Winning the "We told you so!" award, a CT. paper withdraws their Lieberman endorsement

[RiverStone]

We Don't Know This Sen. Joe
TheDay.com - 3/23/08

When The Day endorsed Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman for re-election in November 2006 it was supporting a candidate who demonstrated a history of pragmatic leadership and a willingness to seek bipartisan solutions.

We wonder what happened to that senator.

Sen. Lieberman's open-ended commitment to military involvement in Iraq comes as no surprise. The senator made it clear when running for re-election that was his position. Sen. Lieberman wants the United States military to remain in Iraq until the war is won, whatever that means. It conflicts with this newspaper's position that the time has come for a gradual withdrawal of U.S. forces.

Despite that difference of opinion, The Day editorially backed the senator because of his experience, his willingness to put principle above politics, as demonstrated by his condemnation of former President Clinton following the Monica Lewinsky scandal, and his even-handed political approach.

But while Sen. Lieberman remains experienced, he is no longer even-handedly principled.

He seems to be taking delight in poking the leadership of the Democratic Party in the eye. After losing the Democratic primary for Senate in 2006, he had every right to petition his way on the ballot for an independent run. And his decision, after being re-elected, to continue breaking bread with the Democratic Party was a politically expedient decision for both the senator and the party.

more:

http://www.theday.com/re.aspx?re=ebf24507-9e00-405c-96ed-a82fb2f5373b

It's too damn bad TheDay.com did not consult with DU! Lieberman's agenda back in 2006 was as transparent as it is today. He is one of the most vile, war mongering, opportunistic politician's of our time. Of course, we already knew that.

I commend TheDay.com's editorial board for figuring this out and having the integrity to admit they were wrong. :applause:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

1. I have to laugh at their reasons for supporting him back in '06.

He had more 'experience' (sounds familiar, doesn't it?) and he condemned Bill Clinton for the Lewinsky affair. Now the newspaper is shocked, shocked that Lieberloser is throwing his whole party under the bus. Couldn't have seen that coming, could they? :eyes:

[Buzz Clik]

2. Lieberman's agenda became transparent the day he announced his candidacy as an Independent Democrat.

We were suspicious before, but it became undeniable at that time.

Why did it take them 2 years?