FALLING OUT OF LOVE.

FALLING OUT OF LOVE. Back when The New York Times endorsed Ned Lamont in the Connecticut Democratic Senate primary, I wondered whether the Times would break from their tradition of high-minded endorsements for moderate Republicans this fall. It would seem strange, after all, if the same page that opposed Joe Lieberman on the grounds that Congress must be a watchdog rather than an enabler of the Bush presidency run-amok, endorsed, as it always had in the past, the more conservative (and actual Republican) Rep. Chris Shays, also of Connecticut. Well, today the question was answered, very articulately. The Times notes:

[A]s his party has moved to the right, Mr. Shays has taken more and more stands with which we have profound disagreement. His position on immigration reform is far closer to the crabbed, xenophobic stance of the House Republicans than the fairer, bipartisan approach of the Senate. During the campaign, his remarks about the treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison -- which he minimized as �something less than torture� -- were disturbing.

They go on to argue, correctly, that Shays personal positions, some of which are laudable, are far less important than who controls congress. I'm not sure about Ryan Lizza's suggestion that the Times endorsement of Shays' opponent, Diane Farrell, will tip the deadlocked race. Yes, the Times is widely read in the upscale district. But the Times is also widely read on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, and it still swung for Mike Bloomberg in the 2001 New York City mayoral race (when the Times endorsed Mark Green.) Whatever its impact on the race, though, it's notable to see the Times editorial page go against one of its long-favored sons.

--Ben Adler