So, personally, I enjoy the Economist.  I find it to be a much better publication than Newsweek or Time.  Where else can you read about current events in Guinea Bissau?

That said, the Economist had an article on the Lieberman primary that pretty much read like a hit piece on the left blogosphere, the netroots, and (specifically) Markos.  
http://www.economist.com/world/na/displa ystory.cfm?story_id=E1_SDRGRVN   (subscription required)

Anyway, here is the letter I sent to the Economist.  Are there any points that I missed?

Dear Sir-
I was very disappointed with your piece on Daily Kos and the relationship between liberal blogs and Senator Joe Lieberman.  First of all, Daily Kos, by and large, represents the views of informed, mainstream democrats.  Kossacks, as they are known, have little use for the real far left.  It is an open community, and there are those on the far left, and there are bad seeds.  The site employs minimal regulation.  Now then, the left blogosphere's dislike of Sen. Lieberman goes far beyond his support for the war.  His real fall in popularity arises from his decision to support the privatization of Social Security.  This was very unpopular amongst Democrats of all stripes, and strongly opposed across the left blogosphere.  His fall was further precipitated by the view that he is the right's favorite Democrat.  He's often referred to as a Fox News (a cable news channel with an obvious far right bias) Democrat.  He did not help his cause by failing to support women's rights.  Specifically, Sen. Lieberman believes that taxpayer funded hospitals that are affiliated with religious institutions have the right to deny emergency contraception to rape victims.  Then, Sen. Lieberman voted for cloture (which blocked a filibuster) on Justice Alito's nomination.

These are just a few examples of the reasons why the left blogosphere is opposed to Senator Lieberman.  If he were wrong on a few of the issues, the left blogosphere would be very forgiving.  The left blogosphere, and Daily Kos in particular, is very pragmatic.  We are more interested in winning the Congress than ideological purity.  And that means allowing multiple viewpoints on issues from different candidates.  But the issues Sen. Lieberman is wrong on more than offset the issues he is right on.  And Ned Lamont has shown that he will be right on the issues that matter most.   That is why he gets our support.

Sen. Lieberman continuously works to undermine the interests of the Democratic Party while attempting to find some invisible 'middle-ground'.  It's no wonder that he has earned endorsements from such liberals as Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity.  

Thank you,
(name deleted for this post)