« Tony Snow: Defeat Of Feingold Amendment Shows Americans Oppose Withdrawal | Home | Rudy: I "Usually" Hear Democrats Blame America For 9/11 »

Whoops! Lieberman Admits He Promised To Caucus With Dems Before Election

This is interesting: In a speech today to a Republican group, Joe Lieberman inadvertently admitted that he promised to caucus with Dems during his victorious reelection campaign as an Independent against Ned Lamont.

In the lead-up to that election, Lieberman repeatedly vowed to stay with the Dems as a way of reassuring voters that his Independent status wouldn't lead him to switch to the GOP. But in the months since being safely reelected, Lieberman did an about face, repeatedly refusing to rule out a change of parties — with no mention of his previous campaign promise.

But now look what Lieberman just said in a speech before the Republican Jewish Coalition, according to a transcript at National Review:

In all seriousness, many of you in this room stood with me last year through the long journey up a winding road that was my 2006 reelection campaign. You came to my side without regard for party affiliation, and you stayed there even after I ran as an Independent but said I would caucus with the Democrats. Your non-partisanship in my race is a model for what our politics should be. I thank you personally and deeply for it. I could not have won without it.

So does that mean that Lieberman himself would now acknowledge that his refusal to rule out a party switch constitutes a violation of a crucial campaign promise?


329 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic
You came to my side without regard for party affiliation ...

Ha-ha. Except for the little fact that they were glad he was running against the Democrat, and their Republican candidate didn't have a chance.

user-pic

Breaking news: Sun rises in east, Joe Lieberman lies! Film at 11.

user-pic
So does that mean that Lieberman himself would now acknowledge that his refusal to rule out a party switch constitutes a violation of a crucial campaign promise?

Get real. He'd no more acknowledge that than acknowledge his disingenous "Nobody wants the troops home more than I do" comment during the general election.

Joe doesn't need to acknowledge anything. He's a non-partisan legend in his own mind.

user-pic

Many left-wing extremists decried Lieberman's thrust for bipartisanship. I for one am glad that Lieberman is speaking to bipartisan groups such as the National Review.

user-pic

Not sure that's the issue. Whatever you think of Joe's bipartisanship, the simple, incontrovertible fact is that:

(a) before the election, he repeatedly swore not to switch parties

(b) once the election was over, he repeatedly refused to rule out a switch in order to get the press to write stories about how powerful he is

murmuring the word "bipartisan" over and over doesn't change those simple, unalterable facts.

user-pic

And *Republican* Jewish groups. Quite so. With such "bipartisanship", who needs partisans?

user-pic

time for another Broder article praising the Broderbund?

user-pic
user-pic
user-pic
user-pic
user-pic