That's not so hard, is it


Following up on some recent posts about our local media's failure to note Joe Lieberman's Iraq hypocrisy (some would say madness), we see a textbook example from the Connecticut Post showing how it's done. (Hugh S. Bailey, Iraq finally looking up-again and again):

He has to assume no one is paying attention. Otherwise, there's no way Joe Lieberman could maintain his record of dissembling, prevarication and misrepresentation he's been peddling about Iraq for the past four years.

His new statements flatly contradict his old ones. He tells us things are finally turning around — but he said that a year ago, and two years ago. He has no credibility left.

In a March 29 opinion piece in USA Today, Lieberman decried the idea of setting a date for troop withdrawal: "Just at the moment things are at last beginning to look up in Iraq, a narrow majority in Congress has decided that it's time to force our military to retreat."
Forget the ridiculous verbiage; this isn't a battle over territory, it's an occupation, and it's impossible to retreat when you hold no ground other than that on which you stand. The real problem here is that things were supposed to be looking up last July.

In the debate with Ned Lamont before the Democratic primary last year, Lieberman said this: "I am confident that the situation is improving enough on the ground that by the end of this year," meaning 2006, "we will begin to draw down significant numbers of American troops, and by the end of next year more than half of the troops who are there now will be home."

Also: "The situation in Iraq is a lot better, different than it was a year ago."

...

Among the senator's more ingratiating habits is his constant name-dropping. Listen the next time he's on a Sunday-morning talk show how often he mentions his agreement with former media darling John McCain. Now his affections have moved on to Lt. Gen. David Petraeus, the recently promoted leader of U.S. forces in Iraq. The mere mention of McCain or Petraeus is apparently supposed to put the sheen of credibility on even the most outrageous statement.

But his biggest offense is seeking to end debate on the most bitterly divisive issue in a generation. "General Petraeus says he will be able to see whether his plan is succeeding by the end of the summer. Let us declare a truce in the Washington war until then. For the next six months, let us instead come together around a constructive legislative agenda for our security, " he says.

Just sit back and see what happens, he says — let people continue dying, let the country continue to spend billions of dollars each month. It's a profoundly unserious proposition to ask that Americans, four years into what was promised to be a quick and easy victory, would suddenly stop questioning just what in the world we're accomplishing over there. It defies every instinct of a democratic society.

Nothing that hasn't been said on every left to center oriented blog in this state, but something so hard to get the "responsible" Lieberman enablers to say. Congratulations, Mr. Bailey.
Posted: Monday - April 09, 2007 at 06:39 PM          

©