Let's see. You're an AP reporter who loathes the war, and you want to write a negative, "this guy is going down in flames" kind of story about Sen. Joe Lieberman, so how do you get the most negative comments about him? Ah, that's it. Interview people at a fundraiser for his opponent.
WEST HARTFORD, Conn. - Anti-war Democrats bailed in droves. Teachers unions left over vouchers. Men are drawn to his challenger (ed: not real men), and women aren't all that crazy about the incumbent, either.
Once, Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut seemed on the brink of the vice presidency, a principled moderate in a party that didn't always warm to them. Now, hewing to his support for the war in Iraq, he confronts a political abyss, abandoned by all groups but the poorer, older and less educated Democrats in his state.
"The last three times I voted for him, but I will never vote for him again," Cheryl Curtiss of West Hartford, Conn., said recently of Lieberman as she waited for primary challenger Ned Lamont to speak at a campaign fundraiser.
"The war is the big piece," said Curtiss, 52. "I don't think it can be minimized. All of our tax dollars are going there. It's killing Americans. It's killing Iraqis. We went there on lies."
Carolyn Gabel-Brett, in the same audience, said her disaffection with Lieberman began when he wouldn't support a filibuster in the Senate to prevent Samuel Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court. The senator "does not support marriage equality," she said, adding she is a lesbian who married her partner in a state-sanctioned ceremony in neighboring Massachusetts.
"I would have liked Joe to be better on the issues because I like the guy," said state Rep. Christopher G. Donovan, House majority leader and the senior elected Democrat in Connecticut to support Lamont. "But you know, you only get to vote every six years."
Wow. And not a single quote from a supporter. Instead, we've gotten quotes from the farthest left of the far left, the Cindy Sheehan wing of the Democratic Party. It should be no surprise that people who attend a fundraiser for a candidate supported by the far left would be from the far left themselves. Mr. Lieberman may well lose the Democratic primary, and even the general election, but you might expect a journalist writing a news story to at least be fair to him. I guess not.
7/30/06 1200: (hat tip: Wizbang) The NY Times goes so far as to endorse Mr. Lamont over the man who accompanied Al Gore in his presidential run, confirming and spotlighting just how vindictively anti-war they are. As if we didn't already know.
Giacomo, it's gotten to a point where nothing the NYTs does is surprising!
Posted by: Anna | Jul 30, 2006 at 03:04 PM
Not surprising, Anna, except for how openly their expressing their anti-war left bona fides.
Posted by: Giacomo | Jul 30, 2006 at 08:01 PM
I suppose they just don't care about standards and ethics and they've actually gotten to the point where they don't care who knows it.
Posted by: Anna | Jul 31, 2006 at 11:19 PM
You've outfoxed yourself with this one Giacomo.
Anyone who clicks throught to the article will find these quotes which look very like quotes form Lieberman's supporters:
Struggling to prevail, he called on Bill Clinton for help. The former president urged Democrats to put their opposition to the war aside when they vote. "Yeah, Joe Lieberman is a friend of mine. I love him and he's in a tough race," Clinton said at a Connecticut rally on Monday.
...
"We have seen an outpouring of support and volunteers and resources in the last 10 days that gives us a lot of confidence going into the home stretch," said Sean Smith, Lieberman's campaign manager.
...
"There's a lot of anger" among voters, says Rep. John Larson (news, bio, voting record), who represents the Hartford area in Congress and supports Lieberman. "The galvanizing issue is the war."
Posted by: Retief | Aug 03, 2006 at 08:04 PM