Disclosure: I worked for the Lamont campaign doing web design and production and some writing for the official blog (from 9/5/06 to 11/07/06).

Tuesday, February 28, 2006


Lieberman to Run as a Republican?

That's what Chris Shays and others are proposing, via a bombshell article in the Hartford Courant:

It's been the subject of whispered conversations among top Republican officials for the past month. Now, U.S. Rep. Chris Shays, R-4th District, has let slip the secret: GOP officials have discussed cross-endorsing Democratic Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman this fall.

In an interview today with the editorial board of The Advocate of Stamford, Shays said he intends to vote for Lieberman and is encouraging a Republican endorsement of the three-term senator.

And he's not the only one:

The remark was not immediately reported by The Advocate, but it set off a flurry of calls among Republicans who have been gauging support for the idea among GOP candidates, including Gov. M. Jodi Rell and U.S. Reps. Rob Simmons, R-2nd District, and Nancy L. Johnson, R-5th District.

One GOP operative who was aware of the discussions said premature public disclosure of the possible cross-endorsement probably would kill the idea. That seems to be case.

By Tuesday evening, spokesmen for top Republicans publicly distanced themselves from the possibility of backing Lieberman, who faces a Democratic primary over his support of President Bush and the war in Iraq.

Regardless of whether Joe runs as a Republican, add Shays to the list of "Republicans for Lieberman" (along with Buckley, Hannity, and the rest):

"Their position on the war can't be closer," said Michael Sohn, who is Shays' campaign manager. "They both voted to go into Iraq, and they both support staying until the job is done."

Glad to see the Lamont campaign on top of this:

"We're not surprised that there are people within the Republican Party that would think about endorsing Joe. He clearly is George Bush's favorite Democrat," said Tom Swan, Lamont's campaign manager.

This is an absolute gift to the Lamont campaign if Lieberman isn't going to actually run on the GOP line.

If Joe is planning on running as a Republican, what can I say? More power to him.

But he needs to get the hell out of the Democratic party first.

Update: Some differing thoughts on this from CT bloggers: Matthew Gertz at My Left Nutmeg thinks this was a politically damaging screw-up by Shays but really "much ado about nothing" for Lieberman, while Genghis Conn at Connecticut Local Politics sees Farrell as the big loser, thinks "Ned Lamont and his backers ought to be thrilled," and sees in the dynamics at play here a chance for the GOP to eventually reclaim centrists in CT.
Well, you'd have to like Lieberman's chances as a Republican, even with Bush's abysmal approval rating in CT. But, it would reveal what a complete opportunist Lieberman is. It certainly wouldn't make him look good.
It's beginning to sound like Joe's going to wind up in another three-way tie for third place.
Finally Lieberman showing up on talk shows won't have that "D" against his name.
Finally Lieberman showing up on talk shows won't have that "D" against his name

What I'm really waiting for is him not having the "Sen." in front of his name.
I guess the DCC cash coffers wouldn't exactly be open to Joementum, in that case. lol
I thought Lieberman was already a Repub. He votes like one, holds bush's hand and gives him kisses like a Saudi Prince.
Shays is as good a Republican the Democrats are going to get -- we should think about cross-endorsing him and not hating on him for endorsing Lieberman.

I'm a Lamont supporter, but hating on a Republican willing to cross party lines is pretty stupid. It's idiotic to think Hannity, et al, is going to support Lieberman. I mean, come on.

Here's a better strategy: Focus on defeating Lieberman while at the same time courting Shays' supporters, turning Republicans into Democrats, instead of throwing out Republicans who support Democrats -- just because they're Republicans.
This isn't hating on Shays. It's hating on Lieberman.

I'm not sure how it would help his chances in Connecticut -- it may help them -- but it would finish him as a national candidate in either party.
mediaglutton: Hannity is supporting Lieberman. At least he wants to, but is worried doing so will hurt his chances in the primary.
Good that Lieberman is out of the closet. A Prolife Democratic Senator from Connecticut does not make sense. A ProLife Republican is more like it.
Are we really splitting the Democrat party by supporting Lamont? With all due respect, Sen. Dodd, I don't think so. That was done years ago. Time to fix it. & Long live Lamont.
You've been blogrolled:


Also, I blogged about Shays endorsing DINO Lieberman. It's outrageous that the good people of Connecticut tolerate this nonsense.

My blog is supporting Mr. Lamont's run for the US Senate and if we can do anything to get the word out, please let us know.
Let's all remember who Al Gore chose for VP. Maybe one day there'll be a Democratic Party again.
I thought at the time that Gore chose Joementum because Team Gore believed this would bring in the conservative wing of the Democratic party as well as moderate GOPers who would otherwise vote for Bushco.
I'm not so fond of Dodd at the moment either! Here's my own latest blog entry..

An Open Letter to Senator Dodd

Upon attending a birthday gala for Ct. Dino Joe Lieberman, Senator Dodd had this to say: "This isn't a requirement that we be here," U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said Thursday. "It's an act of love and affection. We don't need a battle in our own state about Democrats. Democrats stand with Joe Lieberman."

Not this Democrat, Senator Dodd, with all due respect. I have no "love and affection" for a man who remains a war hawk despite continued reports that the premise for this illegal war was based on a lie. I have no "love and affection" for one who supports an administration that continues to offer up our precious troops for slaughter for "no noble cause." There will be no "love and affection" for one who offers the kiss of Judas to the very one who sends our people to fight for an ignominious cause nor for one who jumps to his feet in standing ovation; yes, a "Democrat" once again standing with the Republicans.

So please, spare me the schmaltzy talk. I'm a Democrat who follows the actions of this man I regrettably once worked for. And you can take this to the bank...this same Democrat will be working and casting her vote for Ned Lamont, a man of principle, patriotism and passion for truth.

One more thing...when you tell me that we should support Joe because we don't "need a Democratic battle," you're telling me that regardless of the issues, it should be our party, right or wrong. I'm not so sure that's the message you want to convey to me, is it, Senator, that we should refrain from thinking and practice pure partisanship? Because if it is, then we have a huge, fundamental difference of philosophy. I believe it is AMERICAN to question our leaders and when we find answers that go against our beliefs, that we move to change those leaders because that's what America is all about. However, that's a discussion for another day.

Meanwhile, please know that if I have my way, the next time you attend a birthday party for Joe, it will be as Citizen Lieberman, not Senator.

posted by Mary @ 3:56 PM
Yes Mary, but did you see the footage of the "birthday party"? It all looked so stiff and awkward. And then some footage of Rosa Delauro with Hilary Clinton's mechanical handclap. Lieberman has done so much for women in the state of CT(!?!) Or maybe *not.* And how about those "jokes," about taking attendance, eh? Sounds like a real good time in an arm twisting kind of way.
Another blogroll:

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
when you tell me that we should support Joe because we don't "need a Democratic battle," you're telling me that regardless of the issues, it should be our party, right or wrong.

If Joe HIMSELF would practice a little more party loyalty and stop showing up on Fox to deliver Republican talking points and issue framing, he wouldn't be facing this challenge.

I agree with Digby on this: "His voting record is beside the point. Through his rhetoric he's given tremendous solace to the Republicans over and over again at the most critical times. He's advanced their most pernicious ideas, not through votes, but by continuously validating their premises."
On the subject of what appears after Lieberman's name during TV appearances, I've always thought (R-DLC) would be the most accurate.
Post a Comment

<< Home