« Marine Names Murtha in Haditha Defamation Suit | Main | Terrorists Kill Iraqi Children Playing Soccer in Baghdad »

Ned Lamont's Blog Problem

Ned Lamont lackey, and former Hollywood producer Jane Hamsher [Ed - Originally munged by a spell checker to read Hamster], who went from just covering the Democratic primary in Connecticut to actually packing up and relocating to the state for the race has cobbled together a few of her Ned Lamont/Joe Lieberman campaign coverage pieces (1,2,3) from FireDogLake and posted them as a single entry at The Huffington Post.

Ordinarily that wouldn't merit a mention, but Hamsher's choice of image to accompany her piece did cause the blogosphere to take notice. Though the subject of Bill Clinton's appearance on the campaign trail with Lieberman (mentioned in a Washington Post profile today) is never mentioned in her HuffPo piece, she lead off the entire piece with this lovely bit of racist imagery (since removed):


jane-hamster.jpg


Coziness with bloggers like Hamsher (and several million of his own dollars) helped propel Lamont from nowhere into a tight race for the Democratic nomination U.S Senator, but that coziness comes with a price. When one of their biggest boosters has a Kos-style "Screw 'Em" moment like this, they have little choice but to distance themselves; potentially alienating their biggest boosters...

With six days left until the primary can Lamont won't be able to ignore the racist overtones in Hamsher's picture, especially if the story of the smear gains traction in the mainstream press. Given the nation-wide interest in the race this kind of story is exactly what Lamont doesn't need, and a looks like a gift for Lieberman.


On the Ground with Lamont/Lieberman - [The Huffington Post] (cached)


Update: Mark Coffey excoriates Arriana Huffington for her sites attempt "to doctor the historical record by removing the photo with no correction, explanation, or apology." Given that she had to be dragged over the coals kicking and screaming by George Clooney to admit that she "repurposed" Clooney quotes as a blog post, it's hardly suprising she chose the deceitful path in this matter as well.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ned Lamont's Blog Problem:

» In Search Of Utopia linked with Why are Liberals so STUPID at times...

» Outside The Beltway | OTB linked with Joe Lieberman Blackfaced, Jane Hamscher Redfaced

» Environmental Republican linked with The PuffHo and Racism

» The Right Nation linked with Razzisti (di sinistra)

» WILLisms.com linked with Apologia

Comments (24)

I guess it's true th... (Below threshold)
macofromoc:


I guess it's true that in every lib/dem there's a closet racist trying not to get out. Usually they tend to overcompenste by calling others racist, but sometimes their hate is to great to keep inside.

I trust that the Hamster will be signing up for a sensitivity class.

Is it me, or are Democrats ... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

Is it me, or are Democrats having a problem with burgeoning radical lefties like MoveOn.org and Kos Kids alienating Jews and Blacks? And a hat tip to the NAACP for consistently calling Condi and Powell house n*ggers. Lee and mantis act like gang-bang pornstars reciting their lines after their performance. I honestly hope the libs get some leadership soon. It's just not a very serious party right now. Republicans deserve a counter balance not vaudville acts.

They don't know how to be s... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

They don't know how to be serious. Without Joe and the other adults, they won't learn how anytime soon.

Somebody please clean the hamster cage; it is filthy.

Lieberman was "toast" as so... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Lieberman was "toast" as soon as he said he's run as an independent if he lost the primary -- why should the party support him after that?

Someone is going to have to... (Below threshold)

Someone is going to have to explain the purpose of the imagry to me because I just don't get it. I can't see any way for it to have been ment as a compliment to Leiberman (that *is* Leiberman, right? Or is it Lamont? I think I'd recognize Leiberman normally.) But what's with Clinton? He's everyone's darling, isn't he? So what is the photo supposed to say about Clinton?

A compliment is nearly impossible but how does the photo work as a criticism? Is being black bad?

Now even though actors in black-face way back when likely didn't think of themselves as making fun of black people, in these enlightened times we understand that it was insulting for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with failing to hire genuine black actors. How could anyone aware enough of the world to breathe air not realize that this depiction, even if it is of a white man, is full blown racist and utterly inexcusable?

Or are some people not racist by definition no matter what they do?

If it were a museum piece, ... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

If it were a museum piece, the title would be:

"How to Piss Off the Democratic Black Caucus in Connecticut" by Jane Hamster, circa 2006

Jane may have removed the o... (Below threshold)

Jane may have removed the offensive image, but she didn't remove the comments about the image.

Sorry, but everything else ... (Below threshold)
Nada:

Sorry, but everything else aside, that picture is freaking hysterical.

Someone is going to have... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Someone is going to have to explain the purpose of the imagry to me because I just don't get it.

Apparently the photo was taken from this campaign flyer, which Lamont supporters see as a race-baiting smear. The photo of Lieberman with Clinton is supposedly intended to ingratiate the Senator with black voters, among whom Clinton is quite popular.

I can understand being pissed about the flyer's attack on Lamont, but I don't understand why they are trying to depict Lieberman as dishonestly pandering to blacks (thus the photo). Lieberman has a very good record on civil rights and has always enjoyed support from the black community. The guy who made the picture commented on HuffPost thusly:

To this end, he has imported a figure, Bill Clinton, who has standing with the American black community, and has repeatedly asserted his personal credentials as one who has worked on behalf of that community.

