NYTimes Endorses Lamont

[Recreated from another computer]

The New York Times today endorsed Ned Lamont. The Hartford Courant endorsed Lieberman.

The papers agree on one thing: Lieberman's stance on Iraq has put him in this mess. While other Democrats also voted for the Iraq War, most have come around since by calling for withdrawal of our troops at the earliest opportunity, whether by a timetable or not. As the latest Gallup poll points out, this is the wish of most Americans...in fact, as many Americans now want us out of Iraq as wanted us out of Vietnam in 1969. Lieberman, though, has refused to acknowledge this. He stubbornly clings to the Bush agenda on the war.

Even the Courant has good things to say about Ned Lamont. The major negative is his "relative inexperience." I'll take a pol with bright ideas, high ideals, enthusiasm and vision any day over an entrenched pol who thinks by virtue of his longevity he owns the seat.

< Mel Gibson's Anti-Semitic Tirade | Mel Gibson Apologizes, Blames Behavior on Alcoholism >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Re: NYTimes Endorses Lamont (none / 0) (#1)
    by Pol on Mon Jul 31, 2006 at 05:10:34 AM EST
    Don't you mean "NYTimes Endorses Lamont" or "Hartford Courant Endorses Leiberman"?

    Re: NYTimes Endorses Lamont (none / 0) (#2)
    by Punchy on Mon Jul 31, 2006 at 06:50:09 AM EST
    TL--I'm wicked confused by your headline, followed by your next statement. I thought the NYT endorsed Lamont?