who rode an antiwar message to defeat Mr. Lieberman in the Connecticut Democratic primary on Tuesday, has called for removing frontline American troops from Iraq as early as next July. Mr. Lieberman, a Democrat who is now running as an independent, opposes setting a deadline.
Mr. Lamont denounced Mr. Lieberman’s remarks, and some other Democrats and political analysts questioned the senator’s use of a national security hazard to buttress a political attack, especially against another Democrat.
Yet Mr. Lieberman has accused Mr. Lamont of distorting the senator’s record on Iraq, and the Connecticut race has turned into an increasingly bitter fight between two Democrats over issues of war and national security.
In a telephone interview yesterday from his vacation home in Maine, Mr. Lamont said he was disappointed by Mr. Lieberman’s tone, and he questioned whether the war in Iraq had any bearing on terrorists’ designs on Western nations. Mr. Lamont also hit back by again connecting Mr. Lieberman to President Bush, whose war plans he has endorsed at times.
“Wow,” Mr. Lamont said, after twice asking a reporter to read Mr. Lieberman’s remark about him. “That comment sounds an awful lot like Vice President Cheney’s comment on Wednesday. Both of them believe our invasion of Iraq has a lot to do with 9/11. That’s a false premise.”
Mr. Cheney, in an interview with reporters on Wednesday, said that Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups were counting on Americans to adopt a weaker military posture, and that Mr. Lamont’s victory indicated that “the dominant view of the Democratic Party” favored that weaker approach.
Mr. Cheney also lamented Mr. Lieberman’s primary defeat; the two men have been on good terms in the past.
Mr. Lieberman also said yesterday — several hours after Mr. Cheney linked Al Qaeda and the Lamont victory — that another administration official, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, had called him to tell him about the foiled terror plot. Mr. Lieberman is the ranking Democrat on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Having lost his party’s support for a fourth term by 3.6 percentage points, Mr. Lieberman is now seeking support from independents and Republicans — who make up a majority of the state’s electorate — to join core Lieberman Democrats and carry him to victory in the general election.
Part of his strategy is to appear seasoned and bipartisan compared with Mr. Lamont, a former Greenwich selectman and a self-described liberal.
“I’m worried that too many people, both in politics and out, don’t appreciate the seriousness of the threat to American security and the evil of the enemy that faces us,” Mr. Lieberman said at the Waterbury event. He called that threat “more evil, or as evil, as Nazism and probably more dangerous than the Soviet Communists we fought during the long cold war.”
Some political analysts and Democratic strategists expressed surprise at what they viewed as Mr. Lieberman’s attempt to leverage a terrorist threat for political gain, even while the threat is still under investigation.
“Senator Lieberman is sounding more and more like President Bush every day,” said Steve McMahon, a Democratic consultant. “He’s trying to demonstrate strength, but the risk is that he comes across as desperate.”
Gary L. Rose, a professor of politics at Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, Conn., said he, too, was surprised that Mr. Lieberman would link anti-Western terrorists and Iraq, noting that many Democratic leaders separate those issues.
“Connecting the war on terror and the war in Iraq has been a Republican view mostly, and I think a lot of Connecticut voters don’t see a true link there,” Mr. Rose said.
Mr. Lamont hesitated when he was asked if Mr. Lieberman’s criticisms were beyond the bounds of acceptable political combat.
“To try to score political points on every international issue ——” Mr. Lamont said, before stopping himself. Then he added, “Why do I have to say anything?”
Dan Gerstein, Mr. Lieberman’s new communications director, said that the senator had spoken with care about the terrorist plot and that it was Mr. Lamont who had politicized national security by portraying Mr. Lieberman as a soul mate of President Bush on Iraq.
“It would be irresponsible not to talk about the most pressing issue of the moment,” Mr. Gerstein said. “For Ned Lamont, of all people, to make accusations about politicization is ironic, since this is the guy who has spent the last half year distorting Joe Lieberman’s record on Iraq.”
Mr. Lieberman said yesterday that he was trying to stay above the fray of partisan politics and sidestepped a reporter’s question about Vice President Cheney’s remarks about Democrats. The senator said he was focused on Connecticut, not on the rest of the country.
“How the heck can we be in a battle in which we are fighting as Democrats and Republicans against each other, when these terrorists certainly don’t distinguish based on our party affiliation?” Mr. Lieberman said. “They want to kill any and all of us.”
Mr. Lieberman’s maneuvering outside the two political parties comes as many leading Democrats have embraced Mr. Lamont and as some of them, including Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, have called on the senator to quit the race.
The president of the Connecticut A.F.L.-C.I.O., which had endorsed Mr. Lieberman through the primary, also disclosed yesterday that it may sit out the fall election.
The senator has drawn more praise from Republicans including Mr. Cheney and Karl Rove, President Bush’s senior adviser, who said yesterday that he called Mr. Lieberman on Tuesday to wish him well in the primary. The two men are friends, Mr. Rove said.
Another Republican, Mark Kennedy, the party’s nominee in a Senate race in Minnesota this fall, said yesterday that he was endorsing Mr. Lieberman for re-election.
Republicans have a candidate in the Connecticut race this fall, Alan Schlesinger, but he has struggled to raise money or attract interest amid the Lieberman-Lamont contest.
NYT
Some people in this country need to wake up and smell the coffee. Now I know how many people feel about the Bush administrations mismanagement of this war, but why take it out on Joe, he's doing what he can with the tools we have available, blunt as them may be or seam to many.
I know one thing, the terrorist, and their fascist backers with empirical designs are going to do their thing like it or not. So you can sit there and wait your turn at the knife, or your can stand up and fight. I know what I'll be doing, how about you.
“If we just pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England,” Mr. Lieberman said at a campaign event in Waterbury, Conn. “It will strengthen them, and they will strike again.”
