I just noticed on Atrios' site that not only is Joe Lieberman not willing to pledge to support the winner of the Democratic primary in Connecticut, apparently Chuck Schumer (my senator here in NY and head of the Dems' senate campaign committee) isn't either.

Now, I'm just sort of hanging back and watching this. Not taking any sides. Just an observer. But doesn't Schumer have some sort of obligation to at least nominally support the winner of the primary? I don't mean this rhetorically. I'm genuinely curious. It's well understood that in practice the campaign committee isn't neutral in a contest like this. But usually there's a pretty high bar in place for abandoning the winner of the primary. The David Duke situation down in Louisiana under the first President Bush comes to mind. But I'm not sure I can think of another example.