August 08, 2006
Ned Lamont, a Connecticut millionaire whose candidacy for the United States Senate soared from nowhere on a fierce antiwar message, won a narrow victory in the Democratic primary last night over the incumbent, Joseph I. Lieberman.Senator Lieberman, a national party leader and the Democratic nominee for vice president in 2000, conceded defeat in a phone call to Mr. Lamont shortly before 11 p.m. But then, in a combative speech to supporters in Hartford that was carried live on television news, the senator declared that he was not dropping out of the race, but would instead run for re-election as an independent this fall.
“As I see it, in this campaign, we’ve just finished the first half and the Lamont team is ahead — but in the second half, our team, Team Connecticut, is going to surge forward to victory in November,” Mr. Lieberman told cheering supporters.
The senator said he was staying in the race because Mr. Lamont had run a primary campaign of “insults” and “partisan polarizing” that relentlessly blamed Mr. Lieberman for President Bush’s wartime policies, which the senator has supported and defended but also criticized at various points.
“For the sake of our state, our country and my party, I cannot, I will not let this result stand,” Mr. Lieberman said of the Lamont victory.
Stand strong, Senator -- your party may have rejecdted you, but I believe an overwhelming majority of your fellow Americans support you as a man of integrity and decency.
By the way, such purges are common in the Democrat party. the far left became ascendant by adopting an America Last platform and running George McGovern in 1972. And back in the 1920s, former national candidate Oscar Underwood was purged from his position as Senator from Alabama for opposing the Klan. This is simply one more attack upon the decent center by the extreme elements of a party that puts ideology over America.
Posted by: Greg at
11:27 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 344 words, total size 2 kb.
Connecticut chose someone who represents the views of the majority of
America, rather than the views of the losing one third. I
particularly enjoy reading that the primary process is a "purge", with
all the Stalinistic overtones, when, in fact, citizen participation in
the primary was huge. Democracy is kind of frightening when you
are backing an unpopular president and his kissing buddies, isn't it?
Thanks for the concern, though.
Posted by: Dan at Wed Aug 9 01:09:34 2006 (aSKj6)
21 queries taking 0.0096 seconds, 30 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.






