as for your link to the times:

While the Republicans cozy up to Mr. Lieberman, Democrats are in a careful dance with Mr. Lamont, a political newcomer who is still untested among a large swath of general-election voters.

Mr. Lieberman, who during three six-year terms became a Democratic stalwart in Connecticut, acknowledges that his independent campaign has placed him and his former Democratic allies in a predicament.

Indeed, all three of the Democratic Congressional candidates supported him in the primary but have now endorsed Mr. Lamont.

“It’s a little awkward for me now,”Mr. Lieberman said on Friday, speaking to reporters in New Haven. “I’m a noncombatant ” I am not going to be involved in other campaigns. I think it’s better if I just focus on my own race.”

[On Saturday, a Lieberman campaign aide called to offer a clarification for this article. The aide, Dan Gerstein, said that the senator had endorsed all the Democratic candidates for the House and still hoped they would win.

[Mr. Gerstein said, however, that in light of their endorsement of Mr. Lamont, the senator did not expect the Democrats to ask him to campaign with them this fall.]

Obviously reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit is it? What part of this do you grasp. I think it would be better if we sttarted there.

Joe is suporting the Dems even though they have given their endorsement to Ned. Joe went to a rally that had both Reps and Dems at it. It was to support a victory for the state!

It really isn’t that difficult to comprehend this. Oh wait, ignorance is what the Kos machine has been paid to allure..my bad..you can’t help yourself!:roll:

Why not?

Non-partisan/bipartisanship as defined since 2000 by George W Bush, the most partisan president since WWII (according to Pew and Gallup), has poisoned the well. These are partisan times.

I disagree. The definition was actually refined in 2000 by Al Gore, as it was his rabid tirades that kicked this whole she-bang off. Yes, Bushco willingly picked up the torch also, but Algore is the one who statred this, so the Dems have no grounds on which to point fingers.

You included.

For Joe to make the non/bipartisan pitch work, he needs to demonstate something for both sides.

Hasn’t he already? He’s supported both Dems and Reps who are running

Yes, the CT race will be interesting. At this point, it appears that Lievberman could take this if he can drum up the financial support. In elections for federal public office, the person who spends the most wins 92% of the time.

Interesting, huh?

As for Lieberman’s mixed messages, the Times covers the it well:

“It’s a little awkward for me now,”Mr. Lieberman said on Friday, speaking to reporters in New Haven. “I’m a noncombatant ” I am not going to be involved in other campaigns. I think it’s better if I just focus on my own race.”

[On Saturday, a Lieberman campaign aide called to offer a clarification for this article. The aide, Dan Gerstein, said that the senator had endorsed all the Democratic candidates for the House and still hoped they would win.

[Mr. Gerstein said, however, that in light of their endorsement of Mr. Lamont, the senator did not expect the Democrats to ask him to campaign with them this fall.]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/27/nyregion/27connecticut.html

A clarification was needed because Joe is changing positions every day. In the meantime, as the article notes:

Mr. Shays’s shift in position put Mr. Lieberman in an awkward position. In the past, he has sharply rejected the idea of setting any deadlines for removing troops from Iraq. But on Friday, when asked whether he could support Mr. Shays’s proposal, Mr. Lieberman hedged.

Sorry, fellas. Joe’s incoherent messages are going to be the story for the next few weeks.

And from the Lamont blog: “Lieberman will appear with two prominent Republicans, Gov. M. Jodi Rell and U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons, R-2nd, to celebrate last year’s reversal of a Pentagon decision to close the Groton submarine base.”

Meanwhile, Ned Lamont (D) will be helping out Joe Courtney (D) today, who is challenging Simmons.

Lieberman had previously endorsed Courtney and exactly two weeks ago said he would continue to support Courtney as well as the other Democratic House candidates:

Lieberman said that he will continue to support the Democrats running for Congress even though they now support Lamont.

“It is a little bit harder, but I have endorsed the three of them,” he said. Lieberman endorsed Joe Courtney over Rep. Rob Simmons, R-2, and Chris Murphy over Rep. Nancy Johnson, R-5.

I followed the link from Lamonts blog and found that the article says:
Shays has supported the war and has endorsed Lieberman.

“Joe Lieberman is my friend. I have tremendous respect for him. I’m sorry he lost the primary, but unlike my opponent, I look forward to voting for him in the general election,” he said.

I still can’t find a link saying that Joe is out stumping for republicans. I can’t find one because there isn’t one.

Non-partisan/bipartisanship as defined since 2000 by George W Bush, the most partisan president since WWII (according to Pew and Gallup), has poisoned the well. These are partisan times.

For Joe to make the non/bipartisan pitch work, he needs to demonstate something for both sides. Where is the benefit to CT Democrats and moderates? For 5 years, he gives away but doesn’t get. That’s partly what was rejected in the primary.

Nor is Lamont a liberal/radical/lefty. He’s a moderate businessman from Greenwich, a mainstream Dem, whom Joe accused of voting with Republicans (horrors!) before he accused him of being too leftist. But he was elected by moderate CT suburbanites. The lefty charge won’t stick because it’s too silly. People here know better. Don’t forget, folks, this is a race for Sen from CT and not Sen from the US.

Cheers, and nice talking with you!

Why can’t Libeman have it both ways? Your position seems to be the definition of partisanship more so than his.

Both of these parties suck.

What am I missing in Joe’s words? I happen to read them, do you? He is running as an independent with every intention of voting Democratic, as he always does..well that is except for the war…Much like Hillary.

BTW, why does your IP come from St. Louis? Isn’t that sending mixed messages?

Joe wants it both ways. He can’t have it both ways. Further, he’s confusing the voters. After all, he was for Bush’s Iraq plan before he was against it, and he’s closer to Farrell’s position on timetables than Shays’.

“As usual, it is filled with idiocy.”

No, actually not. There’s quite a bit of substance here. Chris Shays has really thrown Joe a curveball and exposed the mixed messages in the Party of One. Joe’s going to have a heckuva time explaining why he’s attacking Lamont but not Shays. More importantly, he’ going to have to explain what he really means without the “helping the terrorists” nonsense the right likes to distract with.

A real debate about real issues in CT. Fancy that.http://rightvoices.com/wp-images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif