I know this is stepping away of the subject of the original post, so I'll keep it brief.

I doubt Jane Hampsire's actions had any impact on the re-election of Lieberman. It appears to be more or a blogosphere issue. It got no coverage in the newspaper or television. Trying to paint one of the parties as racist was important only to discourage some from voting in the election.

Understand that the Democratic Party in Connecticut is bifurcated - there are limosine liberals in the wealthier parts of the state, and working class, conservative "Reagan Democrats" in the places where manufacturing used to take place. The latter are Lieberman's diner buddies, and the people that Lamont needed to win over in the general election.

But in the end I think Ned Lamont made some mistakes in his campaign that had a greater effect.

1. He let Lieberman give his "consolation" speech first. This gave Lieberman 15 mins uninterrupted (starting at 11PM) to launch his new campaign. And Lieberman gave the performance of his life. Lamont came after commercials, and was not as polished.

2. Lamont let himself be surrounded with people from outside CT and that was the "money shot" that every newspaper and broadcast went with. It gave the impression that Lamont was allied with interests outside Connecticut.

3. He went on vacation right after the primaries giving Lieberman momentum.

I was sorry Lamont lost for many issues beyond the war - I voted for him. I think he had a larger impact in teh election than most have given him. Although he lost he changed the nature of the debate. He proved an entrenched, imcubent war supporter could be beat.

I am not voting for Generalissimo Guiliani

No way am I voting for him.

Rob Marine -

Ironically, if it were, the American people would tune back in, and news could be profitable by delivering actual news.

I would like to belive this would be true. I for one, no longer watch the television news. I can't stand the breathless wall-to-wall coverage the "big" stories get these days.

More than any other broadcast news source Frontline has done a great job of reporting skeptically about the war. They reported on the dubious claims of Mr. Chalabi well before the war started.

Their recent 3 part series on the probelms facing the the news media was good as well.