Benny Lambert jumps the shark

By: DukieDem
Published On: 12/9/2006 3:26:11 PM

In the latest chapter of the Benny Lambert saga, Senator Lambert proves once again how out of touch he has become. As today's article in the Washington Post and the latest post on Richmond Democrat points out (richmonddemocrat.blogspot.com), Lambert is in a foul mood because he is being held accountable for openly supporting a Republican in the general election. And for those of you not paying attention, this Republican was George Allen, a man so committed to bipartisanship that he once threatend to kick Democrats "soft teeth down their whining throats." And he encouraged his audience to enjoy doing so.
Lambert finds himself in an indefensible position. For starters, Lambert said his endorsement of Allen hinged upon Allen delivering money to HBCU's, which Lambert has made his signature issue. Unfortunatley for Senator Lambert, Allen never did deliver on his pledge to gain the money and never would have. The bill would routinely pass the Senate only to be killed in the House, where Allen would shrug and say he tried his best. This cycle would have played itself out again and again as long as the Republicans controlled Congress.

When questioned about party loyalty, Lambert points out recent examples of Democrats breaking the party line. Unfortunatley for Senator Lambert, his definition of recent includes incidents that took place 10 to 40 years ago. He cites Doug Wilder's brief run as an Independent in 1994 against Chuck Robb (never mind that Wilder pulled out of the race and endorsed Robb), and the support Republican Governor Linwood Holton received from many Democrats when he faced off against Democratic segregationist Mills Goodwin.

So Lambert is comparing his support of Senator Allen, with his well documented racial insensitivites and his vicious attacks on everything the Democratic Party stands for, as equivalent to the support Linwood Holton received from progressive Democrats who were opposed to segregation.

But here's where Lambert loses it.

Lambert defends his endorsement of Senator Allen and his support of HBCU's by saying:

"In 1955, I couldn't go to the University of Virginia or [Virginia] Tech because they didn't want me," Lambert said.

So Lambert could not attend other state universities because of segregation, but Democrats should have supported a segregationist 15 years later?

At the end of the day, Benny Lambert was played for a fool by George Allen, stood on stage with President Bush, and took a car ride with the President and Karl Rove. If that doesn't warrant retribution, I don't know what does.

Let us hope we have a primary challenge to Senator Lambert's seat so he can be held accountable for his actions.

Comments



Too stupid to be senator? (cycle12 - 12/10/2006 9:03:27 AM)
Thanks, Dukie...wonder if there is a web site, similar to the excellent http://www.toostupid... in which Benny Lambert could be included?

Thanks again!

Steve



RE: A calculated gamble (JPTERP - 12/10/2006 8:08:08 PM)
I think the bigger issue here is that Lambert played Virginia Democrats for fools.  He used his position as a Democratic state Senator to try to undercut the Democratic nominee for Senate.  This wasn't just a case of a lack of enthusiasm for the party nominee--which I could understand--this was supporting George Allen.  Repeat: GEORGE ALLEN.  The guy with a long record of hostility to the Democratic party and to Democratic party ideals. 

Had Allen won you have to think that Lambert was due for some kind of payday.  The HBCUs issue may be the stated justification, but there's got to be something else at work here.  I think that's a large part of the reason why people are upset.  Lambert's justification just doesn't wash. 

I think it's a given that Lambert will be primaried, and I think he should receive a vote of no confidence from the local Democratic parties.  It remains an open question though whether or not he is out of touch. 

The segregation question has never directly effected me, so I'm in no position to judge Lambert on this side of the issue. 

However, as a Democrat there are other areas relating to national security and economic security where Allen is clearly at odds with the values of the Democratic party.  Was Lambert's endorsement of Allen an implicit endorsement of the Iraq War, $9 trillon dollar deficits, warrantless survelliance of U.S. citizens, the abandonment of internationl law vis a vis the Geneva Conventions, and by extension an endorsement of G.W. Bush's actions as president?  From my point of view, this is the side of the story that I find most troubling. 



Question (Newport News Dem - 12/11/2006 12:58:32 PM)
Can Delegate McEachin challange Senator Lambert in a primary or caucus and still hold on to his House seat in the event he lost?


In a word: Yes. (cycle12 - 12/11/2006 6:46:54 PM)
Thanks!

Steve



Donald's Decision (DukieDem - 12/11/2006 7:16:31 PM)
I think filing for both the State Senate seat and trying to keep his seat in the House of Delegates is a stretch. If he files for the state senate then presumably Floyd Miles would file to get his old seat back, and if McEachin still filed for the House seat, then wouldn't that put him in two primaries?


Incumbants Choice (Newport News Dem - 12/11/2006 10:56:49 PM)
I believe that the choice of primary or caucus is at the discretion of the incumbant.