Yeah, he'd like to be McSame's VP candidate....have you seen this?
The Lamont Lesson
By David Sirota
When you hear folks say that history inevitably repeats itself, you probably figure they are referring to the distant past. When very recent events repeat themselves, it evokes a different parable—the one about how the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Welcome to the Iraq debate, circa 2008.
Recall that two years ago, a little-known businessman named Ned Lamont mounted an anti-war primary challenge to Connecticut’s warmongering senator, Joe Lieberman. Lamont’s campaign, which I worked for, was controversial. It was just four years after many congressional Democrats voted for the war, and The Washington Post was reporting that Speaker Nancy Pelosi “said that Democrats should not seek a unified position on an exit strategy in Iraq.” Though polls showed the public to be against the conflict, Democratic strategists insisted that opposing the war could backfire on the party.
When Lamont won the primary, Washington’s chatter machine predicted doom. The hawkish New Republic bemoaned a “Ned Scare” that supposedly meant election-losing “McGovernism has returned.” Slate magazine wondered, “Will the Democratic Party repeat the political mistakes of the Vietnam era?”
Luckily for Democrats, their candidates ignored the “experts” and started echoing Lamont’s message. After the 2006 election, polls confirmed that these anti-war campaigns were precisely what won Democrats control of Congress.
Lamont, though he lost in the general election, showed that representing the public’s anti-war sentiment and ignoring Washington’s self-appointed gurus wins national elections. And as the current campaign unfolds, the Lamont Lesson is resurfacing.