I don't blame democrats who campaign for Lieberman

[WI_DEM]

in the primary. I hold no grudge against Boxer, Dodd or Bill Clinton. They have a perfect right to support him in the primary. It's only if they were to support him if he ran as an Independent that I would be upset--and I believe most elected democrats who have commented on this have stated that they will support the winner of the primary.

Boxer, who has always been a favorite on DU, has disappointed many on DU, according to comments I've seen. But she has worked with Joe for 14 years and she is a friend and they have done quality work together on things like the environment.

There is nothing I want more than to see Lamont win the primary and go on to win in November. But Lieberman is the incumbent and he has people who know him and genuinely like him in the Senate and I can't blame them if they are loyal to him in the primary.

As long as they are for Lamont in November!

[benburch]

1. I do blame them.

Because if it isn't clear to them that he is a traitor to the Party and to the Union, then they are willfully ignoring the facts of the matter.

[WI_DEM]

3. I don't know if it's true or not but on Tweety last night Pat B. said

that he believes that before Clinton came in to campaign for Lieberman he must have made Joe promise two things 1) that Joe will support Hillary in '08 and 2) that if he loses the primary he won't run as an Independent.

We will see on that one.

[davidwparker]

2. true, he's still a dino. but, it will be a different matter for dems to

support incumbency when he runs as an independent.

[LisaM]

4. Well said. I hope Lieberman loses

but I also don't blame his colleagues for campaigning for him.

I actually think it's brave of Boxer (because she knows there will be backlash) and forgiving of Clinton (after what Lieberman said during the Lewinsky scandal) and that's part for the course with those two.

[samsingh]

5. i agree with you, especially after reading Barbara Boxer's letter

of explanation

[BuyingThyme]

6. Yes, they have a right to murder Iraqi babies. But I don't support it.

[Zodiak]

7. Shamelessly reposting my Boxer/Leiberman hypothesis

that Boxer negotiated support for Leiberman in the primary in return for a Joementum vote on a progressive issue (Joe has been voting more progressive since this primary challenge began). In other words, she signed on the dotted line and must honor her agreement, therefore she appeared for Leiberman.

It is true that the Boxer letter issued today has a great deal of spin when it comes to the choice issue. Alito and Roberts weren't exactly shining examples of men to put on the SCOTUS if one is a sincere pro-choice senator. We are talking Constitutional rights, not a political football. Boxer had to defend her position somehow, so this was the best argument she came up with. Her clear progressive voting history exonerates her from the wrath of the grassroots for infractions like this. Despite the strawmen hurled from the DLC, the progressive grassroots can be a forgiving bunch, especially on unimportant matters like this. After all, the new strength of the grassroots and the blogosphere in general (from whence Lamont get his best support) is that we are NOT a cult of personlity that will vote for brand X just because our favorite Dems say so.

After all, did Boxer's endorsement sway anyone here? I doubt it. Once you are off the Joementum bandwagon, there is no going back. I'm pretty sure Boxer knows this and also knows her support will not affect the primary one bit.