I tell ya, Whitehouse mouthpiece Tony Snow makes LIEberman's goon DANGERstein look like a saint.
Watch as this lying hack dodges Chris Matthews' question on whether or not our idiotic Presdient is planning to attack Iran.
Earth to Democratic majority in Congress: We put you in the majority for a one reason...to hold the moron who's running this war accountable fo rhis screw-ups. Please do something before dumb-dumb screws up and bombs Iran...pretty please.
The disgrace of Joe Lieberman and a new simple question
I'll cut to the chase...Joe Lieberman is a lying bastard who said anything to get re-elected.
It's that simple folks and there is no denying the obvious any longer. Lieberman LIED to the voters of Connecticut on Iraq and NOW he LIED to the voters of Connecticut over Katrina.
I'm now going to waste anyone's time going over the bullshit Lieberman pulled during the primary with crazy nonsense ranging from handing out race-baiting flyers throughout the African-American community and sending his goons (headed by lobbyist and D.C. a-hole Richard Goodstein) to cause trouble at Lamont events, to dishing out 387,000 in cold hard petty cash on the streets days and lying about his own senate votes while accusing Lamont of distorting his record. No, I'm not going to get into that, it's TOO easy and you can find all you need in this blog's archives.
What Lieberman did this week is more disgusting than all the crap he pulled during his pathetic primary campaign and he needs to be held accountable by EVERY SINGLE VOTER WHO DRANK HIS KOOL-AID IN THIS STATE.
Lieberman is giving a pass to a President who ran away from his responsibilities and played "I'm a country music star" while people drowned in New Orleans.
A President who FLAT OUT LIED to the American public when he said "no one could anticipated that the leeves would break."
A President who only offered support once the mayor of New Orleans called him out on a radio talk show and his interview was repeated for the world to hear on television.
A President who has no problem flying into New Orleans to do a photo-op but to this day, still hasn't offered any real support to those who have lost everything.
Lieberman is giving a pass to administration idiots like Condi Rice who had better things to do like buying shoes in NYC and hitting tennis balls with Monica Seles while people from her own race were suffering and dying live on television.
Does this man have any shame?
And of course, Lieberman is giving himself a pass for giving the thumbs up (after 42 minutes of questioning) to an under-qualified moron named Michael Brown.
Ironic because he promised them troop withdrawals before the end of this year and aggressive oversight over the mess in Katrina. He's not "answering" to them, he's giving Connecticut voters the middle finger.
We can't pretend to have operating control of the Senate until we take out Lieberman's "swing" role. We win a couple more Senate seats, and Reid will have the ability to toss Lieberman from his committee seats with little repercussion beyond Lieberman's predictable whines.
Lieberman stands in opposition to everything the American people demanded the last election -- an exit from Iraq and accountability for the administration. It is our job, in the next 21 months, to work toward relegating Lieberman to the dustbin of history.
Enough is enough.
We should hold Lieberman and ANY DEMOCRATIC DEFENDER of Lieberman fully accountable. Whether it's State Senator Bill Finch and State Central's Nancy DiNardo (both of whom were sighted at Lieberman's gala in D.C. last week), or the shameless James "I'll cruish you" Amann who is now backpeddling universal health care, it's time for Democrats to draw a line in the sand and say we're not putting up with this kiss ass garbage from politicians any longer.
As the national blogs are looking for reaction from the spineless Democrats in D.C. who can't seem to bring themselves to say anything bad about Holy Joe, we should call EVERY State Rep. ad Senator and get them on the record in regards to Lieberman's latest antics.
It's time to stand up and I promise you, it will not be business as usual for the status quo.
Sen. Joe Lieberman, the only Democrat to endorse President Bush's new plan for Iraq, has quietly backed away from his pre-election demands that the White House turn over potentially embarrassing documents relating to its handling of the Hurricane Katrina disaster in New Orleans.
Lieberman's reversal underscores the new role that he is seeking to play in the Senate as the leading apostle of bipartisanship, especially on national-security issues. On Wednesday night, Bush conspicuously cited Lieberman's advice as being the inspiration for creating a new "bipartisan working group" on Capitol Hill that he said will "help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror."
But the decision by Lieberman, the new chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, to back away from the committee's Katrina probe is already dismaying public-interest groups and others who hoped the Democratic victory in November would lead to more aggressive investigations of one of the White House's most spectacular foul-ups.
Last year, when he was running for re-election in Connecticut, Lieberman was a vocal critic of the administration's handling of Katrina. He was especially dismayed by its failure to turn over key records that could have shed light on internal White House deliberations about the hurricane, including those involving President Bush.
Asserting that there were "too many important questions that cannot be answered," Lieberman and other committee Democrats complained in a statement last year that the panel "did not receive information or documents showing what actually was going on in the White House."
