“Non-Combatant” Lieberman Won’t Back Democratic Candidates

by Melinda Tuhus | August 25, 2006 6:15 PM | | Comments (40)

Declaring himself a “non-combatant,” U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, in remarks at a New Haven press event Friday, raised anew the question of whether his “independent” candidacy will help Republicans hold onto three Congressional seats in Connecticut — and control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Lieberman — who after losing an Aug. 8 Democratic primary to Ned Lamont has launched a third-party bid to hold onto his seat in the Nov. 7 general election — was asked whether he still endorses Diane Farrell, Joe Courtney and Chris Murphy, three Democrats looking to unseat endangered Republican incumbents Chris Shays, Rob Simmons and Nancy Johnson.

“I’m a non-combatant,” Lieberman declared. “I am not going to be involved in other campaigns. I think it’s better if I just focus on my own race.”

Lieberman made the remarks at a Friday morning photo op held in the rain under an I-95 overpass in the Fair Haven neighborhood to tout his role in bringing $50 million to the state to help ease transportation gridlock.

“It’s a little awkward for me now” to endorse the Democratic candidates in the general election, he said, “since they all endorsed my opponent,” Democratic primary winner Ned Lamont.

The comment was significant because analysts from both major parties believe that Lieberman’s campaign could help the three Republicans keep their jobs in the face of tough challenges. Lieberman’s strongest support — 75 percent in the most recent Quinnipiac poll — comes from Republicans. If he succeeds in drawing more Republican voters to the polls to support his candidacy, that could help the Republican Congressional candidates. Those three races are considered among the 10 most competitive Congressional races in the country; both parties consider the races key to deciding which party controls the House in 2007. National Republican strategists and donors have come forward to help Lieberman’s campaign; party leaders have abandoned the nominal Republican in the Senate race, Alan Schlesinger. Prominent Republicans like Shays and former Republican House leader Newt Gingrich have endorsed Lieberman.

Lieberman laughed Friday when asked if he was endorsing the three Republican Congressional candidates instead. He subsequently said they hadn’t asked for his endorsement.

The crowd that gathered Friday was full of union supporters, including laborers who chivalrously poured stones from front loaders to fill in big puddles so the media could traipse out under the highway.

Two of those long-time supporters are Robert Buynsik, secretary-treasurer of Teamsters Local 443, and Anthony Inorio, from Laborers Local 455. They reminisced about their support for Joe going back 25 years. “Joe has not changed his positions,” Inorio said. “He is strong in his convictions.”

Lieberman was introduced by Don Shubert, a founder of Keep Connecticut Moving, a group that pulls together industrial associations, chambers of commerce and labor groups to advocate for improvement in the state’s transportation infrastructure.

“It’s been great to work with you over the years to fight for and win more transportation money for Connecticut,” Lieberman told the enthusiastic crowd, most decked out in red T-shirts. He pointed out that money for transportation not only benefits commuters, but the economy as a whole, and creates jobs. And, he said, that kind of cooperation illustrates “the first principle of my public life — old divisions don’t work to get things done. When business and labor get together, Connecticut wins.”

One Man’s Pork

His press release unabashedly labeled the $50 million an “earmark” — known as “pork” by those on the other side of the issue. Democrat Ned Lamont has criticized earmarks as a way for incumbents to “bring home the bacon” while busting the federal budget. Lieberman agreed Friday that there are “good earmarks and bad earmarks” but admitted he couldn’t think of a bad Connecticut earmark.

Asked for his response to Lamont’s criticism of his role in the Hurricane Katrina debacle (primarily voting to confirm Michael Brown as head of FEMA with no real debate), Lieberman said he has criticized the Bush administration’s handling of it. He noted that he co-chaired, with Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine, a bipartisan commission that spread the blame all around, from the feds to the state of Louisiana to the administration of New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin. The report included 88 recommendations to prevent such a tragedy from occurring again. He said proof that his role has been appreciated in Katrina country is that Louisiana senator Mary Landrieu is one of the few Democrats to stick with him after his loss in the primary.

