I think it is, but not in the manner that's being discussed. It's a civil right for all Americans. Joe Lieberman was fighting for voting rights for blacks and the Lamont campaign sponsored a letter trashing that work.
He can be "your candidate" in more ways than one. Sure he's the Democratic candidate for Senate. But to the folks who are working on his campaign and sending him donations, he's "yours" in a way he isn't mine.
Just because a candidate has a (D) behind his or her name doesn't mean they get my full support. Eight years ago here in Indiana (thank God before I could vote and have my role in it) my party nominated a cross-dressing felon to run against Dan Burton. You better believe he wasn't "my" candidate.
I'm not comparing Ned to Bob Kern, but I don't have anything invested in Lamont and I don't think Lieberman is as bad as most of you do. I hope Ned wins, but if he doesn't, we still have a Democratic senator from Connecticut.
The only problem with the logic of this argument, at least for Feingold, Hillary, Kerry and Biden, is that they come from states that will have Democratic governors and will be replaced by Democrats in the Senate.
I'm half expecting Robert Byrd to resign shortly after being reelected, as West Virginia has a Democratic governor, too. Watch closely.
Ken, as you can read above someone intimated that I get my material from Hannity so I was joking about how much I love him. I'm sorry you're offended by the suggestion of gay sexual acts.
Bush spent 6 years in the weakest governorship in the union, and he managed to become president. Clinton was a veteran of campaigns, and spent only a few more years as governor of Arkansas. Point is you don't need 30 years of experience in government to be president.
Edwards is refreshing in that he's an outsider. He's spent time in government, in academia, and as a victims-rights attorney. He's been tested in a national campaign and is smart enough to learn from mistakes that were made. I fully believe that had the ticket been reversed, Edwards-Kerry, it would have won in 2004.
A president sets the course, he doesn't micromanage. I like Edwards' vision, and I trust he would put good people in key positions. I'm especially encouraged by his work with poverty issues and fair trade.
From PoliticalWire: "I suspect that he was not there, and the reason I suspect that is because he's a guy who says anything to win," said former state Treasuer Henry Parker (D) with Lamont by his side."
Again, the issue isn't about Lieberman's vote against Habeus Corpus for enemy combatants, it was about fighting to give blacks the vote in the South.
That's what this is about. If you want to make a case about Lieberman's record on the rights of suspected criminals today that's another issue.