- Connecticut regrets fake Independent Lieberman (Rob Shvern)
- Local and national media refused to report on Lieberman's actual positions (Connecticut Blog)
- Lessons from the new Lamont/Lieberman poll (David Sirota, OpenLeft)
- We urge Black Missourians to be independent voters. Why are we beholden to only one party? It is hurting us. (Re-Elect Governor Blunt in 2008)
- New Hampshire might very well go to Obama since it has many independent voters (The Essence of Politics)
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Conversations on Independence
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
So, now voters were "fooled" by Lieberman? Is that the new excuse?
I'm sorry, but I don't ever remember Lieberman being portrayed as anti-war.
Lieberman never advocated pulling the troops out immediatly, whereas Lamont did. In fact, if I remember correctly, Lieberman advocated the exact opposite as his means to eventually "end the war". So, I'm not sure where the confusion is coming from.
I see this is nothing more than a lame attempt by the "independent establishment" (unfortunatly, we have one now) to throw Lieberman under the bus because they are still upset at him for two reasons:
1. He was not anti-war and won the election.
2. He was not anti-war and called himself an independent (that could hurt the establishment, which is now anti-war), even though running independently outside of a party is exactly what being independent is.
Post a Comment