He called Lamont “the great distortionist” for attacking his response to Katrina. “And what was he doing about it?” he asked rhetorically.







Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: matt w | August 25, 2006 4:59 PM

“It’s a little awkward for me now� to endorse the Democratic candidates in the general election, he said, “since they all endorsed my opponent,� Democratic primary winner Ned Lamont.

Oho. That didn't stop Lamont from endorsing them - guess in Lieberman's world, endorsements shouldn't go past the primary, eh?

Posted by: *********** | August 25, 2006 6:12 PM

Please stop describing Joe Lieberman as an "independent" candidate in your papers articles. It confuses people and confers more legitimacy on his campain than he deserves because he is not the Indpendent Party's candidate. I think he should be referred to as "unaffiliated" or as the CT for Lieberman Party candidate and that is all.

Posted by: TrueBlueCT | August 25, 2006 8:35 PM

Can Lieberman campaign spokesman Dan Gerstein please lecture us again about how good a Democrat Joe Lieberman is?

And it's sad to see that the only people Lieberman has left are those that have a direct financial stake in his winning.

Posted by: David B. | August 25, 2006 9:40 PM

I think it's time Lamont sponosored a "Republicans for Fair Elections" campaign ad. I would go something like this:

"I'm a registered Republican here in Connecticut, but I'm voting for Lamont. It just doesn't seem like Lieberman is playing by the rules. He lost the primary, and is acting like he doesn't respect the system. I can't support that."

Posted by: Peter Vander Arend | August 25, 2006 9:41 PM

Lieberman the peoples' candidate? I don't think so. If you folks think Jo-mentum is the voice of the average person in CT, take a look at the roster of his campaign donors from the primary. Joe may scoff at the well-heeled donors, but the reality is this "average Joe" is hardly anything but.

Lieberman scoffed at Ned Lamont's spending on his own campaign, deriding Lamont as a "rich kid", but Joe didn't spend a dime of his money on the primary! Well, Joe, this may mean there is a long line of donors and PAC's who have their hands and palms stretched out for favors. Hmmm. seems like it's K Street all over, Sen. Lieberman. Nothing like a greasy plam to get things done.

But, let's discuss the Iraq War, Sen. Lieberman. You stand behind Bush on this policy choice 100% of the way, even as the Bushites are watching their coterie scamper for cover as things go to hell in a hand basket there. Since you are a "non-combatant", let's give pause to 22,000 American casualties and over $425 Billion spent thus far. Iraqi deaths are exceeding 2000/month. But that's all history, as you like to say Joe. What about 3 years..... the toll will be grim.

Posted by: MZ | August 25, 2006 9:53 PM

Yes Joe SoreLoserMan should be identified as CFL (CT for Lieberman) Party in all the news. He should also lose his Democratic membership as he is contesting under a different party against a Dem Party nominee. He should lose all his committe appointments in the Senate as he is no longer a Dem Party Senator. And he will not be getting any plum assignments when he working in the Senate (if god forbid he sneaks in) check other (I).

Posted by: Jeff | August 25, 2006 10:50 PM

If he isn't supporting Democrats... sounds like he should have been stripped of his democrat status earlier this week. When is Reid going to remove him on the committees as a Democrat?

Posted by: B Johnson | August 25, 2006 11:15 PM

Dear Joe,
The Democratic Party of Connecticut has chosen its candidate for Senate. While you were not the winner, you don't have to be the loser either. How about continuing your brilliant record of public service by joining Ned Lamont's staff so that the tremendous knowledge and connections you have developed over the years don't go to waste? Connecticut's citizens will continue to receive the strong support from you that you have delivered and the Democratic Party nationally (and statewide) will demonstrate that it has a rich blend of talent and ideas necessary for governing the country.
Be a uniter, not a divider....

Posted by: Teamster for Change | August 26, 2006 12:16 AM

As a Teamster I'm embarrassed by Robert Buynsik, secretary-treasurer of Teamsters Local 443, and the support he's showing Joe. Does this guy have any idea the number of manufacturing jobs that have been lost in CT because of Lieberman. He continues to this day to support free trade bills that make it easy for corporations to outsource American jobs. He continues to support a war that's maiming a generation of young people, sons and daughters of the working class, a class Buynsik has obviously lost touch with. It's time for Joe to go, and Buysnik too.

Posted by: p j | August 26, 2006 12:26 AM

Are these the same conservatives who thought Lieberman was the devil incarnate when he ran with Gore? what flip floppers These people have no conscience and Lieberman is worse than they are.

Posted by: grammy | August 26, 2006 12:46 AM

Has the world gone mad? Lieberman lost his bid for another term by the same people who elected him before. This time they said no thank you. Now he's telling them, I don't care if you want me or not, I know better than you and I will find a way to go around all of you. It'a a slap in the face to the public he's supposed to be supporting, let alone the demoratic process that all of us have come to count on. This reminds of me of the way Bush signs Bills and then turns around and adds a signing statement, in effect saying that it doesn't matter what Congress wants, he'll do as he pleases! Like minds, Bush and Lieberman.

Posted by: harryjoy [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 26, 2006 12:54 AM

I'll second that !!!

The State of Connecticut has gone to great lengths to make sure that Joe Lieberman's new campaign isn't allowed to use either the term "Independent" or "Democrat" on the ballot.

The least any newspaper or other media should do is respect those terms. They were set up for a reason. Namely to avoid confusing voters.

Just like the Green candidate, or the Socialist candidate, Senator Lieberman should always be refered to by the affiliation he has chosen... the Connecticut for Lieberman candidate.

Posted by: Donna | August 26, 2006 12:54 AM

Ditto on ******'s request to stop using the word "independent" (even in quotes) to describe Lieberman's candidacy. Not only is he not an independent on the ballot, and he is not the candidate of the Independent Party, but there is also nothing "independent" about Joe's campaign. He's raking in the dough from insurance, credit card, finance, oil, and pharmaceutical companies. If, God Forbid, Lieberman is reelected, he'll be beholden to those entities when votes come up. There's nothing "independent" about that. Joe Lieberman is a "minor party" candidate. Please refer to him correctly, no matter WHAT he calls himself.

Posted by: CurtJ | August 26, 2006 2:27 AM

Too many years in office. Just like a Republican Mushroom who is kept in the dark and fed crap. If Bin Laden was in Afghanistan when he ordered the Saudi Arabian and Egyptian al-Qaeda Terrorists to hijack those American passenger jets and crash them into the WTC and Pentagon and obviously the White House than we should have had those 160,000 troops in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and worldwide to root them out. Not stuck in a Iraqi Civil War Quagmire that was brougth on by lies and half truths spewed by the TREASONOUS George Bush Administration.
Now the Bush Administration, Bush Family, Bush Friends, and Bush Donors and Cronies are raking in tens of billions of American Taxpayer dollars of Blood Money, in oil and wartime contracts, graft and corruption, and outright stealing, off the backs of 2620 dead American troops and even more dead Mercenaries.
Supported by Joe Lieberman.

Posted by: serena1313 | August 26, 2006 2:28 AM

Lieberman is a big disappointment. The minute he opted to campaign as an independent after losing the primary says this is more about Joe keeping his seat while ignoring what the voters want --or it certainly gives the appearance thereof.

Most articles hype the idea that Lieberman lost ONLY because he supports the war. It is more than that. While he voted with the dems somewhere in the neighbourhood of 80% or more, several times he voted for legislation that betray "the people" -- not necessarily the democratic party.

