Connecticut Republicans Hail Lieberman
Some think he's on his way to becoming a Republican
ST. PAUL—It's no secret that Democrats in Connecticut have been apoplectic that their junior senator, the man who ran as the party's vice presidential candidate in 2000, has endorsed Republican John McCain.
And last night, when now-Independent Sen. Joseph Lieberman—he lost his party's primary in 2006 and won as a third-party candidate—took to the convention stage to bash Democratic nominee Barack Obama and urge others to vote for McCain, many of the state's GOP delegation were relishing the moment.
"It's been so enjoyable," says Michael Rea of Westport, Conn., who was unable to conceal his delight. Rea was huddled in conversation on the convention floor with fellow delegate Lawrence DeNardis, who in 1980 defeated Lieberman in a race to represent Connecticut's third congressional district.
Conversations in the Nutmeg State about Lieberman, elected senator in 1988, have become "more vituperative than ever," says DeNardis, who predicted that McCain has a "fighting chance" to win traditionally true-blue Connecticut. (Polls suggest is would involve quite a fight: the most recent survey taken in late July showed Obama with a 13 percentage point lead.)
Delegate Michael Fedele, the state's lieutenant governor, says that Lieberman knows there is political risk in endorsing McCain, but that the senator—who still caucuses with members of his former party—is "someone who does the right thing."
"I don't think he's here to support Republicans, but as someone who believes that the Republican is the right candidate for president," Fedele says. "Joe's a smart guy and he knows there's a penalty to be paid for this in his party." That penalty will very likely include the prospect of losing his shot at becoming the next chairman of the Senate's Government Affairs Committee.
Norwalk Mayor Richard Moccia, born in Lieberman's home town of Stamford, took a poke at state Democrats, saying that when they picked anti-war candidate Ned Lamont over their longtime senator, a staunch Iraq War supporter, they "threw away 30 years of public service."
"Joe Lieberman is a very courageous person," Moccia says.
His comments were echoed by retired Bristol, Conn., businessman Wally Barnes who lauded Lieberman as an "independent thinking," and Tracy Enders, a stay-at-home mom, who says she views Lieberman as "inherently a Democrat," but whose views on national security reflect her own.
"Overall, people of Connecticut rejected the politics of the Ned Lamonts of the world," says Enders, a self-described "McCainian" dating back to his original presidential run in 2000.
Do Connecticut Republicans see Lieberman on the path to joining their party? DeNardis says his long-time friend may be "in transit to another status."
But Mike Botelho, a Connecticut delegate from Glastonbury, says Lieberman is a "far more valuable an asset" as an independent voice than if he were seen as spouting the party line. And Lieberman, clearly reveling in his moment in the spotlight and his much analyzed relationship with McCain, no doubt has made that calculation and come to the same conclusion.
Reader Comments
To An Israeli
Hey genius, as a Judeo-Christian country, I think America's interests and Israel's interests are one in the same, or are you just another guy who has a selective reading of the Scriptures?
An Israeli
No report mentions that his religion and his spiritual country take precedence over USA. He and his lobby for Israel make every effort to destroy US for the sake of Israel.
Can we think about our interest as Americans?
There is no Liberman or Israel who will pay for the Trillion dollar war deficit in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will be us American tax payer. But Israel gets everything free. Our real enemies are China, Russia and would be India in the future. As there economy grows we will be losing our power in the world. They would be smiling with our situation and would be dreaming about the party time soon to come. Instead of focusing on the economical threats from BRIC countries we focus on already poor, week and marginal Middle East and central Asia. What a poor insight for the future.
Is it wise to fight against the entire world for just a tiny state in Middle East called Israel? There are client states for super powers, but we are client state of a tiny state which rules the world power by proxy. Think about it independently are we really free?
advertisement









