84% of Connecticut Democrats want the United States our of Iraq. Thus it is not just the Democrat "party's left wing" who are upset with Joe Lieberman's staunch advocacy for continuing the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Lieberman's support for the atrocities that go on day in and day out in Iraq is not moderated by the Bush administration lies that drove our troops into that country, or by the widespread understanding that the presence of those troops fuels the civil war. Those elected and appointed officials who cheer so loudly placing our children into deadly Iraq don't have any family members in harm's way in Iraq. The burden of death, maiming and grief are for other families, American and Iraqi. Lieberman seems not to care that the $250 million burnt every day in Iraq is not spent on education, health care, affordable housing, or rebuilding Connecticut and the US's crumbling infrastructure. No, your writer’s name calling doesn’t change the facts. Saddam Hussein, who the earlier Reagan and Bush administrations supported militarily and financially, after over a decade of cruel blockade and hundreds of thousands of deaths, was a toothless tiger. He had nothing to do with the terrorist actions of 11 September 2001. He had nothing to do with Al Qaida. He had no weapons of mass destruction. What he had was oil, what he had was a well located territory that the U.S. wanted for permanent military bases, and what he had was Bush’s key to winning re-election – a successful war campaign. War is not a “single issue” as Lieberman argues. That is an argument that only someone who has avoided being maimed by war makes. Compared to what our troops and the Iraqis suffer at his hands, Lieberman’s losing an election is a mild rebuke.

84% of Connecticut Democrats want the United States our of Iraq. Thus it is not just the Democrat "party's left wing" who are upset with Joe Lieberman's staunch advocacy for continuing the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Lieberman's support for the atrocities that go on day in and day out in Iraq is not moderated by the Bush administration lies that drove our troops into that country, or by the widespread understanding that the presence of those troops fuels the civil war. Those elected and appointed officials who cheer so loudly placing our children into deadly Iraq don't have any family members in harm's way in Iraq. The burden of death, maiming and grief are for other families, American and Iraqi. Lieberman seems not to care that the $250 million burnt every day in Iraq is not spent on education, health care, affordable housing, or rebuilding Connecticut and the US's crumbling infrastructure. No, your writer’s name calling doesn’t change the facts. Saddam Hussein, who the earlier Reagan and Bush administrations supported militarily and financially, after over a decade of cruel blockade and hundreds of thousands of deaths, was a toothless tiger. He had nothing to do with the terrorist actions of 11 September 2001. He had nothing to do with Al Qaida. He had no weapons of mass destruction. What he had was oil, what he had was a well located territory that the U.S. wanted for permanent military bases, and what he had was Bush’s key to winning re-election – a successful war campaign. War is not a “single issue” as Lieberman argues. That is an argument that only someone who has avoided being maimed by war makes. Compared to what our troops and the Iraqis suffer at his hands, Lieberman’s losing an election is a mild rebuke.

Good luck! Lunatics like you going to kill Democratic Party. Do you think that yours ideas have any support on a national level?

Henry L says, "84% of Connecticut Democrats want the United States our of Iraq. Thus it is not just the Democrat "party's left wing" " Wrong. The party's left wing IS composed of 84% of Connecticut's Democrats.

Typical democratic left wing fanatacism. This is why the dems control neither the house nor the senate nor the oval office. typical leftist extremism....

It is sad to see polarization of both political parties: we need the moderates, we need people like Joe, H. Clinton and... (I can hardly come up with a name on the GOP side for they all have been replaced by the total mishigas.) May be this country must become a Democracy for a change, not a republic run by bunch of corporations.

As during Vietnam war, the American radical Left proves to be anti-patriotic. In the seventies, they used the same anti-war subversive methods to move forward in their Marxist and anti-Western agenda. As they did 40 years ago, these crypto-Marxists scums are using an unpopular war as a way to promote a new generation of political leaders sympathethic to their radical views. The result of these action was the election of the pathethic Dhimmi Carter. The West need strong leaders and strong lawmakers to defeat these terrorist thugs.

You can tell what kind of Democrat Leiberman is by the anguish expressed by the Republicans over his impending ouster.

Running as an independent, according to the latest Quinnipeac poll, Lieberman easily takes the state 56% to 18% (Lamont) to 8% (Schlesinger). Lamont doesn't fare nearly as well vs. Schlesinger in a one-on-one without Lieberman in the race. Unless you're going to tell me that the majority of Connecticut is comprised of closet-Republican Lieberman supporters, I have to take issue with your statement that this "is not just the Democrat party's left wing." So far as I can tell, Lieberman has made it abundantly clear that he does not agree with the course of the war itself, but he does not agree with leaving Iraq now, and he still maintains that getting rid of Saddam was a good thing. This latter view he has held since long before Bush was ever even in the White House. Lieberman's been nothing if not consistent. You knew what you had when you voted for him six years ago; you know what you have now.