Yet Lieberman has engaged in race baiting (with the Lamont flyer) as a cynical attempt to game this demographic, and he has engaged in other activities which cast doubtful shadows upon this allegiance.

Exactly what activities he does not specify. Anyway, I hope that clears up the intent of the depiction, senseless as it may be.

mantis, thanks for running ... (Below threshold)

mantis, thanks for running that down. Now we know the source of the idea, even if that source doesn't make sense!

Thanks mantis.So L... (Below threshold)

Thanks mantis.

So Lamont is black? I guess I read the text of the flyer and thought, "so what". I guess I just don't see it as persuasive in any way. Was it race baiting? If so I think it's pretty borderline and I don't think it's illegitimate to try to persuade people that you'll represent them every bit as well or better than this other guy.

How is it that people can be so sensative (or claim to be) and then do the black-face photo shop and think that's okay?

So to get revenge for perce... (Below threshold)
Tony:

So to get revenge for perceived race-baiting, Jane Hamsher employs reverse race-baiting. Classy.

Oh, rich and not-black. I ... (Below threshold)

Oh, rich and not-black. I went back, looked a bit closer. I think these people are off their meds. What *exactly* is race-baiting about saying "I've done this civil rights stuff. My opponent quit his membership at an exclusive country club when he decided to run for the senate because he suddenly realized it wasn't very diverse and wouldn't look too good."

A low blow? Not particularly. Appealing to racial issues? Yeah, more or less. But I don't get the outrage, I really don't. Unless it's based on the belief that the criticism will carry weight with some voters and supporters don't think that's fair. Which suggests that they seriously lack perspective when it comes to opposing the demon Joe.

Sheesh.

As I understand it, this is... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

As I understand it, this is the first black president (without any blacks in his administration) with a Jewish Senator in black face make-up a la Al Jolson. The only impression I can get from this is that black americans are fools.

Sadly, I don't <a href="htt... (Below threshold)

Sadly, I don't think this will keep Lamont from winning in the primary. Fortunately, I don't think Lamont has much of a chance in the general election.

If the primary stays as close as it is now, Lieberman will carry a good number of Democrats with him. I also think he will pick up a fair number of votes from moderate Republicans who would rather vote for Lieberman than for GOP candidate Alan Schlesinger. It will come down to those moderates who see a vote for Schlesinger as a vote for Lamont.

Ugh, is it so hard to post ... (Below threshold)

Ugh, is it so hard to post about the issue without including racist imagery?

Anyway, this whole Ned Lamont vs. Joe Lieberman issue raises questions about the wisdom of electoral politics. Consider that Joseph Lieberman is just like his fellow Senate Democrats, in virtually every single way, save for one: talk. Simply put, Lieberman talks differently. He votes the exact same way as his fellow party members, but simply talks differently.

Why does the talk, but not the action, attract attention? I put it to you that this represents the failure of electoral politics.

I see Lee is still bungee j... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

I see Lee is still bungee jumping without the bungee. When Lieberman announced he would run as an Ind. if the lefties pushed an unknown rich (I thought the left hated the rich) kid through the primaries. polls immediately showed him winning the general election and still does by a wide margin. The only thing the lefties will accomplish with the 'rich kid' will be to put Lieberman firmly in the conservative camp 100% instead of 50% of the time. Go figure.

The link provided by Nicola... (Below threshold)
Adjoran:

The link provided by Nicolai Brown a couple posts up is quite illustrative of Lieberman's record, showing how many of his fellow Senate Democrats voted exactly as he did on key issues. The lowest correlation was indeed the Iraq War Resolution, but even there, 58% of Democrats voted the same as Joe.

I might also add that Lieberman has a lifetime rating of 85 from the ADA, compared to 90 for Ted Kennedy.

It's not any "slide to the right" - Lieberman's lowest ADA ratings were in his first few years in the Senate, during the Clinton and Bush Pere Administrations. It's not the IWR - they didn't mount an assault on others who voted for it, like Hilarity! Clinton.

Lieberman's great sin is that he refuses to apologize for his vote, continues to support the war and a strong and aggressive pursuit of terrorism generally, and supports Israel openly and strongly.

He failed to toe the moonbat line. In far-left circles, the party line is more important than anything, because if it is ever allowed to be questioned or defied, it will fall of its own weight.

Hmmm.I wish I live... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

I wish I lived closer. I'd run off about 10,000 posters with that image and paste it with:

"Ned Lamont; racially sensitive to African-Americans since May, 2006".

I'd have fun with it that's for certain.

Read a satirical critique o... (Below threshold)

Read a satirical critique of the battle being waged amongst Democrats in the Lieberman v. Lamont Senate race coined "The Hatfield's & McCoy's"...here:

www.thoughttheater.com

Clintock thought bubble : A... (Below threshold)
914:

Clintock thought bubble : A little lower there Sambo.

Who cares? Just d... (Below threshold)

Who cares?

Just dump LIEBERMAN - that's all anyone cares about.

All I care about at least. I'm sick of the guy - and honored to have this wonderful oppritunity to kick him out at long last.

Why are people shocked that... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Why are people shocked that the lilly-white --- the so-white-it-freaks-out-the-Osmond-clan --- leftie blogosphere has no problem uttering racial epithets?

Most of the prominent lefties have likely never even MET a black person in their lives.
-=Mike

Racist imagery?Lik... (Below threshold)
Davebo:

Racist imagery?

Like this?

I mean, you did request this right?

Hamsher was stupid, no doubt. What's your excuse again?




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy