Skip to main content

First Diary, so apologies in advance for poor form.
I am a Democratic Town Committee member and a Lamont delegate.
Went to the JJB tonight.The state part fundraiser. $175 per ticket, and a cash bar. Huge turnout for Barak and, as mentioned many times, the pure insider baseball kind of event. Much of the night was designed as a tribute to our junior senator. The very popular Chris Dodd introduced Joe, then Joe got to introduce Barak, then Barak had to start by praising Joe. All very neat, all designed to get huge ovations for Joe.

But it didn't work.

Dodd gave a typically excellent speech, but when he asked us to stand for Joe, only maybe half of the crowd did - the rest sat on our hands. Joe gave a rousing and funny speech (at least for him), but could barely be heard over the clink of silverware on plates. (which I swear was louder when he spoke then when Dodd did). The crowd barely paid attention to him.

Barak Obama gave a typically amazing speech, handicapped only by the obligatory pro-joe stuff. You could just feel the energy in the room decrease every time he had to praise Joe. He must have hated to do it. A great orator hates to ruin a good address.

One of the best cheers for Barak came when he attacked the War and the lies that led to it - I just wish I had been close enough to see Joe's expression.

All in all, a very good night for Ned. His supporters were well represented in the room. I actually saw as many of his buttons as Lieberman's. And the lack of enthusiasm for Joe from the party elite was simply stunning.

I am encouraged.

If Joe Lieberman can't get an enthusiastic response from this group, and he didn't, who the hell is going to work for him in August? UPDATE: As noted below, AMERICABLOG has a report of Booing. As I responded, I booed (though frankly not very loudly)but didn't hear anyone else. I don't think this is significant. The question is not whether the JJB regulars will, in the end, support Lieberman, but rather with what energy. I saw no evidence that the party is exited about helping Joe keep his seat, no matter what our leaders say. That is why I call this a bad night for Joe.

Originally posted to pavlov dog on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 07:26 PM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Sounded like an awkward moment for JL (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Andrew C White, gmb, GN1927, Bouwerie Boy

    Let's hope the sitting-on-hands sentiment has legs.

    -- Doing my part to shit on neocon Republicanism wherever I encounter it.

    by Agent of Fortune on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 07:25:07 PM PST

    •  And gotta keep folks (0+ / 0-)

      sitting on their wallets when joementum is around, too.

    •  asking folks to stand for Joe (0+ / 0-)

      tonight was a mistake on Chris Dodd's part for another reason. (I know I'm asking for it here, but just trying to be fair.) Many of us never heard him ask.

      There were 1700 people there; for the first speakers the acoustics were terrible (as the evening went on this improved.) Dodd was shouting so we could barely understand him. No one in my area heard the request to stand at all. Nobody stood. In another area lots of people stood. That's a better measure of the sound system than a measure of party support.
      Yes people did boo. Not much given the size of the crowd but it's pretty unusual so it was noticed.
      And yes people are angry about the war. Barak's biggest applause started when he mentioned the coffins. But folks are still figuring this challenge to JL out.  

      Last year was worse for JL. People didn't clap when he spoke. Silence. It was eerie.
      This year the regulars see he's being attacked, and the applause for him was stronger.

      It was a good night for Dems. Sold out crowd, strong response to Barak's claims about our party. And 'we know who we are.' It looks very good for our three Democratic Congressional challengers, Murphy Courtney and Farrell.

  •  John at Americablog said (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    that he got a call from someone at the event who said that when Lieberman was introduced he was booed and it was loud.  Does that sound right by you?

  •  Was Joe booed there? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DavidNYC, joynow, Transmission, L0kI, annefrank

    Maybe They Were Saying...

    (via Lamontblog)

    and why is Americablog saying that Joe was booed at the dinner?

  •  Jane over at FDL (3+ / 0-)

    posted a hesitant, unconfirmed report that Joementum was booed at that dinner. It sounds like the crowd was underwhelmed, but didn't actually boo?

    Let the great world spin for ever down the ringing grooves of change. - Tennyson

    by bumblebums on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 07:26:49 PM PST

  •  THANKS for the post! (0+ / 0-)

    Do you think there will be any pics of Joe looking distressed floating around the internet? I'll pay good money to see him looking sour!!

