On Tuesday night, Connecticut voters went with a fresh political face, an engaging, intelligent and seemingly kind-hearted Democrat named Ned Lamont, who ran essentially a one-issue campaign with clarity of purpose, with respect to his opponent, and with plenty of state and national support.
Most every newspaper in the state endorsed your re-election, Joe, including this one. So did a lot of Democratic voters -- 135,000 of them, to be exact. But it wasn't enough. Lamont gathered 10,000 more votes than you did from an amalgam of people who dislike President Bush, feel your career has run its course, and who are convinced the war in Iraq is a mistake that we will never be able to rectify.
Your position, senator, is that you will continue your quest for re-election by running as a third-party candidate, hoping to pick off enough unaffiliated and Republican voters -- and hold onto your Democratic backers -- to eke out a November victory over Lamont and Republican Alan Schlesinger. Ironically, you may in fact win this way if you push onward. But you shouldn't continue.
If you are successful, Joe, your next term would be difficult to say the least. You have said you will caucus as a Democrat, which means siding with the party whose voters just chose your opponent in your home state. You would meet regularly with Democratic colleagues and leaders who today are asking you to reconsider an independent candidacy, and who publicly and repeatedly will support Lamont between now and November.
You could, in fact, owe your re-election to Connecticut Republicans -- people who largely support the president and his decision to invade Iraq. Yet, Connecticut Democrats rejected you Tuesday night because they feel just the opposite -- they want out of Iraq, and they are angry at the man who put our troops in harm's way there. It would be an untenable fourth term, an ignoble swan song for a senator who has earned a reputation over 18 years as a man of principle and integrity.
There are other mountains to climb, Joe Lieberman, and we have no doubt you will scale them. Please put your party, your state and your country before your career and step aside. Lamont won the primary, he has an opponent, and we'd learn soon enough whether one of them can fill your shoes.
Joe Lieberman ultimate slap in the face to the Democratic Party is going to result in the Republicans holding the Congressional seats. This is unacceptable as a Democratic win in Connecticut is crucial if the Democrats want to re-capture the House.
With so much on the line, Lieberman's self-serving quest to remain senator (at any cost) only reinforces the belief by many (including myself) that Joe Lieberman only cares about one thing...Joe Lieberman.
Remember what Joe's selfishness during the 2000 eleciton? Does Joe running as an VP and a senator ring a bell? Imagine what would haev happened if Gore won (here's a himt: John Rowland was Governor).
Enough is enough. The people have spoken (and in record numbers) and it's time for Lieberman (and his dire-hard supporters) to face reality and think about what's best for the Democratic Party.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
