Albert R. Hunt of Bloomberg News just can't seem to shake his love for Lieberman enough to write an objective article on the Connecticut race (
link). For example:
Lieberman... is struggling for one reason: the Iraq war...
Correction: Lieberman is struggling for one reason: he DOESN'T ACT LIKE A DEMOCRAT. Zell who?
"A Lieberman loss is very bad for Democrats; it says we are one dimension on Iraq," says Peter Hart, a top Democratic polltaker.
Correction: A Lieberman loss would show that the citizens of Connecticut want their Democratic senators to ACT LIKE DEMOCRATS.
Continuing Peter Hart's quote, from the article:
"Politically, Iraq should be a debate about the Bush administration. A Lieberman defeat detracts from that."
Lieberman IS the Bush administration. A Lieberman defeat would reinforce the fact that DEMOCRATS SHOULD CONFRONT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION ON IRAQ.
I can't make this s*** up. Al Hunt apparently likes to cherry-pick the most Lieberman-friendly quotes.
This contest is intense, irrationally so, with Lieberman's opponent, a heretofore obscure wealthy aristocrat named Ned Lamont. [emphasis added]
What's irrational about a little healthy debate in politics, i.e. CHALLENGING A DEMOCRAT THAT DOESN'T ACT LIKE ONE??? Here's irrational for you: calling Lamont an aristocrat to slander him. Since this contest is already so "irrational" and Hunt's trying to use Lamont's wealth against him: Lieberman's good friends Bush and Cheney are also aristocrats. Does that make Lamont better or worse in Hunt's eyes? Besides, isn't "wealthy" and "aristocrat" a little redundant? Bah, let them eat cake!
And then immediately this:
Joe Lieberman is a thoroughly decent, intelligent, compassionate public figure with a solid three-term record of supporting mostly liberal positions on the environment, civil rights and social issues such as abortion and gay marriage.
::Swoon:: XOXOXO
Lieberman, who has always enjoyed support among Republicans and independents, would be favored in a three- way race against Lamont and... Alan Schlesinger
Source, please?
Lieberman plans to remain a Democrat even if elected as an independent and "has agreed to do things" to help the three Democratic House challengers [in Connecticut], Emanuel says.
Sure I'll "do things" for them too. Why not?
A Lieberman loss also poses a dilemma for the party's leading 2008 presidential front-runner, Hillary Clinton.
Who hasn't been acting much like a Democrat either, lately. Hm... connection?
Other than family and a few friends, however, no one in Connecticut will vote for or against Ned Lamont.
HORSE S***! PURE HORSE S***!
The 64-year-old incumbent's considerable charm, genuine humor and independent integrity are assets...
::Double Swoon:: XOXOXOXOXOXO
Yet, as Clinton understood, the senator did the president a favor by distracting focus from the Republican plan to impeach him.
FOR A BLOWJOB.
He's also the only one who not only defends his vote but insists the war is going well.
Maybe he should receive a psychiatric evaluation? Just a suggestion...
Voters, he suggests, want to just "brush back" Lieberman the way a baseball pitcher tries to intimidate a batter by throwing near him but not hitting him. That implies a more calibrated control than these anti-war voters may possess.
Oh let's just pray for the best case scenario, Al. And then insult those idiotic anti-war hippies who are just sick, I mean sick, of seeing their children and Iraqi children dying and the budget spiraling out-of-control! They're just irrational, out-of-control meaniehead aristocrats!!!