    Bomb al jazeera? What could be more stupid than that? People who still support the idiot who thought of this lame brain idea!

    by ejbr on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 07:27:04 PM PST

  •  Ut Oh (7+ / 0-)

    If this keeps up, Joementum will switch parties now, and Ned will have to defeat Joe in the general.

    This is the way democracy ends Not with a bomb But with a gavel -Max Baucus

    by emptywheel on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 07:27:15 PM PST

  •  Very Nice to hear (0+ / 0-)

    Can you organize your county committee to endorse Lamont?

  •  by the way (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gmb, Mass Southpaw

    anytime you bring bad news for Joe it is very good form indeed.

  •  Barak--what are you doing... (6+ / 0-)

    shilling for Republican Lite?  Please protect your reputation.

    •  Last year it was John Edwards (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sacrelicious, Swordsmith

      They're not there for Joe, just fulfilling their presidential aspirations.

    •  lost respect (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      yeah, I just lost a lot of respect for him.

      •  as I mentioned in another thread... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        joynow, GN1927

        speaking as a CT Democratic Town Committee member, I wouldn't blame Obama, or read too much into his presence. Obama was the big name brought in as speaker for a mostly party function, and Lieberman is desperately clinging to it as if it's an endorsement. Maybe I'm misremembering, but when I got the invite months ago, Lieberman wasn't mentioned anywhere.

        A lot of people were very excited to see Obama, and went in spite of Lieberman, including pro-Lamont members of our town committee.

        One of my students was faced with a dilemma: He was offered a free pass, but only if he agreed to hand out pro-Lieberman literature.

        People were there to see Obama and he was there to help the CT Democratic Party. What's he going to say if Lieberman's acting like an overly clingy ex-girlfriend who nobody wants to be rude to? At the time Obama accepted the invite, Lamont wasn't yet in the picture - and canceling would have been a major financial blow to CT Dems (while not hurting Lieberman financially at all).

        At least for one night, Lieberman had his tongue in a fellow  Democrat's ear, and not in GWB's...

        Economic -5.00 Social -5.49

        by Swordsmith on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 09:21:59 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Chris Dodd helped HAVA written by Ney, Abramoff (0+ / 0-)

      Chris Dodd has not helped Democrats nor Democracy with non-evidentiary elections by supporting HAVA written by Ohio's Ney for Abramoff's client Diebold.


      Although public (and media) interest in this issue continues to grow daily, movement on legislation slowed  after four influential lawmakers from both chambers of Congress, both sides of the aisle, opposed further support by their colleagues for any voter-verified paper ballot legislation.  The March 3, 2004 "Dear Colleague" letter signed by Reps. Steny Hoyer (MD) and Bob Ney (OH), and Senators Chris Dodd (CT) and Mitch McConnell (KY), said they should simply "let the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) be implemented as written."

      Blogged by Brad
      on 1/10/2006 @ 11:21am PT...

      The Soon-to-be-Indicted Rep. Bob Ney of Ohio's Connection To Electoral Fraud

      The Dots Connect Between Abramoff, Ohio 2004 Election Smokescreen and Ney's Former Staffer Revealed to be on Diebold's Payroll While Working for White House Law Firm

      All the While as HAVA -- America's 'Election Reform' Bill -- is Used for Political Payoff in the Bargain...

      There's been a great deal of speculation over the last several days, particularly in the light of Jack Abramoff's recent guilty pleas, concerning the connection of Congressman Bob Ney (R-OH) to Election Fraud in Ohio, vis a vis his stewardship and authoring of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) back in 2001 and 2002. The heavy-handed tactics he has taken since, in order to keep the flawed act from being changed in any way over the years, along with going to great lengths to keep the nation's eyes off of massive electile dysfunction in Ohio and elsewhere since 2004, may finally get the attention it all properly deserves.


      Mark Crispin Miller's site:

      Input: Abramoff money --> Output: Election fraud

      In 2002 House Administration Chair Congressman Bob Ney of Ohio was a prime sponsor of the (sic) "Help America Vote Act" (HAVA). In fact, HAVA was actually written in Bob Ney's office. HAVA, under the guise of resolving the 2000 election fraud issues, was actually written to promote the distribution of computerized voting systems across the nation. The bill was designed to send $3.8 billion taxpayer dollars straight into the pockets of corporations like Diebold, whose voting equipment has now been unequivacolly proven to provide an open door to election rigging. Diebold, one of the prime lobbyists for HAVA, was at the time a client of Greenberg Traurig, Abramoff's firm.


      Paper Ballots and Hand Counts ONLY  
      (no machines, no audits, no absentees, no early voting)

      By Lynn Landes    (6/23/05)

      Most Americans are unfamiliar with these facts due to our privately-owned and corporate-controlled news media.   When faced with the prospect of machine-free hands-on elections, voters have lots of questions and concerns.  Here are some of them:

        Don't some voters need these machines, such as non-English language voters and disabled voters?  

      No.  Voters who want a ballot in their own language should be able to order such a ballot in advance of any election.  Secondly, voting machines present the same violation of voting rights for disabled voters.  And contrary to popular belief, the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) does not require election officials to purchase electronic voting machines.  Besides, anecdotal evidence suggests that these machines are difficult for the disabled to use.  Election officials and voting machine companies admit that it takes the sight-impaired voters ten times longer to use a touchscreen machine than able-bodied voters.

      However, there is a way for the sight-impaired to vote privately and independently.  They can use tactile paper ballot with audio assistance.  Tactile ballots are used around the world and in some states such as Rhode Island.  Unfortunately, many disabled voters are unaware of these kinds of ballots.  That may not be an accident.  Two organizations for the blind, The American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD) and The National Federation of the Blind (NFB), are ardent supporters of paperless touchscreen voting machines.  They also have received over $1 million dollars from the voting machine industry, according to news reports.

      many green, yellow, blue and now purple dogs are a majority.

      by Prove Our Democracy with Paper Ballots on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 09:23:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Joementum (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    joynow, gmb, GN1927, ariesm44, Eupraxsophist

    If the Rummy rumors swirling around are true maybe Joementum will get Rummy's job. As much as I would hate to see Joementum as Secretary of Defense, it might be the only sure way to get rid of Joementum once and for all.

    Look at the plus side. Joementum can't be worse than Rummy. Besides he will have to defend what happens in Iraq on TV day in and day out. He will be accountable. It might be the worst of all worlds for Joe. Iraq is FUBAR. There is not much Joementum or anyone else can do to fix the mess. But Joementum would be responsible. It will be HIS failure. And why not? He has supported this war 100%. It is only fair that he be stuck with the clean up.

  •  I used to put up with him for the most part (0+ / 0-)

    I understand a Democrat moving to the center in a solidly red state. But Lieberman is a joke.

    ==== The More You Know *

    by ZT155 on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 08:01:27 PM PST

    •  The reason there's such an uprising against (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joynow, Swordsmith, liberal atheist

      Lieberman is not because he's a centrist in a blue state (Tom Carper of Delaware is far more conservative than Lieberman (in 2005 only Max Baucus and Ben Nelson voted with the Republicans more than Tom Carper (nearly 25% of the time). Joe Lieberman ranked 16th (he voted with the Republicans 10% of the time), and nobody's making a big deal out of him).
      It basically boils down to his support for Bush on the war, his unwillingness to be an obstructionist, and things he said on Fox News  (if I think of a "good" word for obstructionist, I'll start using it instead).

      Don't take my bluntness and attitude personally-the best weapon for the Democrats is the unvarnished truth, and the truth usually hurts.

      by DemocraticLuntz on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 08:21:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  AP confirms booing (9+ / 0-)


    Despite the camaraderie between the two, the crowd was clearly more receptive to Obama's remarks than Lieberman's speech about party unity and the potential for Democratic victories at the ballot box this fall.

    In fact, scattered boos greeted Lieberman when he took the podium, and he had to stop three times during his remarks to shush the crowd so he could deliver key points.

    Ned Lamont, a Democratic activist and anti-war candidate from Greenwich, is challenging Lieberman for the party's nomination this year. Legions of supporters of Lieberman and Lamont both attended the dinner.

  •  Sent some dough (5+ / 0-)

    to Lamont today.  As much as I could at the moment; hope all Kossacks will do the same.  You know, $20.00 by 200 people is a big political donation.