Voters want a new direction after being lied to and misled on so many different issues for the past 5 years; It's not just the Iraq war. Voters are saying "enough already" and are willing to kick out incumbents, regardless of party, based on their performance. We are fed-up. We, the people, elect representatives to "represent" us -- they are our voice in government. And when our elected lawmakers no longer represent "us" we have the choice to vote for someone who will.

Lieberman chose to ignore the will of the people. The voters spoke. Campaigning as an Independent clearly demonstrates or at least gives the appearance this is all about Joe Lieberman, not the people. Theretofore it raises questions about who he is as a person, his character and whether he is trustworthy.

While party loyalty and support of the Iraq war are important, but only a part of it, voters base their decisions on the whole package.

Does Joe Lieberman represent you (or himself)? Is Joe listening to you, his constituent?

Lieberman may talk the talk, but does he "walk" the talk -- actions speak louder than words.

Posted by: Kevin Hayden | August 26, 2006 6:48 AM

Now he's a 'noncombatant'. Nice. I wonder if 86,000 dead Iraqi civilians appreciate that they died because of 'noncombatants' like him.

And then there's Terry and Michael Schiavo. I bet they appreciate his noncombatant rank.

Looks like he'll fight for no one except the braindead or Joe's Ego.

Posted by: FastMovingCloud | August 26, 2006 9:01 AM

I agree with ********, Lieberman is not an Independent candidate, he is not a member of the Independent Party. He is an unaffiliated turn-coat of a Democrat. And, it should be pointed out at every opportunity that the only party he gives a damn about is the party of Lieberman!

Posted by: Charlie | August 26, 2006 9:08 AM

Do sane men ALWAYS grin like Lieberman does?

Posted by: cv | August 26, 2006 9:13 AM

So THAT's what that traffic jam was just after rush hour yesterday. What a jerk! Take the one of the worst construction site nightmares on I-95 and make it worse as a campaign stunt!
Lucky for me, I was on my way out of New Haven, Sucked for people who waited for the traffic to die down.
Go Home Loserman!
And *********** is right, stop calling him an independent, he's a republican stooge (no offence intended to Larry, Curly and Moe).
Notice also that the KEEP CT MOVING signs are one-way, to the right. It's subtle but telling.

Posted by: furball [TypeKey Profile Page] | August 26, 2006 9:18 AM

For the *****-ing Independent party member and their comment, this sort of confusion is what you get when you give your party a generic name.
If there was a Maverick party, should members get their fur up when certain politicians are called maverick?

Posted by: Conn.-Lie. Party | August 26, 2006 9:23 AM

He actually is not running as an independent because he did not want his name further down on the ballot.

Can your paper and the others get the facts straight. Joementum is running as the sole candidate of the connecticut for lieberman party. Legally it apparently is not a phony party so stop saying he is independent. It is just factually wrong.

Please use the extra four words to get it right. There is a big difference in the impression a voter would have about a true independent versus a de facto republican who created his own party.

Posted by: KSM | August 26, 2006 10:42 AM

I might not agree with Joe on all of the issues, but I admire his willingness to stick up for his principles. He believes in defending America. Go Joe!!!!

Posted by: Mister Snitch! | August 26, 2006 12:52 PM

Joe will stop calling himself an 'independent' as soon as leftists stop calling themselves 'progressives'.

Posted by: Greg | August 27, 2006 12:57 PM

What a disgrace Joe Lieberman is. What a liar, a sore loser and a bad Democrat. I wish he had one shread of dignity so he could objectively see how pathetic he looks. Be a man, Joe, and go home.

Posted by: CT4LAMONT | August 27, 2006 2:58 PM

I admire his willingness to stick up for his principles. He believes in defending America. -KSM

Lieberman "sticks to his principles" as is expedient for him. When other Dems and Lamont said we need a timeline for withdrawl from Iraq, Lieberman (like Cheney, Bush, etc) said that would be a victory for terrorists. But now that Chris Shays (R-CT) has proposed setting a timeline for withdrawl from Iraq, Lieberman is now willing to consider it. This is definitely not evidence of his "sticking to his principles."

