Joe returns from Iraq, and inflicts his wisdom on a defenseless
nation
Joe Lieberman crawls out from under his rock to
pen a column
for the Washington Post that may go down in history as every bit
the
reverse of prescient as his Wall Street Journal column of a year ago.
( "If all
goes well, I believe we can have a much smaller American military presence there
by the end of 2006 or in 2007, but it is also likely that our presence will need
to be significant in Iraq or nearby for years to come.") I'll leave it to others
to deconstruct the lies, half truths and flights of fantasy.
The publication of this column in the Post (Connecticut papers, as well as Connecticut people, are far too provincial to serve as a pulpit for Joe) emphasizes the fact that Joe has returned to form. We in Connecticut are now stuck with this national disgrace for the next six years. Unfortunately, he is not stuck with us. Now that the election is over, Joe can go back to being a national wise man. During most of his last term, he believed he was untouchable, and acted that way, only finding religion in that brief period between May and November. Will Joe ever again stoop to explaining his positions to, or communicating with, his actual constituents? His ego is just too big to even consider coming here to explain what he's doing in our name, or even putting his drivel in our newspapers. I predict this will be his last term by his own choice (forced on him by harsh reality, but that's another story), so the likelihood is that he will never set foot in the state again. He despises the majority who had the "audacity" to vote against him, and he holds the people he conned in contempt.
We are stuck with this guy, and it should be obvious to all that he will spend the next six years giving us the middle finger. It's not like he didn't warn us. His entire campaign from start (going after the "low information episodic voters" in the primaries ) to finish (smearing his opponent and lying about his own positions) was based on the premise that you don't have to fool all of the people, you just have to fool a plurality of them.
Is there any way for a state to impeach its Senator?
The publication of this column in the Post (Connecticut papers, as well as Connecticut people, are far too provincial to serve as a pulpit for Joe) emphasizes the fact that Joe has returned to form. We in Connecticut are now stuck with this national disgrace for the next six years. Unfortunately, he is not stuck with us. Now that the election is over, Joe can go back to being a national wise man. During most of his last term, he believed he was untouchable, and acted that way, only finding religion in that brief period between May and November. Will Joe ever again stoop to explaining his positions to, or communicating with, his actual constituents? His ego is just too big to even consider coming here to explain what he's doing in our name, or even putting his drivel in our newspapers. I predict this will be his last term by his own choice (forced on him by harsh reality, but that's another story), so the likelihood is that he will never set foot in the state again. He despises the majority who had the "audacity" to vote against him, and he holds the people he conned in contempt.
We are stuck with this guy, and it should be obvious to all that he will spend the next six years giving us the middle finger. It's not like he didn't warn us. His entire campaign from start (going after the "low information episodic voters" in the primaries ) to finish (smearing his opponent and lying about his own positions) was based on the premise that you don't have to fool all of the people, you just have to fool a plurality of them.
Is there any way for a state to impeach its Senator?
Posted: Saturday - December 30, 2006 at 09:55 AM
Quick Links
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Apr 17, 2007 07:18 PM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Apr 17, 2007 07:18 PM