John McCain? Olympia Snowe? Take heart...centrists exist among both parties...it's just hard to hear them over all the partisan screaming. The "Gang of 14" shows that there are those still willing to compromise in good faith rather than hold the entire government hostage to score points with the misguided bases of both parties.

Quoting you: "Good luck! Lunatics like you going to kill Democratic Party. Do you think that yours ideas have any support on a national level?" There is tremedous support on the national level for candidates that come out against the foolishness of the Iraqi debacle. The amerikan public is way ahead of the curve on this issue. Joe Lieberman has been a shill for the war, George Bush, and the neo-cons who instigated this war from day one. He deserves to lose. And if he does it will send a message to the U.S. Congress, AIPAC, the neo-cons, and the israeli right-wing.

See, that's just it..."what kind of Democrat" becomes more important to you than "good legislator." That's the problem today, and that's why Republicans and Democrats both are becoming more extreme in their views, less likely to compromise, and why good candidates in both parties are pushed to the background in favor of loud, party-first shills. For more on blind party loyalty, see what George Washington had to say about it in his Farewell Address: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/washing.htm (20 paragraphs in). By the way, Schlesinger, the Republican, is only about 10 percentage points behind Lamont in a runoff between the two, with over 30% of voters undecided. He's not nearly so close with Lieberman in the mix, either as a Democrat or an independent. I don't see why the far right wouldn't see Lamont winning as a good thing.... Personally, I don't see how anyone in Conn. can't clearly recognize Lieberman as by far the best choice of the three.

political rivals the night before the election. Then he is gonna have a tough time. add to the fact that african american voters will be blocked from votin in crucial seats... hes got a tough road ahead. G-d Bless you Joe, If I was American i would vote for you.

Joe Lieberman is as American as apple pie...I can think of no more patriotic politician than Joe Lieberman...it is offensive for Israelis to call for him to abandon his country (otherwise known as Aliyah)...Americans are Americans, Israelis are Israelis...religion has NOTHING to do with it

Please, oh please, dear God, help him "Make Aliyah" and move to Israel. Then when he backstabs the Jewish State for his own interests, you will understand why we want him out of office here. If Joe Lieberman would only be honest and just run as a "Republican", we would have no problem with him. It's the fact that he's dishonest and supports George W. Bush and the Repiblicans lockstep he has become so unpopular. You want him? Please, be our guests and take him.

You don't get it. The war in Iraq has weakened America and its ability to support Israel. Now we will get mullahs running Iraq and both of us lose. Lieberman is NOT a patriot - he is a dangerous fool and the people of Connecticut know it.

Americans, who oppose the Iraq war, are not necessarily isolationist!! Most of us, who originally opposed this war, did so precisely because of our deep interest and involvement in international politics. And to suggest that the war is the left's sole political cause is pure nonsense! The minimum (living) wage, access to healthcare and education are core issues for any descent person, and along with the Iraq war, they are at the center of the left's anger at Dubya.

FINALLY I can remark on an issue with a bit of credibility. I am Jewish and have lived here in CT 30 years. I like Lieberman and think he is a decent Senator BUT like the MAJORITY of CT people, and a significant number of all Americans and Jewish Americans, I realize the war in Iraq was a mistake. This is a mainstream opinion, even within the Republicans. Unfortanately, only Liberman, Bush, Rumsfeld and RIce seem to be the ONLY ONES that refuse to admit that the war has been a mistake. Because of that, no matter what else Joe has done, this stance has hurt him. The war was wrong and the US has no business being there. I am not a leftist and I believe this. And so do many many Americans, Jewish Americans, Republicans, and Democrats. I will vote for Joe, but reluctantly. But I suspect he may loose anyhow.

accussing the anti-war crowd of an orwellian twist? are you aware of all the mis-information, news-speak, and other shanigans that were used to lead us into bar. bush and company are the master's of the orwellian twist - not the anti-war crowed. you write that lieberman's sin was wanting to rid the world of saddam - sorry, but that is not how it went down. lieberman's sin is accepting bush's lies about WMDs that didnt exist, his failure to do any over-sight in investigating those lies, and his continued refusal to accept that bush won the support of the american for the war through lies. good riddance to lieberman!

I am an American. I'd fight for America if she needed me. I'm also an Israeli. And when the chips are down, no matter what, I will stand with my people in their land. You can be offended as you like. A Jew is a Jew, and no matter how "American as Apple Pie" Jow is - and he is Orthodox and prays for the well-being of Jerusalem three times daily - his soul still thirsts for Zion. You can be as "rah, rah" Americano as you want. I'll still advocate his moving to the land of his forefathers - and I'll do it as an American, as an Israeli, and as a Jew. Boo-hoo to your hearts content if you don't like it.