As for defending America, every American believes in defending America, MOST ESPECIALLY those Americans who believe that America is strongests when it works with its allies, keeps its financial house in order and doesn't ensnare our military in reckless adventurism.

Posted by: Patrick | August 27, 2006 4:49 PM

wow. The venom and hatred that comes from the Left is amazing. like .. "He's a pitiful little man who should just go on ahead to his maker, whom he alludes to often enough to make one sick."

Just a few percentage points and Joe would have been the Dem candidate and they'd be heaping the praise, and now its "he's a republican stooge"

So the take is:
"The Democratic Party of Connecticut has chosen its candidate for Senate." Yes, and it sends a great message to the country that vacuous rich elitist one-issue defeatist wonders are preffered over experienced politicians.
phew.

Such a quick turnaround is in my mind a signature of dangerous ideologues.

Go ahead, vote for the real Republican candidate if you want a REAL change. Or stick with Jo. But Lamont is the worst pick of the litter, for sure, a man in hock to the 'nutroots' Left.


Posted by: Oscar Enema | August 27, 2006 6:18 PM

I'd like to make a couple of comments on the photos which accompany this story. "The crowd that gathered" - does that reflect the two guys that seem to be examining a train wreck at the factory gate?
The two guys int he center photo don't have any resemplance to the candidate (but I don't have a great monitor on my computer, so could be a Joe there.) plus the guy to the right appears to be holding his nose about something.
Then the last photo. Joe is the little guy holding the hardhat, I think. But the sign...am I the only one who thinks it resembled the "I'm with stupid" tee-shirt?
Bet your Andy Gold wampum card none of these photos will make the Joemobile.
O-Thay

Posted by: OscarEnema | August 27, 2006 6:21 PM

And that guy in the center is stealing a tee-shirt? Or perhaps it is a leftover from the 12 that they ordered...Ah, life among the beltway munchkins.

Posted by: KEVIN SCHMIDT, STERLING VA | August 27, 2006 11:32 PM

This is all the Democrats fault!

They have yet to kick Lieberman out of the Democratic Party. Today, Lieberman can still walk the halls of the Senate as a Democrat. He still holds the ranking and priviledges that go with his position as a Democrat.

Makes you wonder just whose side Semate Minority Leader, Harry Reid is on. Same goes for DSCC Chairman, Chuck Shumer. Because of their nonactions, they have committed malfeasance, again. Neither are on the side of the Democratic Party.

Posted by: Peter Vander Arend | August 28, 2006 12:31 AM

Let the data do the talking about Joe Lieberman. Is Jo-mentum a stooge? Survey the website www.opensecrets.org, a site which tracks all contibutions to political candidates, and see who Sen. Lieberman owes his political life to.

Sen. Lieberman had many opportunities to demonstrate REAL leadership. A first step wouild have been an unequivocal statement, not a parsing of words or the requirement of a seer to read into the tea leaves, that told ALL of American and CT he was wrong to have supported a war that had no political basis and to back an Administration that consistently skewed or misrepresented all the facts about going to war. (For more detail, please read Thomas Ricks' book FIASCO.) All we hear from Jo-mentum is that plantive whine "I'm so bothered about how badly the war has been waged." Really? Then why are you jumping up and down and exercising your lungs to demand a wholesale change, begining with a layout of a blueprint (i.e. a plan) to extircate the US from Iraq? No, Joe Lieberman lays back in the weeds and waits for political winds to blow before he takes a measure of the situation. Leadership? No way.

Ned Lamont is a breath of fresh air for CT and for the nation as a whole. The politicians - Republicans AND Democrats - got the United States into the mess of Iraq by abdicating their duty and rolling over and caving into the dictates of the Bush Administration. People across the United States can see others like Lieberman in the House and Senate.

