Ned Lamont's country club problem

A couple of days ago, Ned Lamont resigned from the Round Hill country club in Greenwich, persumably because he didn't want it to become a distraction during the campaign, but insiders are saying that Lamont resigned for a completely different reason. The reason is that Round Hill country club is basically a lilly white members only club, with only a few African American members there.

Lamont's explanation of this he says was that the club was not as diverse as it should be, and he really didn't pay that much attention as he should have.

So, Ned Lamont was once a member of an exclusive country club here in Connecticut that was basically a whites only club.

I wonder how the Lamont forces will try to explain this one away. As Rosco P. Coltrane would say, shame, shame, everybody knows your name!!!!.      http://www.lieberdem.blogspot.com



Display:


Re: Ned Lamont's country club problem (3.00 / 1)

Considering that CT is pretty d*mn lily white and the richest state in the country, I don't see that there's a lot to explain.

I have an idea. Let's talk about Joe's record.

Oh, what's that you say? It's more fun to find distractions? Yeah, I imagine it is.


Karl in Drexel Hill, PA
by KB on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 01:25:14 PM EST

Re: Ned Lamont's country club problem (3.00 / 1)

There is no such thing as "pretty much" whites only, and you know it.  There was only one black kid in my high-school class, but it was not "pretty much a whites-only school."  This charge is as odious as it is cheesy.  Grow up.

Oh, and good luck getting anyone to care about this tripe.  Ned LaMont is a rich white guy.  So is Joe Lieberman.  There may well be a serious and significant issue underlying that fact, but I coubt anyone trusts it to be fairly or fruitfully elucidated by the likes of you.


by Patton on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 01:51:01 PM EST

Re: Ned Lamont's country club problem (none / 0)

"There was only one black kid in my high-school class, but it was not "pretty much a whites-only school." "

______

So you're saying it was a whites only school?
Or are you saying it was "diverse"


by v2aggie2 on Thu Jul 20, 2006 at 01:45:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ned Lamont's country club problem (none / 0)

"Whites only" means that an institution actively excludes non-whites.  This accurately describes many country clubs, but clearly not the one to which Mr. LaMont belonged.  I simply grew up in an area with an unfortunate lack of diversity.  This did not mean that non-white people were excluded, simply that there were not very many of them there.  This post claims that it is possible to be "almost whites only," which is an attempt to portray LaMont as a racist by (somewhat) cleverly blurring the semantics.

There are currently zero Jewish people on the moon.  This does not mean that the moon is anti-semitic.  

Oh, and for the record, my high school sucked and would have benefited from more diversity, and I would probably hate Ned LaMont's countryr blub.


by Patton on Thu Jul 20, 2006 at 03:51:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ned Lamont's country club problem (1.00 / 4)

I don't really care if your sick and tired about it. I'm sick and tired of the "swiftboat" treatment Joe is getting on blogs like this. If I have to put up with the gutless wonders on this and other sites, then you're going to have to put up with me.


by liebermanlives on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 02:21:41 PM EST

lieby, you've got a lot of nerve (none / 0)

calling anybody else a "gutless wonder" -- I've asked you on a couple of occasions to explain why on Earth Dems should support a Dem who makes headlines by attacking other Dems, and you've never responded.

Your tone is hostile and immature, and you've got nothing constructive to say. You obviously think the man's worth defending, so explain why -- rather than smearing his opponents.


Yeah, I'm cynical.
by catastrophile on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 04:19:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ned Lamont's country club problem (none / 0)

Swift boating is making up stuff with no merit and has no effect on the issue of the day.

Joe is not getting swift boated.


by Demrock6 on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 02:26:32 PM EST

Ahhh the important issues (3.00 / 3)

New York Times:

Dozens of gunmen suspected of being Sunni Arabs went on a rampage through a mostly Shiite market area in the town of Mahmudiya on Monday, killing at least 48 civilians and wounding scores, police officials said. Many of the attackers, who fired assault rifles, heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, wore the uniforms of the Iraqi security forces.  "You can't tell your friend from your enemy," an Iraqi Army officer said as Iraqi troops moved in.

Meanwhile, the important issue of the day to Senator Lieberman's campaign?


by Tim Tagaris on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 03:02:07 PM EST

Re: Ned Lamont's country club problem (none / 0)

Of course scorecards are not relevant, they take a big hole in the silly argument that Lieberman is not a good Democrat.  And of course anything bad about Ned Lamont is just more lies and spin from the ruthless Bush Whitehouse.  


by ditka on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 03:10:42 PM EST

Next we are going to hear (3.00 / 1)

that the country club does not accept jews, demonstrating that Lamont is anti-semitic.

Or if we don't hear that, we will hear that the country club ONCE did not accept jews

The plain fact of the matter is that few blacks can afford country club fees.  I don't belong myself, because I don't golf and I'd rather spend my money in other places, plus I don't have that level of jack.


by dataguy on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 03:19:43 PM EST

Swift-kissing (3.00 / 1)

Mr./Ms. Liebermanlives has accused us of "swift-boating."  What a crock.

Actually, what is going on is "swift-kissing" Mr. Lieberman.  Holy Joe is George's new version of a Democrat, now that Zell Miller is in the booby hatch.  He just loves Joe.

