"[The editorial page of The New York Times on Sunday endorsed Mr. Lamont over Mr. Lieberman, arguing that the senator had offered the nation a “warped version of bipartisanship” in his dealings with Mr. Bush on national security.]"
update:
The editorial is here.
update2:
What The NY Times harshly criticizes as a “warped version of bipartisanship” is alternatively celebrated as an "ability to bridge the partisan divide," in the Orwell-in-Wonderland realm of the WaPo editor's minds. Shoveling great heaping piles of cow puckey, the Wapo endorses Lieberman. (Seriously, you'll want to bring some bathroom deodorizer with you when you click the link; the stench of disingenuous bullshit is pretty nauseating.)
As usual, the WaPo editors don't bother to read their own news pages, wherein Shailagh Murray lists a few items on the list of that so-called "ability to bridge the partisan divide."
While laying the foundation for his own presidential bid in 2004, Lieberman criticized Gore for mishandling their 2000 campaign by sounding a populist tone instead of appealing more to centrists. He showed interest in the Republicans' plan for overhauling Social Security, he voted for a Republican energy bill that Democrats decried, he supported federal intervention in the Terri Schiavo right-to-die case, and he helped clear the path for a vote on Samuel A. Alito Jr.'s Supreme Court confirmation -- although he voted against Alito.
SPECIAL DEAL: Subscribe to our award-winning print magazine, a publication Bernie Sanders calls "unapologetically on the side of social and economic justice," for just $1 an issue! That means you'll get 10 issues a year for $9.95.