Mr. Lamont, who rode an antiwar message to defeat Mr. Lieberman in the Connecticut Democratic primary on Tuesday, has called for removing frontline American troops from Iraq as early as next July. Mr. Lieberman, a Democrat who is now running as an independent, opposes setting a deadline.
Mr. Lamont denounced Mr. Lieberman’s remarks, and some other Democrats and political analysts questioned the senator’s use of a national security hazard to buttress a political attack, especially against another Democrat.
Yet Mr. Lieberman has accused Mr. Lamont of distorting the senator’s record on Iraq, and the Connecticut race has turned into an increasingly bitter fight between two Democrats over issues of war and national security.
In a telephone interview yesterday from his vacation home in Maine, Mr. Lamont said he was disappointed by Mr. Lieberman’s tone, and he questioned whether the war in Iraq had any bearing on terrorists’ designs on Western nations. Mr. Lamont also hit back by again connecting Mr. Lieberman to President Bush, whose war plans he has endorsed at times.
“Wow,” Mr. Lamont said, after twice asking a reporter to read Mr. Lieberman’s remark about him. “That comment sounds an awful lot like Vice President Cheney’s comment on Wednesday. Both of them believe our invasion of Iraq has a lot to do with 9/11. That’s a false premise.”
Mr. Cheney, in an interview with reporters on Wednesday, said that Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups were counting on Americans to adopt a weaker military posture, and that Mr. Lamont’s victory indicated that “the dominant view of the Democratic Party” favored that weaker approach.
Mr. Cheney also lamented Mr. Lieberman’s primary defeat; the two men have been on good terms in the past.
Mr. Lieberman also said yesterday — several hours after Mr. Cheney linked Al Qaeda and the Lamont victory — that another administration official, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, had called him to tell him about the foiled terror plot. Mr. Lieberman is the ranking Democrat on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Having lost his party’s support for a fourth term by 3.6 percentage points, Mr. Lieberman is now seeking support from independents and Republicans — who make up a majority of the state’s electorate — to join core Lieberman Democrats and carry him to victory in the general election.
Part of his strategy is to appear seasoned and bipartisan compared with Mr. Lamont, a former Greenwich selectman and a self-described liberal.
“I’m worried that too many people, both in politics and out, don’t appreciate the seriousness of the threat to American security and the evil of the enemy that faces us,” Mr. Lieberman said at the Waterbury event. He called that threat “more evil, or as evil, as Nazism and probably more dangerous than the Soviet Communists we fought during the long cold war.”
Some political analysts and Democratic strategists expressed surprise at what they viewed as Mr. Lieberman’s attempt to leverage a terrorist threat for political gain, even while the threat is still under investigation.
“Senator Lieberman is sounding more and more like President Bush every day,” said Steve McMahon, a Democratic consultant. “He’s trying to demonstrate strength, but the risk is that he comes across as desperate.”
Gary L. Rose, a professor of politics at Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, Conn., said he, too, was surprised that Mr. Lieberman would link anti-Western terrorists and Iraq, noting that many Democratic leaders separate those issues.
“Connecting the war on terror and the war in Iraq has been a Republican view mostly, and I think a lot of Connecticut voters don’t see a true link there,” Mr. Rose said.
Mr. Lamont hesitated when he was asked if Mr. Lieberman’s criticisms were beyond the bounds of acceptable political combat.
“To try to score political points on every international issue ——” Mr. Lamont said, before stopping himself. Then he added, “Why do I have to say anything?”
Dan Gerstein, Mr. Lieberman’s new communications director, said that the senator had spoken with care about the terrorist plot and that it was Mr. Lamont who had politicized national security by portraying Mr. Lieberman as a soul mate of President Bush on Iraq.
“It would be irresponsible not to talk about the most pressing issue of the moment,” Mr. Gerstein said. “For Ned Lamont, of all people, to make accusations about politicization is ironic, since this is the guy who has spent the last half year distorting Joe Lieberman’s record on Iraq.”
Mr. Lieberman said yesterday that he was trying to stay above the fray of partisan politics and sidestepped a reporter’s question about Vice President Cheney’s remarks about Democrats. The senator said he was focused on Connecticut, not on the rest of the country.
“How the heck can we be in a battle in which we are fighting as Democrats and Republicans against each other, when these terrorists certainly don’t distinguish based on our party affiliation?” Mr. Lieberman said. “They want to kill any and all of us.”
Mr. Lieberman’s maneuvering outside the two political parties comes as many leading Democrats have embraced Mr. Lamont and as some of them, including Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, have called on the senator to quit the race.
The president of the Connecticut A.F.L.-C.I.O., which had endorsed Mr. Lieberman through the primary, also disclosed yesterday that it may sit out the fall election.
The senator has drawn more praise from Republicans including Mr. Cheney and Karl Rove, President Bush’s senior adviser, who said yesterday that he called Mr. Lieberman on Tuesday to wish him well in the primary. The two men are friends, Mr. Rove said.
Another Republican, Mark Kennedy, the party’s nominee in a Senate race in Minnesota this fall, said yesterday that he was endorsing Mr. Lieberman for re-election.
Republicans have a candidate in the Connecticut race this fall, Alan Schlesinger, but he has struggled to raise money or attract interest amid the Lieberman-Lamont contest.
NYT
Some people in this country need to wake up and smell the coffee. Now I know how many people feel about the Bush administrations mismanagement of this war, but why take it out on Joe, he's doing what he can with the tools we have available, blunt as them may be or seam to many.
I know one thing, the terrorist, and their fascist backers with empirical designs are going to do their thing like it or not. So you can sit there and wait your turn at the knife, or your can stand up and fight. I know what I'll be doing, how about you.
posted by madtom at 11:53 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home