It reads like a condemnation of Lieberman more than an endorsement for Lamont, but the New York Times is endorsing Lamont for the August 8th primary:
If Mr. Lieberman had once stood up and taken the lead in saying that there were some places a president had no right to take his country even during a time of war, neither he nor this page would be where we are today. But by suggesting that there is no principled space for that kind of opposition, he has forfeited his role as a conscience of his party, and has forfeited our support.
We’ll just ignore that Lamont is a nut.
I suspect that I may regret my early prediction that Lieberman would win by a comfortable margin. I also can’t help but notice just how many Lamont fliers we’ve received in the mail; so far we have seen or heard nothing from the Lieberman campaign.
Monday I’ll head down to town hall to do my duty to help make it an interesting election season, by casting my absentee ballot for Lamont. Then, the evening of the 8th, I’ll hang out in the hotel pub in San Francisco, and watch the results roll in over the free WiFi signal.
2 responses so far ↓
1 Zonuts // 30 Jul 2006 at 10:38 am
How is Lamont a nut?
2 MikeTheActuary // 30 Jul 2006 at 2:33 pm
That’s just my impression of him from watching the debate. He seemed unprepared, a little too idealistic… His campaign seems to be focused on the idea that he’s a “real Democrat” while Liberman is a DINO…but he doesn’t seem to define “real Democrat”, or he seems to take positions without actually contemplating the implications or logistics of implementing those opinions.