Our nation doesn't need weak-kneed sisters like Joe Lieberman who owe much of their future to well-heeled donors such as $1.443 M of PAC money and $7.284 M of wealthy donors. Make Lieberman explain his donor list, CT.

Posted by: Amused Republican | August 28, 2006 10:58 AM

You people are absolutely hilarious. Joe Lieberman is one of the few serious people left in the Senate, and you wack jobs want to throw him overboard for some dilettante limousine liberal. I'm not a big fan of some of the votes Shays, Johnson, and Simmons have made - but I've got to say, there's a clear formation of a moderate center here with the unofficial alignment between them and Lieberman.

It's nice to see that there are still some grownups interested in public service, sorry that you nutroots kiddies can't deal with it.

Posted by: Kris | August 28, 2006 12:40 PM

Lieberman is comparing himself to a soldier with the non-combatant thing. That's a little strange since getting shot at is magnitudes more significant than political endorsements.

A poor choice of words.

Posted by: Ross | August 28, 2006 12:57 PM

The other Democratic candidates and his own party gave him the shaft in the primary, and now they seem suprised at his reaction. If you stab someone in the back, you should expect consequences.

Posted by: MikeB | August 28, 2006 2:49 PM

I'm seeing a pattern here with labor-management groups doing the organizing, and a few stray labor personalities (especially in construction) being pulled in. That's the way it looked the other day with that little 'labor rally' in New Haven Paul Bass reported on, Lynn Fusco the developer playing a prominent role.

I'll give it to Lieberman for making the best of a bad hand, with careless news reports to the effect that 'representatives of 16 unions' are endorsing him, when many and probably most of those individuals are speaking for no one but themselves -- their memberships, executive boards, and COPE committees silent to date.
.

Posted by: Donna | August 28, 2006 3:51 PM

"Stab someone in the back," Ross?

What happened on August 8 wasn't a crime, it was called an ELECTION. It was called DEMOCRACY AT WORK. If you don't like how your elected officials are representing you, you have the right to run against them, and the voters have the right to choose between you and the incumbant--in other words, it's how this country WORKS.

Joe Lieberman took part in an ELECTION and he LOST.

Joe is the one doing the stabbing--right into the back of both the Democratic Party and democracy itself.

Posted by: David Fishman | August 28, 2006 4:39 PM

Although I left the Democratic Party in September 2000 after 10 years as a loyal Democrat due to my utter disgust with their institutionalized hypocrisy, cowardice and rightward shift, exascerbated by the Democratic Leadership Council spreading this problem like an ugly cancer, I must give credit where it's due, both to Democrats who have a long record of speaking truth to power, and likewise to those who subsequently admitted their faults. Among the latter, in sharp contrast to Mr. Lieberman, are most notably John Edwards and John Kerry, who both found the fortitude and intellectual honesty to admit they were wrong when they voted for the Iraq War, or the so-called authorization to use military force to that effect. I proudly voted Green in the last 3 consecutive Presidential elections, partly for the aforementioned reasons, and registered as Green when I left the Democrats. Lieberman embodies the most substantial reasons I left the Dems, notwithstanding his blatant contempt for the best interests of both his party and CT constituents. Unlike Sen. Edwards, who had the modest temperament and dignity to leave the Senate when he ran for Vice-President, Lieberman resolved to run both for reelection to the Senate and Vice President simultaneously. Given the direct implications of this approach for the constituents who depend on representation by their legislative candidate of choice, aside from the party affiliation of their chosen candidate, I believe this practice should be illegal or declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Why should someone be able to potentially win 2 different elections at once, nevermind the balance of powers between legislature and executive being threatened? Lieberman should be ashamed of himself for his temerity to deny the will of his constituents in a primary race. If he truly wanted to run as an "independent" candidate in the first instance, he might have found the decency to take the Jim Jeffords route and leave his formal party, rather than falsely portraying a Democrat, knowing his chances of defeating Lamont were slim, all the while intending from the outset to challenge any negative outcome that doesn't please his ego. His entire body of criticism of Lamont revolved around slander, much like Republicans used against honorable members such as Max Cleland, Jim Sasser (slandered out of office by Bill Frist) and others. Lieberman doesn't represent Orthodox Jewry any better than he represents Connecticut or the Democratic Party. I can tell you as a Jew that Talmudic ethics in no way condone Lieberman's narcissistic attitude or contempt for the democratic voting process. Among other lessons, he needs to brush up on his knowledge of Tikkun Olam, a.k.a. the process of healing the world. He certainly doesn't heal the world by happily supporting the most criminal gang that has occupied the White House in recent memory, possibly more diabolical than even Reagan's gang in the Iran-Contra scandal. Lamont's critique of Lieberman's positions toward the Iraqi fiasco in which he is directly complicit is right on target. Nor is Lamont a single-issue candidate as anyone listening to his speeches can immediately decipher. It's long past due for the American people and the major media to wake up and smell reality. We need bona fide intellectual honesty and moral courage to control the reins of democratic power in this nation, whether Democratic, Green or otherwise, carpe diem!

