(Reposted to reflect an update since its original timestamp of 12:30 pm)

Update: At 5:09 pm, Jane pulled the graphic, apologized for the error and explained what she intended by its use. Kudos to her for the correction.

The Lamont campaign made its own displeasure known about a graphic it was in no way responsible for, and as the article notes, the “picture of Lieberman in ‘blackface’ on a Lamont supporter’s blog drew criticism from both sides.”

The original post, in its entirety, is below.

Jane Hamsher has been providing excellent coverage of the Lamont/Lieberman primary race, raising many valid points to describe why there’s such disillusionment among Connecticut’s voters about their incumbent senator. Simply put, Lamont’s a successful businessman, the type of moderate Democrat Connecticut voters prefer, and the type that Lieberman sold himself as when he first ran for the Senate position he now is struggling to hold onto.

Over time, however, Lieberman’s turned into a prudish scold, mirroring the Republican obsession with citizens’ sex lives, which has never been the broadly accepted purpose of any successful government. He’s also mirrored the neocon position on the Iraq War, which now registers as the most unpopular war in US history. And Lamont, along with the majority of citizens in almost every state, stands opposed to this war.

Today Republican bloggers, instead of trying to take on Jane’s well-crafted arguments or debating the merits of the Senatorial candidates (including the GOP candidate, old N. Vizzable Whatsisname) , are picking on the graphic attached to Jane’s post, which includes Lieberman in blackface.

On that point, I have to concur. Whatever analogy Jane’s trying to make with that graphic is not readily apparent and because the use of blackface in minstrel shows has long been deemed as insulting, I think she’s made a gaffe that requires correction. As she’s not part of Lamont’s staff, however, it’s important to avoid making conclusions about Lamont based on a media error.

Lieberman’s made many gaffes in recent years, as a Senator and as a campaigner, and ultimately, that’s what this primary’s about. Desperate to stop the hemorraging of support that has steadily squandered a huge polling lead, Lieberman’s been calling in favors from nearly every political ally he’s ever made. Several popular Dems have made recent appearances in his behalf and Lieberman’s fundraising has skyrocketed.

Despite that, there’s two important facts that remain ever present. To date, the polling shows that Connecticut voters aren’t buying what Lieberman’s defenders are selling. With less than a week to go, Joe’s negative ad blitz has yet to display any positive results.

The other fact - the thing that I suspect many voters have noticed - is the one face missing in Joe’s cheerleading team.

In 2000, Lieberman was chosen as the Vice Presidential candidate by Al Gore. Just four years later, when Lieberman ran for the top job, Gore publicly supported Howard Dean, one of the two candidates who opposed the Invasion of Iraq. Despite that, if Gore were to speak up now on behalf of his old running mate, it’d likely be persuasive, which could make the difference in a very close race.

Gore’s silence on this race is deafening. In the 2000 election, only Rhode Island, New York, Massachusetts and Hawaii were more in favor of the Gore-Lieberman ticket than Connecticut was, where Bush only managed 38% of the vote.

Gore’s exactly the type of moderate Democrat that Connecticut voters love and that they once thought they had in Senator Joe. Gore’s silence validates the sense that Connecticut Democrats have, that Lieberman’s shift rightward is an abandonment of his base on several core issues.

Gore could sink Lieberman outright if he publicly announced for Lamont. That he hasn’t only indicates that he’s settled into the dignified role as an elder statesman of the party and is willing to let Connecticut voters exercise their own judgment, while he felt it equally important to refuse that impartial role when Joe pursued the top national office.

Lieberman’s headed for a loss, not only in this primary, but also in the general election should he pursue his independent bid. Al Gore’s support is the only persuasive voice left that could change that outcome. After the hurt feelings Joe endured in the 2004 campaign, it’s quite likely Joe’s too proud to even approach Gore for that.

To me, that exposes the Achilles heel of Lieberman. He wasn’t too proud to ask Bill Clinton to appear, though Joe previously insulted Clinton publicly by calling for his censure. But when the situation was reversed, and it was Lieberman insulted, he’s chosen not to approach Gore for the thing he longs for most, a return to the Senate.

Lieberman remains for Lieberman above all. Connecticut voters sense that. And they sense that Lamont puts Connecticut’s concerns first. And that’s really at the core of what this race is about. It’s not just the issue of the Iraq War. It’s about who’ll put Connecticut’s interests first.