gchaucer2 - I certainly don't think you "deserve to be hammered." You are like many - if not most - Connecticut voters.

But unlike yourself, Sen. Lieberman is a Democratic officeholder, and as such should be expected to support Democratic candidates - at a minimum. He is already refusing to do so in CT. Will he refuse to do so in RI? That's the question.
 

The problem with both Chafee and Shays is they enable the most extreme elements of their party in exactly the same way Lieberman enables the most extreme elements of the Republican party. The only difference is that Lieberman supposedly is a member of the so-called "loyal opposition."

But the question here is more apropos, would Lieberman support incumbent Chafee as a petitioning candidate (or petitioning party)?

Would Lieberman as a "loyal Democrat" support Democrat Whitehouse, who is the endorsed Democratic candidate against either Republican?

Where does Lieberman, the Unity and Purport™ candidate stand?

Or like Lieberman's position on the Bolton nomination, do we have to wait to see which way the wind blows to find out?

The problem with watching Lieberman has always been one of wondering which gust of wind was going to send him where.
 

JoeBlog's comments are gone, and he has indeed nutpicked the worst comments - most of which I'm sure were posted by Lieberman supporters specifically for that purpose - and posted a link to them on the now non-blog as a pdf document, presumably so that he can make them available to reporters.

Of course, Dangerstein never answered the scores of questions and requests for debate also posted, and ignored, by Lamont supporters. So it's altogether convenient that now he is not allowing any comments at all. With Dan, it's all about getting the last word, just like his boss, Senator "It's my seat, I tell you, and you can't have it" Lieberman.

What an ass.

I posted this on the defunct comments line prior to its being shut down. Because DANGERSTEIN is a coward and never responded, I'm posting it here and as many places I can, in hopes that the press will see it:

Dan Gerstein, in his "State of the Blog" post of Sept. 7, 2005 at 5:28 pm at the Cup O’ Joe blog on the official Joe Lieberman website (www.joe2006.com/blog_details.asp?id=18) below:

"As far as we can tell, no campaign spokesperson ever suggested the Lamont campaign was responsible for whatever happened. However, if any one associated with the campaign made that accusation, it is wrong, and I will not hesitate to apologize to the Lamont campaign. If we make mistakes, we will do our best to own up to them."

From CNN.com, “Lieberman blames Rove-like tactics for Web site disruption” by Robert Yoon (www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/08/lieberman.website/index.html):
"Lieberman campaign manager Sean Smith suggested that the campaign of the senator's primary opponent, Ned Lamont, or his supporters were responsible for the disruption.

'This type of dirty politics has been a staple of the Lamont campaign from the beginning, from the nonstop personal attacks to the intimidation tactics and offensive displays to these coordinated efforts to disable our Web site,' said Smith in a statement e-mailed to reporters Monday evening.

'There is no place for these Rovian tactics in Democratic politics, and we demand that our opponent call off his supporters and their online attack dogs.'"

From the NYTimes.com, August 9, 2006, “Charges of Dirty Tricks on Web Feed Speculation in the Blogosphere” by Michael Cooper and John Markoff:
"The Lieberman campaign said that 'we believe that this is the result of a coordinated attack by our political opponents.'’'

From ABCNews.go.com, “Officials Probe Lieberman Web Site Crash” by Pat Eaton-Robb, page 2 (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2298417&page=2):
"Visitors to the site Thursday received a message that read in part: 'We call on Ned Lamont to make an unqualified statement denouncing this kind of dirty campaign trick and to demand whoever is responsible to cease and desist immediately.''"

From the Associated Press, “Lieberman Campaign Says Web Site Hacked” by Susan Haigh (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/08/08/D8JCCCIO0.html):
Lieberman campaign manager Sean Smith said the campaign has contacted the Connecticut attorney general's office and asked for a criminal investigation by state and federal authorities.

'If Ned Lamont has a backbone in his body, he will call on these people to cease and desist,' Smith said."

And finally, from Dan Gerstein, as quoted by Justin Rood at tpmmuckraker.com (www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001292.php):
"Their supporters are doing these [attacks], we've demanded they get them to stop and they refuse to do it"

As you yourself quipped in the last story linked above, Dan, "That's the definition of a lie, when you tell something that's false knowingly."

So, Gerstein, I'm going to say this in plain English, so even you will understand.

You are a liar. A stone liar.

That's L-I-A-R.

I despise liars. You are wasting taxpayer money - my money - on a baseless investigation, prompted by a blatant and cowardly lie, spread by your own candidate, his staff, and YOU, that will ultimately come back and bite you in your lying Rovian ass on Election Day.

So, Dan, I ask you:

When do you plan to apologize to Ned Lamont, as you promised on your own pathetic and laughable campaign weblog?