Posted by: B.H. | August 28, 2006 8:16 PM

Lieberman made it clear that he would run as an independent if he didn’t win the primary. He made it clear before the primary. Lieberman has a better than good chance of winning in November and it is unlikely that those who voted for Lamont (or against Lieberman) in the primary didn’t know what was at stake. If Lamont loses in November it will be no small blow to the Democratic party, and no small victory for the Republicans. Lamont’s victory in the primary is a feather in nobody’s cap but his own and there will be no moral victory for his supporters if they win the battle but lose the war.

Posted by: Citizen Pessoa | August 28, 2006 8:30 PM

"Notice also that the KEEP CT MOVING signs are one-way, to the right. It's subtle but telling."

Actually, sadly, they're pointing to the left, as if to suggest he's a progressive. They should be point to the right.

Great article and even better comments. The media should be refering to him as the "CT4Lieberbush" party, as he is not a third party either. A third party would infer that there were other members in said party, as the Greens, Independants, Working Families... hmmm, all things the "Connecticut for Lie-berbush" party of those that support Lieberman stand for.

'Just a few percentage points and Joe would have been the Dem candidate and they'd be heaping the praise, and now its "he's a republican stooge".'
There's nothing to praise about Joe's current decision to run solo, other than the fact that he blamed a third party for his 'loss in 2000' (not the fact that he didn't believe in his campaign enough to step down from his Senate seat) and now he damages the Democratic process by ignoring what his own party has decided. And refering to him as a republican stooge (no offense to Moe, Larry, & Curly) is all too proper: look at where his current support is coming from and has come from. This man accused Lamont of getting support from out of state, yet the only people really standing up for Lieberman now are out of his 'precious lifelong' party and out of his home state.

Posted by: Tom | August 28, 2006 10:03 PM

As a conservative Republican I can tell you this -- we are all laughing our butts off about this race. It's really quite amusing. To almost all of those who posted replies to this article, thanks for the laughs.

Posted by: andru | August 29, 2006 5:32 PM

No-mentum Joe-mentum should be kicked out of the Democratic Party at this point.

He's been a Bush enabler since his immediate concession during the 2000 recount. Semmed he'd rather serve as a Bush-Lite wannabe than a real Democratic leader even waaaay back then.

He represents the WORST SELF-SERVING motives in today's politics.

No-mentum Joe only cares about Joe.

I'd rather vote for Republican Schlesinger than continue to have a mole like No-mentum who is DEMOCRAT IN NAME ONLY.

Sorry, Comments are closed for this entry

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links


Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

Buy New Haven Independent Stuff

News Feed

Powered by
Movable Type 3.35