I recall hearing at some point that it’s the longest word in the dictionary, but I can’t confirm that. All I can say is it fits Joe Lieberman’s actions this week.
A lot of woo-hooing is going on about Lamont beating Lieberman in Connecticut – Lieberman lost with 48% of the vote. What I don’t get is how he got that many votes in the first place. There’s all this controversy over Dems backing Lamont now. Like they’re supposed to bail on the guy who legitimately won their primary? I’m sure Joe Lieberman is a good guy and all, but if he really thinks he can run as an Independent and win, he’s been smoking some pretty strong stuff.
Meanwhile, what’s up with that whole bit about the Lamont campaign hacking into Lieberman’s site? It’s certainly possible, but nobody would condone that sort of thing. And from what I know of campaign databases, most of the information that might be useful to an opposing team would not be located on the campaign web site’s server anyway. As far as a DOS (Denial-of-Service) attack goes, he has no proof – why is the first assumption to think that if his site’s down, it’s because of a hacker? These campaigns are always so cheap, it’s more likely the server just couldn’t handle the election day load.