Tuesday, October 10, 2006

Lamont's Latest Negative Attack Ad

(Posted October 10, 2006)

It is official – Ned is on track to set a new record for non-stop negativity in Connecticut campaigns.

The TV ad he is releasing today is his third attack ad in a week, and marks the 11th negative paid television or radio ad he has run since the primary – out of 12 ads total.

That means more than 90 percent of his ads have been totally or largely attacks on Joe – with no new ideas to solve the problems the people of Connecticut care about.

And it’s only going to get worse -- the Lamont campaign told the Hartford Courant that the ad is the first in a whole new series of negative attack ads they plan to run in the closing month of the campaign.

Sadly, with the ad he released today, all Ned is showing the people of Connecticut is his own desperation and hypocrisy.

The fact is Joe has a 93 percent career voting record over his 18 years in the Senate. That is the same exact percentage as Lamont compiled during his six years on a Greenwich town board.

Moreover, the overwhelming majority of the votes Joe missed were while he was working to defeat George W. Bush, who Ned attacks almost as much as Joe.

In 2000, Joe ran for Vice President to help Al Gore prevent George Bush from becoming president. In 2003, Joe ran for President to change the direction of the country by removing George Bush from office.

If you factor out those two campaigns, Joe’s voting record is 98 percent – he missed 109 votes out of 5295.

Ned should know this history as well as anyone. In the 2000 campaign, he gave $500 to Joe’s Senate campaign and $5000 to support the Gore-Lieberman campaign at a Greenwich fundraiser that Joe headlined.

In addition, in 2003 Ned twice contributed to Joe’s presidential campaign, well after the war in Iraq started.

Clearly Ned could not have that upset that Joe was missing votes in those years.

All of which shows that if it’s time for anything, it’s time for Ned to answer for his constant double talk and double standards.

How can he attack George Bush and the Bush policies and then turn around criticize Joe for trying to do something to stop Bush and change his policies?

Then again, we should not be surprised. This is the same Ned who last month had to reach back eight years to the Clinton impeachment proceeding to find something new to attack Joe, only for us to find that Ned praised Joe’s speech before he attacked it.

The bottom line: If Ned really wants to offer voters a change, he could give them a break from his relentlessly negative, misleading, and hypocritical attacks, and maybe provide just one new idea to solve a problem they care about.

So far, he has had practically nothing positive to offer the people of Connecticut — no experience, no credibility, and no ability to get things done for our state.

It is no wonder that the broad majority of voters outside his anti-war base are rejecting his campaign left and right.

HERE ARE THE FACTS:

* This new ad is his third attack ad in a week, and marks the 11th negative paid television or radio ad he has run since the primary – out of 12 ads total.
* That means more than 90 percent of his ads have been totally or largely attacks on Joe Lieberman – with no new ideas to solve the problems the people of Connecticut care about.
* The fact is Joe Lieberman has a 93 percent career voting record over his 18 years in the Senate. That is the same exact percentage as Ned Lamont compiled during his six years on a Greenwich town board.
* Moreover, the overwhelming majority of the votes Joe Lieberman missed were while he was working to defeat George W. Bush, who Ned attacks almost as much as Joe Lieberman.
* In 2000, Joe Lieberman ran for Vice President to help Al Gore prevent George Bush from becoming president. In 2003, Joe Lieberman ran for President to change the direction of the country by removing George Bush from office.
* If you factor out those two campaigns, Joe Lieberman’s voting record is 98 percent – he missed 109 votes out of 5295.
* Ned should know this history as well as anyone. In the 2000 campaign, he gave $500 to Joe Lieberman’s Senate campaign and $5000 to support the Gore-Lieberman campaign at a Greenwich fundraiser that Joe Lieberman headlined.
* In addition, in 2003 Ned twice contributed to Joe Lieberman’s presidential campaign, well after the war in Iraq started.
------
Posted by: Eric Blankenbaker on 10/10/2006 at 3:56 PM

===================================================================

ADDENDUM from Connecticut Bob (B.A.) - Here's the Lamont ad that Eric is referring to above. Judge for yourself:

12 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

When Joe's bad points are being highlighted; that is being negative to him. If you ask me, there is a hell lot more stuff to be negative about.

Whenever Joe LIE-man's campaign runs out of talking points, or they can't rebutt Lamont, they'll either twist the facts or call him "negative". Fact: it just happens to be true and if it is negative, it is because Joe makes it so.

Please, Joe ....stop whining. Calling someone else negative doesn't change the facts that you have been morally connfused, delusional, downright wrong and literally caught lying soooo many times.

7:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As always, the facts are biased...

Poor Joe

J

8:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nice addendum BA; IMO that might be a very useful feature in many cases. Thanks again.

J

8:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TRUTH HURTS. USE JOE's words against JOE. Rinse. Repeat

9:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let me see if I get this right. Because Ned uses Joe's own words against Joe, he's negative (according to you).

But when you guys falsely blamed Ned's supporters, for your own incompetence that crashed Joe's web server, that wasn't negative?

By the way, what ever happened to that investigation? I read somewhere that the FBI was not thrilled at having you waste their time with your bogus charges.

10:29 PM  
Blogger CT Bob said...

Anon, I posted this on my other blog today: "Hacking" Investigation Update

10:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Going into Iraq was a positive thing.

Ignoring North Korea is a negative thing.

Chastising Clinton was a positive thing.

Not calling for accountability from those responsible in covering up Foley-gate is negative.

Joe ....you are so confused, morally depraved, deluded and WRONg, you should be institutionalised ...at that old folks home that was applauding you, maybe ...if they still want you.

4:16 AM  
Anonymous Veritas said...

What a bunch of sorry hooey! Turncoat Joe - you're not acting in Connecticut's interests, you don't have Connecticut's interests at heart - your only interest is yourself, your sad and profoundly pathological ego. You don't have the first scintilla of an interest for what you can do for Connecticut, you're only and exclusively interested in what Connecticut can do for you. That's why you named your new party "Connecticut for Joe". If you were truly concerned about Connecticut, you'd have called it "Joe for Connecticut". The only people you are fooling are the wilfully blind and wilfully idiot.

7:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

BTW Eric Blank ...you write like a kid ....I guess Joe's supporters must come from somewhere .....just hope you are not of the ex-traumatised pages!

9:47 AM  
Blogger gchaucer2 said...

Nice to put up the ad on your site. How stupid are you? Get your facts right about the missed votes. And the negativity comes from your side of the spectrum. Cover-up seems to be your modus operendi.

2:23 PM  
Blogger dab said...

First of all, I suggest your campaign buy a dictionary - or use spell check.

Secondly - waaa, waaaa, waaaaa.

You are running for office against the wishes of the Democratic party in Connecticut. You're like the stalker boyfriend who just won't get the message.

Your record stinks and lots of people wanted you out of office - long before Ned entered the scene. You've been out for Joe and Joe alone, for years.

Joe - you got to go.

And suck it up, man. You sound pathetic.

6:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Joe made it clear years ago: the people of CT deserve a Senator who works for them.

Where was Joe?

2:11 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home