You can run,but you can't hide from the swift-kissing.

If Joe would stop kissing George and act like a democrat, all of this would stop.  Too late, I'm afraid.


by dataguy on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 03:22:21 PM EST

Re: Ned Lamont's country club problem (3.00 / 1)

Lieberman is a member of a pretty much white, male only club too.  It's called the United States Senate.  I think he should resign and hang his head in shame.


by Lucas O'Connor on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 03:34:47 PM EST

Lamont's mole (3.00 / 1)

By now I'm sure everyone on MyDD has figured out you are a Lamont operative liebermanlives. So trying to help Lamont by posing as a crazed Lieberman troll isn't going to wash. People here are too sophisticated for that.

I do grudgingly admire Lamont's foresight in creating this blog character, "liebermanlives", to lay the groundwork for his run so far in advance. That's more impressive than his actual usage of the character which has been so silly that I believe it has lost effectiveness.

IMHO, if you continue trolling for Lamont using "liebermanlives" then you should adjust your postings to be more spectacular. In this guise you do make people see Joe as pathetically grasping at straws but that's not going to affect too many votes. You'd do better at steering people Lamont's way if you'd instead "defend" some of the stupid things Lieberman has said over the years that never fail to enrage Democrats.

For example, why not mount a "defense" of the time Joe told Democrats that they dissented from President Bush at the peril of our nation and their own lives? That was a classic anti-Democratic (in both senses of the word) thing to say which you could pretend to defend and in the process you'd help Lamont by reminding people of just how mad that sort of thing makes them and how much they disliked Joe for saying it.

That's just one possibility. The choices are endless. Have you seen the latest out of TPM Muckraker on Joe? Turns out he has been palling around with some pretty heavy theocratic forces over the years and by defending that you'd help spread the word that Lieberman is very socially conservative and helped put Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court. That would really help Lamont!!

Long story short. You can do better as a Lamont mole posing as a Lieberman troll than talking about a silly country club that Lamont has resigned from.


by Curt Matlock on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 04:36:20 PM EST

Re: Lamont's mole - Digby reference (3.00 / 1)

Actually, it is Digby commenting on and linking to a Newsmax article , not TPM Muckraker, where you can find some insight into Joe's embrace of theocracy.

Personal Conviction

"I Would Leave The Tube In"

Lieberman Backs Life for Schiavo


by Curt Matlock on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 04:50:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Lamont's mole (3.00 / 1)

Great minds think alike- see my comment below.


by paida on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 05:02:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Lamont's mole (3.00 / 1)

Hah! I was kidding about liebermanlives actually being a Lamont troll but I've wondered for a long time about his motivation. It's so obviously self-defeating to tout Lieberman in such a disrespectful, combative manner that you are left with only a few reasonable conclusions as to what gain he is seeking.

One possibility is that liebermanlives is 16 and really believes he's an effective advocate for Lieberman.

Another reasonable conclusion is that he's a progressive who is trying to incite anger in other progressives against faux centrists such as Lieberman.

One final thought is that liebermanlives is a GOP troll sowing dissension in the ranks of the progressive blogosphere. This one holds less water given the fact that it usually just unifies makes progressives to fight that much harder against weak Democrats like Lieberman.

Which is it? I don't know but maybe one of these days we'll see a book written by some GOP nerd titled "How I riled the lefties in my spare time".


by Curt Matlock on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 05:55:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You helped me solve the mystery.... (3.00 / 1)

It is so obvious I can't believe we didn't think of it before:

"liebermanlives" IS Joe Lieberman.  After reading your post I realized that the same strange behaviors you wrote about "liebermanlives" mirror the strategic missteps that Joe himself has taken. lightbulb moment.  


by paida on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 07:25:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This cracks me up (3.00 / 1)

I think "Liebermanlives" really is on the Lamont payroll because he or she just makes Lieberman look even more like a whiny baby than he looked before- something that I didn't think was posible.

I mean Lamont belonged to a country club with only a few black people- therefore we should once again vote for a guy who is cheerleader for Bush's illegal evil war?  I don't think so.


by paida on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 05:01:20 PM EST

Re: Ned Lamont's country club problem (3.00 / 1)

The reason is that Round Hill country club is basically a lilly white members only club, with only a few African American members there.

Neither JoeMo nor his handful of remaining supporters can get through one sentence without a contradiction.


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 09:16:51 PM EST

Re: Ned Lamont's country club problem (none / 0)

Joe Lieberman and I are both members of the Great Undead. So, basically, we can, technically speaking, "join" a country club -- lily white or not -- but we can only do the golf thing at night. You could come out to the links and watch us at maybe 3 AM. But I would not recommend doing that.

Joe's problems all stem from his idiotic Bush "kiss." I told the butt orifice that you cannot just suck off anybody. Bush is not merely vile, he is toxic. It all started with that huge cloud of DU vapor that he sucked in during his unannounced visit to the Iraq "green zone."

Mr. Lamont obviously is unhampered by these issues.


by blues on Thu Jul 20, 2006 at 05:52:45 AM EST

51-47 (none / 0)

Q-pac 7/20, Likely Voters.

That's 51-47, Lamont leading.

That is all.


by ElitistJohn on Thu Jul 20, 2006 at 07:44:16 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.