Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Richard Blumenthal stanches the bleeding

My colleague Greg Sargent is right: Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal (D) will survive today's brush with political death. Barring anything else coming out, of course

Repeatedly saying or implying that you were in Vietnam when the record shows five deferments and Marine reserve duty that had you hunkered down on the East Coast is pretty low. Although, I agree with Gene Robinson's take on Blumenthal's press conference, I think his defiant performance while surrounded by veterans at a VFW hall will help him weather this storm. So will the unwavering support of Sen. Robert Menendez (N.J.), chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

You know what else is going to help? The timing of this story. It broke too soon. Sure, the Connecticut Democratic Party convention starts on Friday. But the primary isn't until Aug. 10. Plenty of time for Blumenthal to recover whatever ground he might lose to his two challengers. And I don't know why the campaign of potential Republican challenger Linda McMahon was crowing about providing information for the damaging Times story earlier today. It gives Blumenthal a target to slam for dirty tricks. (Realization of this might explain why the crowing was removed from McMahon's campaign website.) Also, the revelation gives Blumenthal six whole months to hammer that point home. You would think the co-founder of World Wrestling Entertainment would be more adept at the art of the smackdown.

By Jonathan Capehart  | May 18, 2010; 5:14 PM ET
Categories:  Capehart  | Tags:  Jonathan Capehart  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: One cheer for Rand Paul
Next: Sestak sweeps, Critz wins, but what do we really know?

Comments

You and Gene are both losing so much with your take on misspeaking. He told many lies and really did not even need the job. You and Gene must have had sex changes, or are you just coming out. I will never read another word either of you write, x out writing, it is just typing that you have inflicted on everyone on this subject. Tc

Posted by: therondr201 | May 18, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

You are Gene Robinson could not be more wrong. Namely:

1. What if a woman lied about being pregnant, or having a child? One does not "mis-speak" about fundamental issues as childbirth, war, and major life events. You and Gene seem to brush over the fact of what he did and instead focus on "timing" and the tactics of his oppponents.

2. What is wrong with his opponents pointing out the he lied? Maybe if you blind liberal journalist would do a little reporting every now and then instead of rushing out and covering up for a liberal Democrat No Matter What each time, opponents wouldn't have to do your job for you.

3. His press conference today was at a VFW hall. Blumenthal never served in a foreign war. Did anyone else see the irony in his location? That was the whole point of him having to have the press conference to begin with - he lied.

4. "Defiant performance"? Blumenthal himself lied. He didn't "mis-speak". What does he have to be defiant about, his own mouth? For him to go after the NY Times for doing its job - "keeping them honest" - is shooting the messenger. It is either true or it is not. He admitted it was true but he didn't "lie". It's not going to fly.

5. I'd love to see how you can Gene would chortle with glee if this happened to a conservative Republican. If Palin said she'd fought in the first Gulf War you'd never stop talking about it. But, if its one of "yours', its like oh, ok, he misspoke and he was defiant and it'll be ok.

Posted by: vtguy34 | May 18, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Interesting saga, I have watched Mr. Blumenthal with interest and anticipation for many years, as to whether he would be governor, Senator or otherwise - he impressed me as a very straight shooter - a Eliot Spitzer type without the baggage. I respect his abilities and am impressed by his charisma. That being said, he's got a heck of a lot of work to do to get people like me to the polls now - for someone to make a career of taking a very hard line on any mistakes that he deemed to cross the line, most folks I know (those who are Connecticut voters, anyway) are disgusted and the reactions range from the - "how can you tell when a politician is lying / his lips are moving, ha ha ha, who cares" to "I'll vote for anyone but that lying dishonorable, so-and-so". At present, independents who would have happily voted for him prior to this, as well as Democrats who aren't hard core, see little reason to support this guy. So he "survives" but then what? I don't know how he brings back enough folks to get elected, even if he survives the primary. I think he's shown himself to be a mealy mouthed jerk, albeit a talented one.

Posted by: gdobbs | May 19, 2010 4:57 AM | Report abuse

This story will be the lead in Richard Blumenthal's obituary. Until the end of his life it will be the one thing that everybody knows about him. If he manages to be elected to the Senate, it will be the one thing every witness before his committees knows about him. He will be the first source of shame for Connecticut in the Senate since Thomas Dodd. Are the people of his state so morally degraded that they will overlook this lie compounded with cowardice?