Like most people you are proving you can't look beyond your own skin and assume everyone else naturally thinks and votes as you do. I was born to a family of conservative democrats who are still wondering where their candidates went. And you think the polemics and whining of the modern dems over partisan politics means anything to me? Pu-leeze! I have no interest in regurgitated election year jingoism, which is what your giving me. I liked Joe before and I like him now. He's been consistent the whole way through - an old fashioned conservative democrat (who is therefore out of step with the polarized libby-extreme zeitgeist of the party today). Joe's one of the only politicians in the freaking middle. He didn't shift away from his constituents - they shifted away from him. In fact, the entire party shifted away from its conservative and centrist voters. JFK was the last Dem who was worth a damn and worth voting for.

While Lieberman ran for vice president he was always hammering on what a superjew he was, and how pious. For that reason it isn't far-fetched to imagine that Lieberman's real reason for supporting the murderous Iraq debacle is that the war benefits Israel, which long has wanted Saddam Hussein 6 feet under. Personally I have nothing against Israel but I resent having to fight its wars for it. And that is what has happened, I believe on purpose. The "imminent danger" of Iraq's supposed WMD were all lies, and I am sure the Bushites knew that very well. We spend billions upon billions of dollars on the intelligence services, only to see the intelligence thrown out when inconvenient. Bush and the neocons lied and lied, and the gullible American public bought into the lies, having long forgotten the underhandedness, mendacity, and criminality of a US government intent on going to war (remember the Gulf of Tonkin resolution?) "Patriotism" is not defined by agreeing with the Bush White House and the Republican rightists, although they try to portray patriotism that way and accuse those who dissent with "un-Americanism." Those are evil, fascist lies, and the jerk Lieberman who spends his time with his nose in Bush's anus will pay for his perfidy. In America there are two political philosophies: reactionary (the Republicans) and the merely conservative (Democrats such as the crypto-fascists in the Democratic Leadership Council.) We will drive the Democratic party to the left so that we may have an alternative to the reactionaries and their lumpen-proletariat and right-wing religious fanatic supporters.

religion means nothing I am an Israeli citizen as well, dual american/israeli citizenship...not that it matters to you, as I am a christian...being an Israeli citizen means nothing to me, other than making it easier for me to work when I am in israel with my wife (mizrahi jew, probably pisses you off even more)...I was born in America, therefore I can be nothing but an American, like you, like Joe...you are a citizen of a borrowed nation...you will ALWAYS, only, be an American

70% in the latest count. So not only are most Connecticut Democrats opposed to the war, so are most Jews. So are most people in Connecticut. So are most Democrats everywhere, now that the truth about Bush and Cheney's deliberate lies has emerged clearly. I'm not a Leftist. I supported the war at first, but now I know that I was lied to. I wouldn't have supported it had I known the truth. Lieberman may or may not win. But he's out of step with his own party and his own State on this issue. Trust and name recognition, however, may yet carry him to victory. What's disgraceful about Zalman Shoval's piece (and he shoukd know better) is his slithery attempt t in the last section to make this a Jewish issue. Most Jews oppose the war! It has nothing to do with Israel, or with terrorism. And who is this Moulitsas person? I've never even heard of him. Has anyone here? Shoval seems to think he's the main motivation behind American public opposition to the war. What on earth is he talking about?

I am not sure what you really mean. DO you mean CT democrats are more leftist than other Democrats? OR more leftists live in CT? It doesnt really matter, because if 84% of Democrats want the US out of Iraq, and since the Democrats are the majority part yin CT (I can attest to that), than it says much about what view towards the war is from our state. It really doesnt matter what other people think about us. This is what we belive, though I suspect we are a microcosm of the rest of the USA. But even if we are more liberal, so what? We are the ones voting for or against Joe. It is our decision. It is humourous to see the banter about this, and how it affects the middle east. NOW I KNOW HOW ISRAELIS FEEL ABOUT OTHERS BUTTING IN. Its not the NYers issue. Or the Israelis issue. Its our issue here in CT.

Ody, I empathaize with your resentment. But please be aware that many Jews such as myself initially supported the war NOT because it was good for Israel, but because we belived, like most Americans, that the war was good for the US. I realized after a few months, that I was wrong, and that we had got snookered by Bush. I have the courage to admit that. Unfortunately Joe still hasnt realized that. He may have supported the war b/c he thought it was good for Israel. Or maybe he was like us and just thought the war was good for the US. Who knows.

That's the best I can call Joe Lieberman. Being "moderates"? Forget about it. This guy has taken careful considerations to maximize his support nation-wise to realize his presidential fantasy, on Iraq, on social security, etc. He's become the sympol of showing democrats are a bunch of chickens compared with W. So it's time to get rid of him. His decision to run as independent is not an issue of party loyalty. It's just one of his "last throes" as Mr. Cheney perfectly called.

Lieberman's support of the war is a minor issue in his list of transgressions; a list which is perhaps topped by his continuously predicatable betrayal of fellow democrats. Isn't it telling when he's unwilling to follow the will of Democrat primary voters by creating his own political party? The blogosphere is only judging the defensibility of Lieberman's statements and actions. Is he a dedicated Democrat? Clearly not.