Among the missing material: the record of a videoconference in the White House Situation Room in which former Federal Emergency Management Agency chief Michael Brown said he warned senior officials about the dire situation in New Orleans, but was greeted with "deafening silence." Also missing: records believed to include messages and conversations involving the president, Vice President Dick Cheney and their top aides during the days in late August and early September 2005 when the Katrina disaster was unfolding and thousands of city residents were flocking to overcrowded shelters and hanging onto rooftops awaiting rescue.
But now that he chairs the homeland panel-and is in a position to subpoena the records-Lieberman has decided not to pursue the material, according to Leslie Phillips, the senatorÂs chief committee spokeswoman. "The senator now intends to focus his attention on the future security of the American people and other matters and does not expect to revisit the White House's role in Katrina," she told NEWSWEEK.
Phillips said that Lieberman may still follow up on some matters related to Katrina contracting. But in listing the Connecticut senatorÂs top priorities for the panel, she cited other areas, such as reform of homeland-security agencies and legislation promoting tighter security at U.S. seaports. Asked whether LiebermanÂs new stand might feed complaints that he has become too close to the White House, Phillips responded: "The senator is an independent Democrat and answers only to the people who elected him to office and to his own conscience."
With a majority of the people in Connecticut AGAINST this war and CRITICAL of the President's handling of Katrina, just who is Lieberman answering to? It's clearly not to the people who re-elected him to office but rahter to the Washington conservatives who backed his campaign.
But in the view of White House critics, the Katrina fallout is far from over. They view the missing White House material, along with contracting foul-ups and abuses, as an important part of the story of the disaster that befell a major American city. "Katrina was perhaps the government's biggest failure ever," said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, a liberal watchdog group. "For the Congress not to be willing to stand up to the White House and demand to know who's accountable is a total abdication of their responsibility. How serious about oversight are they if they're not willing to flex their muscle over this one? Wasn't the election about holding the government accountable? Congress has the power for oversight, and the mandate. Does it have the will?"
Will someone please tell me, in light of everythign Lieberman has done this week, why one should feel that he'll caucus with the Democrats?
So, this is the oversight Lieberman promised during his campaign...
He launched his bid for the White House this morning on the Don Imus radio show, and then told the Courant he would file the papers today to become a candidate for the White House in 2008. He plans to base his campaign in Connecticut, and intends to have Attorney General Richard Blumenthal acting as state chairman and Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro, D-3rd District, a former Dodd chief of staff, as a national co-chairmen.
He stressed today the themes he's been testing in key primary and caucus states since he began exploring a bid last year. He talked this morning about "the sense of urgency people feel," not only about the Iraq war, abut about health care, education and jobs.
Dodd also talked about his two young daughters, and how he has a responsibility to shape a better world, and said his experience and temperament make him uniquely qualified to lead the country.
"You have to have the capacity to lead and bring people together," he said, "and I have a lot of experience at that."
During his interview with Imus, Senator Dodd went over the themes of his campaign as well as let his feelings known about President Bush's plan to throw an additional 20,000 into the meat grinder.
Dodd on Bush's troop increase and the Kennedy proposal:
"I applaud the President for rejecting the fatalism of failure and pursuing a new course to achieve success in Iraq. There is no more difficult decision that a President can make than to send our nation’s bravest soldiers and patriots into harm’s way. Yet, no objective is more worthy in defending America’s vital national security interests than aiding a struggling democracy and supporting brave moderates who are in a life and death struggle against totalitarian extremists supported by Al Qaeda and Iran.
Our troops have sacrificed much and now more will be asked of them to defend our nation. They fight in a just, noble and moral cause against the forces of terrorism, and their sacrifices will make America and the world more secure. I want our troops to return home as soon as possible - after we allow, enable and support them in accomplishing their mission in Iraq in finishing this fight.
I know there are deep differences of opinion about what the President has proposed tonight. In the coming days and weeks, we should undertake respectful debate and deliberation over this new plan. But, let us also remember that excessive partisan division and rancor at home only weakens our will to prevail in this war. I am particularly pleased that the President has taken the important and necessary step of creating a bi-partisan Consultative Group consisting of representatives and leaders of the Executive and Legislative branches to address issues related to the war against global terrorism.
At the moment, we and our Iraqi allies are not winning in Iraq and the American people are understandably frustrated by the miscalculations, the lack of progress, and the daily scenes of violence and casualties. But, make no mistake - defeat in Iraq would result in a moral and strategic setback in our global struggle against Islamist extremists who seek to strike our interests and our homeland.
Success is attainable in Iraq, and tonight the President has offered a comprehensive program to chart a new course in both winning the military struggle to establish order and in achieving the political and economic objectives to build a more promising future for Iraqis. However, no progress is possible unless we restore order, particularly in Baghdad.