Posted by: miglefitz | May 19, 2010 5:48 AM | Report abuse

An interesting, yet disgusting peak inside the mind of a liberal: Bringing the truth to light = dirty trick.

"Oh that congressional page and his dirty tricks. How dare he tell someone Foley was sending him sex-texts?"

Or, "Oh, that Woodward and Bernstein and their dirty tricks. They had no business telling the country about the Watergate break-in."

Jesus.

Posted by: shecallsmemoe | May 19, 2010 6:27 AM | Report abuse

An interesting, yet disgusting peak inside the mind of a liberal: Bringing the truth to light = dirty trick.

"Oh that congressional page and his dirty tricks. How dare he tell someone Foley was sending him sex-texts?"

Or, "Oh, that Woodward and Bernstein and their dirty tricks. They had no business telling the country about the Watergate break-in."

Jesus.

Posted by: shecallsmemoe | May 19, 2010 6:31 AM | Report abuse

What is the big deal here??? Khazars LIE as easily as most people breathe. No one believes the Khazars anymore.

Posted by: usnr02 | May 19, 2010 7:07 AM | Report abuse

This is not evidence of a lack of integrity, which would be the story here, but shows he valued and wanted to be associated with an honorable group and let himself get carried away. Turning away qualified leaders because they stumble over a few statements only provides openings for the less qualified who have spent thier entire lives preparing to be vetted which does not demonstrate the qualites we need in our leaders but as in the case of Ms. Kagan provides us with nothing to judge them on at all.

Posted by: almorganiv | May 19, 2010 7:52 AM | Report abuse

So, Rob Simmons is the best candidate in this election. That is obvious.

Given enough time, the flaws of the others who aspire for this post are all too clear.

Posted by: GaryEMasters | May 19, 2010 8:04 AM | Report abuse

I'm not sure pointing out your opponent is a liar when in fact it would appear he is one constitutes a dirty trick.

Posted by: sullivanjc | May 19, 2010 8:25 AM | Report abuse

As someone who would be happy to see today's Republican party go extinct, I have to say this Blumenthal guy is a disgrace and those defending him are even more of a disgrace.

He lied. He did not "misspeak." And it was a particularly atrocious lie. For personal political gain, he cynically took credit for doing something that cost thousands of people their actual lives.

I would never vote for this guy now. Anyone who respects and honors the sacrifices people in the armed forces make should despise him.

Posted by: RMS70 | May 19, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Dick Blumenthal is a LYING P.O.S.? No kidding. EVERYBODY already knows that. What I wanna know is, who are these USEFULL IDIOTS standing behind him? Loser Union R-Words.

Posted by: GoomyGommy | May 19, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

The Democratic CT establishment is playing with fire by continuing to support the ultimate insider in an anti incumbent year who lied about his service in Vietnam.Blumenthal will say or do anything to get elected and he is a very poor campaigner who appears out of touch with the average voter.The Democrats need an exciting,inspiring candidate, not another Mass. Martha Coakley like candidate who feels entitled to the job.Doesn't the establishment get it? The voters, and that includes Democratic progressives, are fed up with our bought and paid for politicians.For the good of the party,Blumenthal should get out of the Senate race.

Posted by: johnbird1 | May 19, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

The Democratic CT establishment is playing with fire by continuing to support the ultimate insider in an anti incumbent year who lied about his service in Vietnam.Blumenthal will say or do anything to get elected and he is a very poor campaigner who appears out of touch with the average voter.The Democrats need an exciting,inspiring candidate, not another Mass. Martha Coakley like candidate who feels entitled to the job.Doesn't the establishment get it? The voters, and that includes Democratic progressives, are fed up with our bought and paid for politicians.For the good of the party,Blumenthal should get out of the Senate race.

Posted by: johnbird1 | May 19, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Why is lying about your service in Vietnam not such a bad thing. Its not just about coming forth with the truth its what made him say it in the first place. I assume he would distance himself from Vietnam if it served his political purpose. This is not the type of person that should be elected to office. Who know what else he says is untrue. Mr. Capeharts standards are apparently not as high for elected officials or is is just Democrats.

Posted by: tdressler | May 19, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company