Sunday, September 10, 2006

Campaign Web Sites 101

This illustration is prominently positioned on Joe Lieberman's campaign home page. I ask you -- is this respectful political discourse? Is this reaching across the aisle? Is this rising above nasty partisan attacks? That's your call. Look again at that page -- is there anything there that invites you to vote for Lieberman? I can't find it. It looks like someone who feels he shouldn't have to explain himself to voters.
This is the prominent illustration on the Lamont campaign home page. This is followed by an explanation of Lamont's candidacy. Do the candidates disagree? You bet. But does the Lamont official Web site make plays on the Senator's name? If so, I can't find it.

Let's take a look at the official campaign blogs -- I'm not talking about comments, that are out of control of the campaigns -- but what is posted by staffers. I cannot find a post on the Lamont Blog that does not refer to one of the opponents in the race as "Senator Lieberman." On the other hand, here are some snippets from the offical posts at the Lieberman offical blog. First is from their "our first post"
Beyond being a central source of useful information and commentary from our campaign, we hope this will become a gathering place for lively and thoughtful conversation for our supporters – and even our opponents.
>Negative Ned is at it again...According to the Hotline, the Nedster told his latest whopper...maybe the Nedster can find another excuse for his hypocrisy...Lets see how the Lamonsters find a way to spin that into a negative.... We are lucky the Lamonsters are such tolerant people.’s exactly the same excuse the Nedster used

I guess "useful information and commentary" is in the eye of the beholder.


Anonymous said...

joe liebermans website says "lamonty". i dont find that very offensive. maybe really sensitive people do, but i dont think its nasty or mean. the blogs say "negative ned", "nedster" and "lamonsters." still. not very offensive nor very mean.

Anonymous said...

"nedster"? "lamonster"? Not nasty or mean. Pretty darn juvenile, unoriginal, and just plain dumb, though. Joementum must have found these "advisors" in karl rove's discard pile.

Anonymous said...

This is pretty self-explanatory, but given the way the Lieberman campaign treats emails, I'm posting it here for insurance, and have cc'd a copy to CTBob:


Congratulations on shutting down the comments on your farcical "official blog." Your venial and pathetic website, like the entire Lieberman campaign, was never about communication, but was and is totally and completely predicated on smearing Ned Lamont and ignoring the will of the voters where it suits you.

Your playing the long-expected victim card, which you invited in the first place by refusing to take the time to moderate your own blog, is just another example, and perfectly in character with your candidate's attitude. I'll say this much - at least you're consistent.

Since I, like many, many other Lamont supporters, never got any meaningful response to the many lively and thoughtful questions we posted, I've sent this copy of one of my posts to you personally. Not so much because I expect an answer, but to remind you what a mendacious coward you are. And because your candidate has a habit of taking things out of context, I've cc'd this letter to the Lamont campaign and posted it on several other high-profile blogs as well, so that any attempt by you to cherrypick its contents will be seen for what it is.

So, Dan, when are you going to apologize to the Lamont campaign for your baseless and scurrilous accusations that they hacked Joe's website, accusations clearly designed to cover up your campaign's own technical incompetence and stupidity? To refresh your memory, here are the facts and their sources:


Dan Gerstein, in his "State of the Blog" post of Sept. 7, 2005 at 5:28 pm at the Cup O’ Joe blog on the official Joe Lieberman website ( below:

"As far as we can tell, no campaign spokesperson ever suggested the Lamont campaign was responsible for whatever happened. However, if any one associated with the campaign made that accusation, it is wrong, and I will not hesitate to apologize to the Lamont campaign. If we make mistakes, we will do our best to own up to them."

From, “Lieberman blames Rove-like tactics for Web site disruption” by Robert Yoon ( "Lieberman campaign manager Sean Smith suggested that the campaign of the senator's primary opponent, Ned Lamont, or his supporters were responsible for the disruption.

'This type of dirty politics has been a staple of the Lamont campaign from the beginning, from the nonstop personal attacks to the intimidation tactics and offensive displays to these coordinated efforts to disable our Web site,' said Smith in a statement e-mailed to reporters Monday evening.

'There is no place for these Rovian tactics in Democratic politics, and we demand that our opponent call off his supporters and their online attack dogs.'"

From the, August 9, 2006, “Charges of Dirty Tricks on Web Feed Speculation in the Blogosphere” by Michael Cooper and John Markoff:
"The Lieberman campaign said that 'we believe that this is the result of a coordinated attack by our political opponents.'’'

From, “Officials Probe Lieberman Web Site Crash” by Pat Eaton-Robb, page 2 ( "Visitors to the site Thursday received a message that read in part: 'We call on Ned Lamont to make an unqualified statement denouncing this kind of dirty campaign trick and to demand whoever is responsible to cease and desist immediately.''"

From the Associated Press, “Lieberman Campaign Says Web Site Hacked” by Susan Haigh ( Lieberman campaign manager Sean Smith said the campaign has contacted the Connecticut attorney general's office and asked for a criminal investigation by state and federal authorities.

'If Ned Lamont has a backbone in his body, he will call on these people to cease and desist,' Smith said."

And finally, from Dan Gerstein, as quoted by Justin Rood at ( "Their supporters are doing these [attacks], we've demanded they get them to stop and they refuse to do it"

As you yourself quipped in the last story linked above, Dan, "That's the definition of a lie, when you tell something that's false knowingly."

So, Gerstein, I'm going to say this in plain English, so even you will understand.

You are a liar. A stone liar.

That's L-I-A-R.

You are wasting taxpayer money - my money - on a baseless investigation, prompted by a blatant and cowardly lie, spread by your own candidate, his staff, and YOU, that will ultimately come back and bite you in your lying Rovian ass on Election Day.

So, Dan, I ask you:

When do you plan to apologize to Ned Lamont, as you promised on your pathetic and laughable campaign weblog?


Anonymous said...

sean smith was fired

CT Bob said...

Sharoney, you anticipated my next post, where I examined Gerstain's less-than-honorable "State of the Blog 2" post. I used the words "lying" and "lies" repeatedly; they were justified.

Anonymous, even though SS was fired, there still hasn't been an official Lieberman campaign apology for their libelous statements. Gerstain inherited SS's job, and as such he is the logical person to speak for the campaign. If Lieberman was an honorable person, he would have apologized weeks ago.

The man, and his campaign, have absolutely no class.