Tonight, the President did not take the easy path, but he took the correct and courageous course. We are engaged in a world-wide struggle against Islamist extremism, and Iraq is now the central front. It is a dangerous illusion to believe that we can depart Iraq and the inevitable killing fields and terrorist violence will not follow us in retreat - even to our own shores. That is why it is right and imperative that we recommit ourselves to success in Iraq. Weakness only emboldens our enemy, but united resolution will make our nation safer for generations to come."
A vote for Joe Lieberman was a vote for George Bush
From the decider tonight.
Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group that will help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror.
House Judiciary Chairman Mike Lawlor was just on Colin McEnroe's show and indicated that web sites and blogs were being monitored to look for potential threats.
Lawlor Quote: "Apparently state police employees were trolling the internet, blog sites prior to the inauguration seeing if anyone was talking about any type of interference of the Inauguration. And they encountered Ken Krayeske's one post that to me is not at all threatening..."
Colin McEnroe just posted this on his blog. Seems like the events surrounding the arrest of Ken Krayeske is going to turn into a full-scale investigation. McEnroe just posted this letter Gov. Rell sent to Department of Public Safety Commissioner Leonard Boyle.
January 8, 2007
Commissioner Leonard Boyle
Department of Public Safety
1111 Country Club Road Middletown, Connecticut 06457
Dear Commissioner Boyle:
I am writing with regard to the incident last week involving Kenneth Krayeske which led to his arrest by the Hartford Police Department.
I recognize that security assessments are by necessity comprehensive, and I understand that our State and local law enforcement agencies must work together and share information. Law enforcement agencies also have the difficult job of assessing the information they receive. Nonetheless, I was disturbed to read in media reports allegations regarding the existence of a “list” of individuals.
It is my expectation that all State Police information is maintained in strict compliance with federal law. In this environment of heightened security, the use of information must be balanced with the individual rights of our citizens. In providing security and protection, we cannot permit the rights of individuals to be trampled.
The parade was a public event, and moreover an event at which public participation was invited. People also have a right to protest – and that right is one of the fundamental freedoms of our state and nation.
Most importantly, security procedures must be uniform and consistent in order to safeguard both the people and places of Connecticut as well as our basic freedoms.
Accordingly, I am requesting that you review the circumstances of this incident. Specifically, I would like to know how this individual came to the attention of State Police and the circumstances under which his name and photo were provided to the Hartford Police Department.
In addition, I am requesting that you evaluate existing procedures to ensure that information gathered by the State Police is reliable and reported to other law enforcement agencies in a responsible manner.
Standing under the grand dome of the Library of Congress on Friday, the three top Senate Democrats bitterly condemned sending more U.S. troops to Iraq, as President Bush is now considering.
"A bad idea," said Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.).
"A huge mistake," warned Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (Ill.).
"Makes no sense whatsoever," fumed Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.).
Across town an hour earlier, at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, Connecticut Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman shared his own thoughts on Bush's plan. "We need an increase in troops there now," he asserted before an audience of military experts and academics. "It must be substantial, and it must be sustained."
As for him supporting the Democratic Party...
The November election swept Republicans out of power in Congress and signaled that voters are deeply unhappy about the course of the Iraq war. The asterisk is Lieberman, who won a fourth term in an antiwar state with strong support from Republican and unaffiliated voters.
That has given Lieberman a mandate to be the man in the middle, an essential player to both parties while beholden to neither. Lately he has dropped the "Democrat" half of his affiliation, describing himself at the Friday event merely as an independent. He even holds out the possibility that he would back a supporter of the Iraq war, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), in the 2008 presidential race -- although his Connecticut colleague, Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D), also may be running.
"I've had a very political two years, so I'm staying out of it for now," Lieberman demurred after his AEI address. "But you know, I'm independent, and I'm just going to watch it develop for a while. I'm going to support who's best for the country. But I wouldn't exclude the possibility" of endorsing McCain.
Look people, Joe Lieberman would be doing the same thing whether he won the primary or not. Joe Lieberman is a neo-con and only cares about one thing...Joe Lieberman. Backing Bush's idiotic idea of increasing troop levels in Iraq only verifies what everyone should know by now.
"There is no military solution in Iraq, only a political solution," Reid said. "Adding more combat troops to this civil war undermines our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for the future."
Lieberman got a hearty laugh at the AEI event when asked to comment on the Reid-Pelosi letter. "Speaking as an independent," he said with a smile, "needless to say, I respectfully disagree."
For Lieberman and McCain, the big worry is that Bush will order too small a troop increase to make a difference. "Unless you believe all is lost, we've got to do everything we can to win," Lieberman said.
Upon hearing of his colleague's comments, Durbin sighed and shook his head. "Joe Lieberman said that?" he asked.
Democrats grumble off the record that Lieberman is muddying an increasingly unified Democratic message on Iraq, but their public comments are cautious and generally complimentary. They pretended not to notice his brief appearance at the Library of Congress retreat, which overlapped with the AEI forum.
You should have thrown Lieberman under the bus after he lost the primary.
Can we now look into his 387,000 in COLD HARD petty cash?