Bipartisanship Sank Joe Lieberman

RUSH: You may have heard that Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman is not going to seek another term in 2012. Now, Joe Lieberman ought to be the poster boy for the kind of new bipartisanship that the news media and the rest of the Democrats now claim that they want. Who is it? On the Democrat side, who has done more reaching across the aisle? Who has been more civil than Joe Lieberman? And yet we’re now told that he’s so unpopular with the Democrat base in Connecticut that he doesn’t stand a chance of being reelected. And yet he’s the model for what we all should be. He’s bipartisan; he is civil; he crosses the aisle; he works with the other side. He is the shining example. He fits the mold.

Speaking of bipartisanship, the New York Times in 2006 refused to endorse Lieberman because he was too bipartisan. The Times didn’t endorse a single Republican for Congress in 2006. That’s how nonpartisan they are. But Lieberman was too bipartisan, he was too wishy-washy. They instead endorsed that nutcase on the left, Ned Lamont.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I want to read to you from an editorial. This is the New York Times July 30th, 2006, just an excerpt from that editorial: ‘[T]his primary is not about Mr. Lieberman’s legislative record. Instead it has become a referendum on his warped version of bipartisanship, in which the never-ending war on terror becomes an excuse for silence and inaction. We endorse Ned Lamont in the Democratic primary for Senate in Connecticut.’ They didn’t like Lieberman’s bipartisanship at the New York Times.