Thanks to my compadres at Babalu (Im an official cubiche now. For those of you who dont know Spanish, a cubiche is drop-dead sexy and studly man able to slay a woman with either his looks or his wit), I gazed upon the angelic visage of Americas mom, Ci…

Additionally, people characterize people for not supporting when something/someone loses. The PRESS characterized the country as having a tantrum (Ted Russert) in 1994 when the Republicans essentially broke the mostly 54 year Congressional rule that the Democrats had (with Democrat presidents in the mix during those years). It wasn’t by a large margin either. There are other examples of characterizations of this country that I could share. It’s not the point. It’s just people sharing their opinion.

It is a shame that Democrats didn’t support Joe over the extremist due to the ONE issue. Joe has a 96% liberal rating by groups because he does vote with them on most issues but Democrats couldn’t bring themselves to suppport him in large enough numbers to win.

Good luck with your blog. The first post I read had a cuss word so I won’t be reading it. Not that I’m a prude. It’s just a symbol that tells me something. Gives me an opinion.

Most of the rest don’t really know how much of an empty suit Nutroots Ned really is.

Regardless, Lieberman should win re-election by 20 to 30 points as Lamont melts down to well-deserved obscurity.

The national Democratic Party will simply ignore the CT race and concentrate on other races. After all, Joe IS one of them, despite his Iraq stance, and he will most likely rejoin the party next January.

Suppose there was are a not-so-bright middle-class middle American who makes a silly home-made so-called documentary that ends up getting national attention.

But now I guess he is not a real Democrat anymore. A Rovian Republican, in fact! He has broken the faith! Disagreement = Heresy! Let The Great Purge begin!!

I am really enjoying the outpouring of glee from the far leftists. “We’re number ! Wooo Hooo We Won!!!” This hysteria, this victory dance on meth, all because they defeated not a conservative, not a Republican, but because they defeated a liberal Democrat!

I guess after having their heads handed to them for 6 years by conservatives, they are desperate for any kind of victory to celebrate, but c’mon…this is more pathetic than their claiming that losing to a Republican by just a little bit was a victory.

Or maybe you did not do any investigating yourself. Some things the nutroots were not meant to know, eh?

I believe you. There are some serious wack jobs out there. The stuff they are saying about Lieberman is awful. And he was one of thier own. It is similar to some of the stuff they screamed at Bush in the past. I’ll admit, most people are here to vent, but there must be some protocol?

They are already going full steam on Lieberman, and he only decided to go independent today. He’s got a rough 4 months ahead, but hey it’s only 4 months, and the reward at the end is at least another 6 years in the Senate.

Not sure what you mean but you should investigate a little more. Lamont is not considered particularly liberal by the left bloggers (nor are a number of candidates they support). So they don’t expect much. As Lieberman (you trust him right?) said, Lamont was practically a Republican in disguise in his previous electoral experience. His “anti-war” stance does not do much to change that since it is no more left than, say, William F Buckley’s position. And I’m not sure how opposing the particular Bush policy in Iraq makes you racist — I’ll defer to your expertise — but it probably doesn’t make you too unpopular. It is, after all, the position of 60% of Americans.