    And yes, let's all lower our heads and mourn Lieberman.

    But let's get him out of there.

    It's more than him "veering from the party line."

    It's more like, what exactly is he expecting to get for selling his soul to the devil?

    I think he is, at heart, a good man, so I believe somewhere deep inside he's worked it all out.  His pretzel logic? Believe in Bush, believe in a free, peaceful Israel.

    Well, here's a lightbulb moment for you.  Who DOESN'T want a free, peaceful Israel?  Even most Arabs want a free and peaceful Israel!  Good intentions aside, Lieberman is deluded...and really, oddly so.  He's supposed to be such a thoughtful, intelligent man.  At least Al Gore seemed to think him so...unless Al Gore was using him, too?  We know that Bush is using him.  It's really quite sad to see a "good" man be so publicly "used".  It hurts.  It brings out the vulnerability in all of us - what happens when we are caught, kissing the losing quarterback?

    If Israel is Lieberman's pressure point, then Bush and his ilk are using Israel to get to their own greed-inspired goals.  Which is, complete American world domination, of the Middle East, of oil, of, well, pretty much everything.

    We can read it all in the PFNAC treatises.  What they wanted.  And they got it.

    But whoops - they weren't equipped to handle it.

    Lamont - what a perfect candidate at a perfect time.  I'm proud to put my dollars behind you, and I hope the loss of Lieberman is a much-needed shock to the placid "moderate" (read: Republian) Democratic system.

    "There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of law and in the name of justice." - Montesquieu, 1742

    by hopesprings on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 08:03:07 PM PST

  •  In the name of stopping the GOP... (6+ / 0-)

    ...if Lieberman wins the nomination, I'd support him through gritted teeth.  Better an extra Democratic vote for Reid as Senate Leader than a GOoP'er.  But damn, I want Lamont to win.  Lieberman has been right on a lot of votes, but he's been wrong on some, too, and he's an enabler of extremists.  It's time that stopped, one way or another.

  •  So, the law of Karma works? n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cake or Death

    Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else. --Will Rogers

    by groggy on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 08:42:43 PM PST

  •  nice job for a first diary (0+ / 0-)

    Joe is about to learn that his opportunism has a serious price.  He thought he could get some mileage out of sucking up to the people in power

    To those who say he should switch parties, he has nothing to gain by switching parties.    Rs only have a use for him as a renegade Democrat.  If he switched parties, he'd be a moderate Republican like Giuliani--and they'd have no use for him.

    Politics is like driving. To go backward, put it in R. To go forward, put it in D. IMPEACH

    by TrueBlueMajority on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 09:13:57 PM PST

  •  Light a fire... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Hopefully this will be a wake-up call to the other Democrats go against their constituents and appease the worst actions of Republican adversaries.  

  •  To Boo or not to Boo (0+ / 0-)

    Lets not resort to rethug tactics, like disseminating, obscuring, clouding, etc. ad nauseum. TELL THE TRUTH was it BOOS or BOO HOOS 'cause we all really wanted to be bolder than we were at this gathering. COWERING before the great LIEberman? MOO-Moo

  •  Question... (0+ / 0-)

    I am curious what this says about those that support Joe like Obama and Dodd? Me being an ex-Democrat and all can barely stomach the party as it is. I have never voted Republican in 30 years of voting, but with the party's "future" (Obama) backing such a lame act, I can only cringe at what the Democrats are about to offer up. Why is the leadship hell bent on losing more elections? Why would someone like Obama "suck-up" to politicians like JL? Is it that he is so concerned with preservation of the "party" over the "country" that he does this. Prediction: if the Dems continue to present the American public with the same lame bullshit they have given us since 1980 (with a few notable exceptions) the Republicans will win again. Can't the Democrats get in touch with the people?

    The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. - Thomas Jefferson

    by american pastoral on Thu Mar 30, 2006 at 09:57:08 PM PST

  •  Firedoglake (0+ / 0-)

    linked over to this diary. I saw it  here late last night - hopefully she'll keep it up.

  •  'Why can't you people just settle down ?' (0+ / 0-)

    Image hosting by Photobucket

    Hey, sometimes even my wife likes me!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site