[Peace-discuss] Fwd: [Ufpj-disc] FW: [NYTr] Don't Be Fooled: Lieberman Rival Lamont No Peacenik

[John W.]

At 08:39 PM 8/9/2006, Morton K. Brussel wrote:

>Here is a perspective on Ned Lamont, victor in the Connecticut Democratic 
>primary. Although it was good to see Lieberman defeated, indicating that 
>most voters rejected him as a Bush acolyte (among other things), the race 
>was close, and one should have no illusions about Lamont as a committed 
>antiimperialist progressive. He was less than impressive in his statements 
>on DemocracyNow! today, not inclined to criticize Israel and I think 
>somewhat embarrassed by the more progressive statements of Ralph Nader on 
>that same program. One can't be optimistic that the Democratic Party is 
>turning a page on the basis of this primary election.

No, one can't indeed.  Lamont is worth like $500 million.  Put away the 
party hats and the balloons, kids.

News Flash:  Hillary Clinton isn't going to be anyone's savior, either.




>The article below is ANSWER's view. --mkb
>
>Begin forwarded message:
>
>
>>Connecticut Democratic primary winner Ned Lamont is not anti-war
>>
>>
>>By Nick Flynn
>>
>>
>>Capitalist candidate firmly supports U.S. imperialism
>>
>>
>>Three term Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman, one of the strongest
>>
>>supporters of the racist Iraq war and the colonial occupation of
>>
>>Palestine, just lost the Democratic primary on August 8 to Ned Lamont,
>>
>>a multi-millionaire cable television executive. After he was declared
>>
>>the loser, Lieberman announced that he'll continue his bid for
>>
>>reelection by running as an "independent Democrat" since Lamont won
>>
>>the primary.
>>
>>
>>Lamont's victory was largely fueled by his attacks on Lieberman's support of
>>
>>the Iraq war, which isn't surprising. A majority of people in Connecticut as
>>
>>in the United States in general oppose the war. The corporate media has
>>
>>given this race a great deal of attention, often portraying Lamont as
>>
>>Lieberman's "anti-war challenger." But is Lamont really against the Iraq
>>
>>war?
>>
>>
>>In short, no. An examination of Lamont's positions and statements
>>
>>reveal a clear support for U.S. imperialism in the Middle East and
>>
>>around the world. His positions are similar to those of Rep. John
>>
>>Murtha--supporting U.S. interventions but disagreeing on tactics to
>>
>>carry out those policies. Click here to read more from the PSL about
>>
>>Murtha and the war.
>>
>>
>>Lamont's web site states "that the war in Iraq has diverted far too
>>
>>many of our dollars, and too much of our attention, from our needs
>>
>>back home." But Lamont stops far short of calling for complete and
>>
>>immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops. Instead, he supports Murtha's
>>
>>plan for redeployment of "frontline troops out of harm's way" and
>>
>>states that U.S troops should "continue to provide logistical and
>>
>>training support as long as we are asked."
>>
>>
>>In his victory speech on August 8, Lamont called the U.S. troops in
>>
>>Iraq "brave" and said that, if he gets elected in November, he'll
>>
>>ensure that the United States has "the strongest military in the
>>
>>world."
>>
>>
>>Lamont has never spoken a word about the will of the Iraqi people, who
>>
>>are against any foreign occupiers and are courageously fighting back.
>>
>>In fact, he fully ignores their existence. To Lamont, it's as if the
>>
>>occupation of Iraq is all about keeping U.S. soldiers safe--a
>>
>>racist, chauvinist position to be sure.
>>
>>
>>At no time has Lamont questioned U.S. imperialism and the many war
>>
>>crimes perpetrated against the Iraqi people, instead presenting minor
>>
>>changes so that a "winning strategy" can be reached. Unlike Lamont's
>>
>>demagoguery, a true anti-war position calls for immediate withdrawal
>>
>>of all foreign troops from Iraq, followed by reparations paid to the
>>
>>people of Iraq.
>>
>>
>>Lamont's support for U.S. imperialism does not stop with Iraq. He
>>
>>stands fully behind U.S. threats against Iran, North Korea, and the
>>
>>Palestinian people. He has stated that since the start of the war in
>>
>>Iraq, "Israel is no safer, Iran is more dangerous," and called North
>>
>>Korea the "most serious threat facing the United States today" in a
>>
>>debate with Lieberman. Lamont also recently reiterated his unequivocal
>>
>>support for Israel, saying on national television that "Israel has the
>>
>>right to defend" itself. He failed to mention the ongoing occupation
>>
>>and war on Palestine and the murderous Israeli bombing campaign on
>>
>>Lebanon. This was no mistake.
>>
>>
>>Lamont, just like the Democratic party he belongs to, clearly supports
>>
>>the goals of U.S. imperialism around the world. He's a capitalist
>>
>>politician cut from the same cloth as Leiberman and his politics are
>>
>>hardly different.
>>
>>
>>A candidate of and for the capitalist class
>>
>>
>>Ned Lamont is himself a member of the capitalist ruling class. Lamont's
>>
>>great-grandfather was chairman of J.P. Morgan and Co. and Lamont's personal
>>
>>fortune is estimated at up to $300 million. He has used these many millions
>>
>>to self-fund his Senate campaign. Lamont and other ruling-class politicians,
>>
>>Republican and Democrat, wholeheartedly support and in fact rely on U.S.
>>
>>imperial domination of the Middle East and elsewhere to maintain their
>>
>>wealth and power.
>>
>>
>>In the coming months, liberal anti-war groups and media outlets will
>>
>>call for support of ruling-class politicians like Ned Lamont who
>>
>>supposedly promote "peace" and "a speedy end to the war in Iraq." No
>>
>>progressive person should be fooled. These self-interested appeals
>>
>>keep the progressive movement tied to the capitalist class and its
>>
>>interests. They divert crucial efforts away from building an
>>
>>independent, anti-imperialist anti-war movement and deepening class
>>
>>consciousness. Instead of having to choose between pro-war
>>
>>politicians, who have minor tactical differences on Iraq, it is
>>
>>important to know which side we're on and to confront the ruling class
>>
>>with the power of the working class and progressive movement.
>>
>>
>>The ANSWER Coalition (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism), of which
>>
>>the Party for Socialism and Liberation is a member, is cosponsoring a
>>
>>National Emergency March on Washington, D.C. on Aug. 12 to defend stop
>>
>>the U.S.-Israeli war on Lebanon and Palestine. ANSWER has also
>>
>>initiated a call for nationally coordinated anti-war actions on
>>
>>October 28, days before the November 2006 elections. Tens of thousands
>>
>>of people across the country will demonstrate against brutal U.S.
>>
>>military occupations and their proxy forces on these days. Only by
>>
>>mass struggle can U.S. imperialism be stopped.