Bzzzzzzztttttttttttt! It's too bad there couldn't be a laboratory to play out different scenarios. I'd bet if Bush had done nothing and then Hussien launched some WMD attack, like an anthrax attack on SF, for example, you and Ty would be screaming the loudest that Bush dropped the ball, and Saddam had violated all of the UN Sanctions since 91 and Clinton had called him the greatest threat to stability in the ME, but dumya was asleep at the wheel.

Thank G-d history will be the ultimate vindication for George W. and his courageous stand against the enemies of peace and freedom.

That's utterly non-responsive to what I was talking about, as you well know.

And the victory part is deluded.


Completely non-responsive, but given the cards you were dealt that was well-played.

In follow up to the below, in fairness, in my estimation, the war we are currently in, started with the taking of our Iranian Embassy. Carter dropped the ball by prostrating our policy to the lives of a couple of hundred diplomats. It was an act of war and it should have been treated as such. Reagan dropped the ball consistently to trhougout his term on the ME (except for supporting Israel). The day the hostages came out was the day we should have launched retaliatory strikes and taken out some military targets. We were weak on Hezbollah after the embassy bombing in Beirut, and Reagan cut and ran. Etc etc etc et al. It is all part of a whole, as the terror network and the funding network interact (albeit necessarily in a concerted way) in various ways. Unfortunately, none of our Presidents over the last 30 years has had an overarching policy or vision on the ME and how to balance dealing with the radical islamist terrorist problem while also trying to respect the cultural differences and win the hearts and minds of the people. So we find ourselves in the situation we are. For now, I advocate more aggressive military policy. It's not perfect, but I think diplomacy in this area is for shit, so the alternative method is worth a shot.

Either way, point is, plenty of blame to go around to all of the last 5 presidents. At least.

I tried to read what you wrote, but the above is all I could make out. MY eyes are tired. Long day.

I was re-reading this to mock my spelling and grammar errors, and I had to note that the funny thing is, in the 80s, I was far more willing to give the Palestinians a chance and supported a position that Israel should be pressured to give up land for peace and the pressure should be us leading them by the nose, or else. I also was highly critical of Sharon and his lebanon incursion.

How times have changed.

:eek:

Go Hank, go!
 

U.S. Representative, District 4 -GA
Democrat
35% of precincts reporting Votes Percentage

Henry C. "Hank" Johnson, Jr. 11,295 61.5%
Cynthia McKinney 7,073 38.5%

Go Hank, go!
 

2

Go Hank, go!
 

3

Go Hank, go!
 

It's not even worth posting a link, trust me or go to Drudge, but a Mckinney staffer assaulted a television news cameraman today outside a polling place.

See Sidd, this is what I mean, the apple doesnt fall far from the tree.

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

Well, looks like it will be about a 3% margin. Certainly, we can all agree which way it was trending, and who knows, maybe the shenanigans regarding the website cost Lieberman that 3%. If so, I hope Lamont is proud of his people and his ill gotten victoury. Although for a guy wiht a commie sympathiser for an Uncle, I am sure this a proud moment much as in the tradition of most of the elections in the communist world.

All I can say at this point is, let the games begin. I'm teeing up my absentee ballot for the "I" candidate, but who knows, the big winner here could be the Republicans. Either way it will be fun to watch the democrat party eat itself alive over this race for another 3 months.

Keep prayin
 

U.S. Representative, District 4
Democrat
51% of precincts reporting Votes Percentage

Henry C. "Hank" Johnson, Jr. 17,947 58.1%
Cynthia McKinney 12,945 41.9%

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

That is the stupidest thing you've posted all day, and that's saying a lot.

There is speculation that Lieberman was setting up a "the hackers cost me the election" line to justify running as an independent.

Cite, please.

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

If my post is stupid, then your second sentence above is correspondingly stupid. You can't have it both ways. There is either some legitimacy to the claim or there's not. If professional campaigners are going to make the claim then I feel justified. They know more about the game than you or me. Who knows how important the website was to the election day GOTV. I don't know how those operations run, anymore, and my experience was from pre-interweb days. Do you know as a matter of fact, that the campaign was not using the website as a tool in its GOTV work?

If so, cite please.



This makes no sense, you want a cite to my hope that is based on a conditional fact assumption, that by the "if" I used in my post, I am acknowledging may or may not be true?

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

As you know, I have a close relative who is working on a campaign. I am reliably informed that the website is not important to election day GOTV. E-mail, maybe moreso, but certainly not to the tune of 3%.

Since we're on the subject, I will add that you do not have to look very hard to find blogs questioning the web-hosting service that the Lieberman campaign chose. Low-end, and not likely able to handle the sort of traffic you would see in these circumstances. Also not likely to be able to tell the Lieberman folks what caused their problems today. Am happy to provide cites if you will promise to read them.

Cite for the notion that Lamont's victory is somehow ill-gotten. I took this as a suggestion on your part (again) that he had cheated, notwithstanding the admission today by the Lieberman folks that they had no evidence of this.

Prediction time
 

Assume Lieberman loses the primary.

Also assume that he runs as an independent, which given the margin of loss tonight and the lack of any viable R candidate, he would nuts not to do, the seat is his to keep.

When he wins, who does he caucus with?

Based on (i) the continuing violence in the ME (ii) and relatredly, continued threats to Israel's existence from Hezbollah and Iran, (iii) and relatedly Iran's nukes that it has and tests (on August 22) and (iv) the continued flirtation of the democrat party with anti-Israel anti-semitic pro-Euro/ME terrorists' positions; I go out on a limb here and now and predict Joltin Joe will caucus with the Rs.

