Fighting the 'Lieberman (D-CT)' label [updated]

Please correct me if I'm wrong:  Joe Lieberman is explicitly NOT a Democrat.  He is a CFfLer (Connecticut for Lieberman)-er or an Independent.  Or god, if we must, an 'Independent-Democrat.'  But not a Democrat.

The recent Time piece (see below) about Lieberman flirting with party-switching that as of this writing is the 2nd 'most popular' article on the website, works on the claim that Lieberman is a Democrat.  But I thought he was not.  He explicitly, deliberately rejected the Democratic party--he lost the nomination, and ran as an independent in his state in '06.  He may caucus with the Democrats (like Bernie Sanders), but he is not a Democrat.

Am I mistaken?  Is it more complicated than this?  Because if I am not wrong, then the media establishment is, and continually repeats this inaccurate message.  What should do we do about this continual media inaccuracy?

Update of quote:

He terrified fellow Democrats...The Democrats' 2000 candidate for Vice President is the only party member in the Senate supporting President Bush's Iraq policy...Lieberman says leaving the Democratic Party is a "very remote possibility."...So far, Lieberman is using his clout mostly in ways that discomfit his fellow Democrats...Lieberman, a lifelong Democrat...

Should the netroots just leave this well enough alone?  Or should we fight it together?  Or have we already fought it enough to no avail, so we should now leave this well enough alone?

I know I am not the first one to bring up this discrepancy.  But every time I see (D-CT) next to his name in the media, it's like nails on a friggin chalkboard.  And I think it does terrible disservice to Ned and everyone who worked their asses off on his campaign, not to mention the Connecticut Democratic Party, who rejected Lieberman.  Whether you believe as David Sirota does that it would be good for the party and for Senate Dems if Lieberman caucused with the Republicons, or if you just think Lieberman is a lying neoconservative who dilutes the party position on Iraq in the media, should we try to fight this media narrative?

I'm no web designer, but should we somehow craft a very basic, no-frills sort of rapid response site/listserv to send letters to the editor of any outlet claiming Lieberman is a Democrat?  Should we demand that he be called a CfL-er or perhaps an Independent, and labeled (CfL-CT) or (I-CT)?  I would think even a core of 100 people writing very short, original, 3-sentence emails anytime we are alerted to the press confusing this would be a decent weapon.  

Or am I wrong?  Or is this all semantics?  Or is this less important than other endeavors at the moment?  Or is even bothering to acknowledge Lieberman's existence giving him more attention than he deserves?  Because it seems to me that if an article repeating over and over that Lieberman is a Democrat is the 2nd most popular article on Time's website, he's going to get attention whether or not we choose to take this on.

•  My view

  You're absolutely right, in principle.

  But Lieberman is driven by his enormous, insufferable ego today. He should be treated like Donald Trump: ignore him, because reacting just encourages the next outrage.

  by Elwood Dowd on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 06:56:39 AM PDT

•  why not include an email address

  for the writer or editor and we can all write him/her?
  why reinvent the wheel?  We set up a rapid response blog and we would only have to post the story and link here anyway to get people to go to it.

  Just post the person's email address and we will write.

  by TeresaInPa on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 06:57:48 AM PDT

  •  Hmmm...

    Well, I was thinking that if we had a core group of people willing to write 30 second emails whenever the press repeats the (D-CT) message, it would be easier if we had our own simple list.  But maybe you're right...?

    Either way, the link to the story above will take you to the full text, and you can click on the author's name to submit a letter to the editor.

    by Harmonious on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 07:02:34 AM PDT

    •  you have a good point

      about the email list.  
      But I also know from experience that you have to make things very easy for people if you want them to act.  If you put a link right there where people can click on it they are more likely to do something with it than if they have to go hunting.

      by TeresaInPa on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 07:30:01 AM PDT

•  Here is roughly the form I use

  This is the form of the letter I use:

  To:
  Subject: Lieberman is No Democrat

  Dear ________,

  Within your on-line story:
  "Story Headline"
  [link]

  Joe Lieberman is identified as "Lieberman, [insert reference to Joe as a Democrat]...." Of course, Sen. Lieberman was elected on the "Connecticut for Lieberman" Party ticket.  He should therefore be identified as "Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, (CfL)...."

  It would perhaps be acceptable to identify him as "independant" since he is does not represent either major party.  However, it is incorrect to identify him as a Democrat (especicially with the capital "D").  It is offensive to members of the Democratic Party refer to the person who defeated the party's nominee in the General Election as a "Democrat.".  I am sure many Democrats in [news oulet's city or region] feel the same.

  I realize that in the news business, you have to
  maintain a working relationship with Senator Lieberman, but it would be appreciated if you could work out a way to stop mis-labeling him as a
  Democrat.

  Sincerely,

  Here is the response I got from a reporter at the Hartford Courant to a version of this letter:

  hi, and thanks for writing. We've gone back and forth on how to ID Lieberman...he did run as an independent, but is counted as a Senate Democrat. AP has had the same problem....we did try to simply call him an independent, but the head of the Ct. Independent Party protested....so this is still a dialogue in progress. You might want to forward this letter to Lew Bresee, our letters editor...and again, I appreciate the comments.

  I am not obsessive about this, but I have written to a couple of newspapers about it since the election.

  by Justus on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 08:24:10 AM PDT

  •  they should use (C-CT) or (CFL-CT)

    It's accurate, keeps the Independent Party off their ass, and takes a poke at the race-to-the-bottom two-party system that's given us so many asshats from both the D and R sides.

    by clyde on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 10:10:43 AM PDT