I watched the replay of Meet the Press, where Jim Dean squared off against former Clinton Administration official, and Lieberman supporter, Lanny Davis. Davis made two accusations against Lamont that must be defused immediately.
From tomorrow's
New York Times:
He also criticized Mr. Lamont for being less than clear on which plan for withdrawal from Iraq he supported -- the "phased withdrawal" offered by Senators Carl Levin of Michigan and Jack Reed of Rhode Island, or the set withdrawal date advocated by Senators John Kerry of Massachusetts and Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin. At different times Mr. Lamont has signaled support for both, which Mr. Davis decried as inconsistent.
What concerns me is Lamont's response:
Tom Swan, Mr. Lamont's campaign manager, said today that Mr. Lamont supported the Kerry amendment. However, Mr. Swan added, the candidate would support other proposals "in order to unify the Democrats; he's not going to make that decision alone," a reference to determining how and when to withdraw troops from Iraq.
This response, unfortunately, makes Ned sound too nuanced on which withdrawal position he supports. There are shades of Kerry 2004 in this response that could be used by Lieberman against Ned. Lieberman could also twist this response to make it sound like Lamont is playing politics with withdrawal (in that, Lamont is open to looking at other withdrawal plans that have a consensus within the caucus.)
There is also another accusation that we need to defuse. Davis said that Lamont donated money to Lieberman back in February 2005, and accused him of being a flip flopper and political opportunist. Can someone look in to this.
...BTW, for those who follow Newark, NJ politics, I had no idea that Cory Booker is a DLCer, which sucks, but he's still a reformer for Newark nonetheless.