Who has the guts to go on record with me!?!?!

Also, of note, once Lieberman turns I, he is no longer a D, and thus the Senate will be 55-43-2. Ouch.

Prediction time
 

If Lieberman loses the primary, there will be a lot of pressure on him from mainstream Democrats -- those who campaigned for him -- to drop out. Bill Clinton, e.g. His money may dry up. He'll look a lot worse coming off a loss. So I think it's presumptious to say that the race is his to lose. I would be surprised if he stays in, though stranger things have happened.

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

I am not conceding anything, but I do know your sources of campaign info are better, so I'll trust that your assertions are honestly made.

:D


I said "if" he cheated, "if", then I hope he is happy with his ill gotten gains. If he didn't cheat, then g-d speed to him, but Lieberman still has the Joe-Mentum for the general election.

Prediction time
 

Word on the street is that moderate/liberal Republican money is already lining up behind him. Remember this is the state of Lowell Weicker (and the current governor is closer to teh D side than naught, and I have some first hand experience on that score).

Good news
 

U.S. Representative, District 4
Democrat

89% of precincts reporting Votes Percentage

Henry C. "Hank" Johnson, Jr. 36,853 58.9%
Cynthia McKinney 25,683 41.1%

better news
 

Sen. Joe Lieberman has conceded the U.S. Senate primary to challenger Ned Lamont but vowed to petition his way onto the November ballot as an independent.

Woo hoo. Joe-Mentum baby! Go Joe, go Joe, go Joe!!!!!!

better news
 

Awesome speech:

"Thank you dear friends for standing by me in this difficult race."
"Your support has sustained my family and me and made this a much closer race than all the pundits were predicting."
"I called Ned Lamont and congratulated him on his success today."
"We've just finished the first half and the Lamont Team is ahead. In the second half, our team, Team Connecticut, is going to surge forward in November."
"The old politics of polarization won today. For the sake of our state, my country and my party, I cannot and will not let those results stands today."
"I will continue to offer Connecticut a different path forward."
"People are fed up with the petty partisanship and angry bickering in Washington. It is continually blocking progress on major problems and wasting America's greatness."

I am down with Team Connecticut! Go Nutmeggers!

eta: what does mean by my party? He needs to have forensics run a print check on the knife they take out of his back. Dollars to donuts says its a donkey hoof.

better news
 

There is something very annoying about Lieberman. Although I appreciate his courageous stance on the war, he still seems pretentious, arrogant and condescending. His hollywood bashing made him seem like a twisted version of the church lady. I think personality played a major role here. This just wasn't an election over policy.

I was glad to see Cynthia McKinney go. It is too bad we couldn't use the primary to get rid of some of the bad eggs in our party.

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

Recount?

better news
 

Spanky, get with the program, it's Team Connecticut now. You are either with us or with them.......

I guess the cum stain on her dress was irrefutable?

"The British Government has learned that..."

Still not a lie.

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

the thing is, what's the point. If he wants the seat, its his take as an I.

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

When he wins the Senate race as an Independent, will the Kossacks blame "Diebold" and will the CBC claim that blacks in Stamford were disenfranchised?

All seemingly empty space is filled with ether, per Aristotle. Not a lie, but misleading to someone who doesn't know better, since Aristotle is one of those people who is recognized as a good source. So putting that out there in a science discussion would be highly, you know, bad.

Dishonest, though not an outright lie.

I don't want that in a leader.

better news
 

Lest anyone forget, he hedged his bets in 2000 by running simultaneously for both Senate and for Vice President.

You forgot to add "hubris"

dissent. The analogy is off. the fact is, all empty space is not filled with ether and if someone who knows that quotes aristotle then that is close enough to a lie to be equivalent.

With Bush, they thought it might be true. They had some intelligence that indicated it was and then some subsequent intelligence that conflicted with the earlier intelligence. The brits only had one type of intelligence and were a key ally. I think citing their intelligence, when you still believed it might be true (and as far as I am aware it was never absolutely proven that it was not true) is fine.

Again, if it turned out Saddam got the yellow cake and made a bomb and dropped it on SF, Ty would have been howling louder than the most that Bush;s inteligence dropped the ball. And questioning why the brits got it right.

It was a judgement call. No dishonesty.

Next.

Reporting for Duty
 

I guess you didn't vote for John Kerry in 2004 either, given his "Holiday in Cambodia" lark and the stories about the Green Beret he keeps in his briefcase.

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

He won't. He doesn't have a friend in the world now. All the Clintons and FOBs will have to support Lamont now. Maybe McCain will help him, but many Dems who were on his side in the primary are already on record that they will support the Dem nominee. It's a long way to November, and the polls today on a 3-way race are meaningless.

Diebold is the reason he got 48%. In a fair election he loses by 10 or more.

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

You'll eat those words. Team Connecticut is rolling. Take no prisoners.

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

You're comfortable adopting a phrase from the guy responsible for "Joementum"?

Oh-kay.

Say it ain't so, Joe
 

If Ty wrote this, I'd assume it was a joke.

With you - not so much.


PS - Echo Chamber

Reporting for Duty
 

I did not vote for any presidential candidate in 2004.

Reporting for Duty
 

President Bush and the RNC thank you once again for your support.

better news
 

I will be supporting the Republican in the race. Since Joe is so selfish and puts himself above his party, our guy may have a chance. Joe will split the Demo vote giving the Repub a victory.

Reporting for Duty
 

What's the point of voting in a state that is certain to go one way? I didn't vote in 2000 in TX, either.