My wife's LTTE on Lieberman, the flip-flopper, is published

[NewJeffCT]

Thanks to the folks on DU who helped with some editing suggestions.
>>>
Mark Twain might have written about Joe Lieberman: "If you don't like his position on Iraq, wait a minute and he'll change it."

Last Monday, Lieberman gave a Big Speech on national security that called, in part, for us to get tough with Iraqi leaders. On Tuesday, Senator Lieberman may have set a
Senate record for flip-flop speed when met with President Talabani of Iraq and then said we could not get tough on him, or put a gun to his head.

Also in his Big Speech from last week, Lieberman claimed he supported the right of those against the war to speak their minds. Yet, in his infamous op-ed in the Wall St. Journal late last year, Lieberman scolded Democrats and told them to accept Bush as president and that if we undermine Bush's credibility, we do so at our own peril. First, how can Democrats undermine something that Bush does not possess? And, second, who knows what Joe will say tomorrow, or next week, or after the election? He later supported President Bush in throwing out habeus corpus, if the president sees fit. What is a little freedom of speech on top of that?

Additionally, when he first started his presidential run, Sen. Lieberman called for the ouster of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld over the Iraq debacle. Yet, when the Abu Ghraib torture scandal broke, Lieberman flip-flopped and supported Rumsfeld. Now, running for office in a state that is strongly against baby-sitting a civil war, Lieberman has again called for Rumsfeld's replacement. Perhaps if the Pentagon releases the remainder of the Abu Ghraib pictures, still suppressed and, reportedly, far worse than what has been seen so far, Joe's political weathervane will turn back to supporting Rumsfeld?

Of course, all along Lieberman has insisted that everything is rosy in Iraq because people have cell phones and satellite dishes, so this is a huge sign of progress. Yet, Lieberman is now saying that indeed some things are going badly in Iraq. Or, maybe now that Bob Woodward has released the book "State of Denial" that says that
the American public does not yet know how terrible it really is in Iraq, Lieberman is back to his original rose-colored glasses view of Iraq?

These everchanging positions should not come as a surprise. A few weeks ago, Lieberman was asked by the media about his position on Iraq, and he told them they had to wait a week for his response. Despite his being one of the most outspoken cheerleaders of the Bush Iraq debacle, Lieberman still had to check which way his political weathervane was pointing before he could respond.
<<<<
http://www.journalinquirer.com/

Unfortunately, they only keep 1 LTTE at a time online, so no direct link.

[BOSSHOG]

1. BRAVO! - three cheers for Jeff's Wife

I think we liberals have done a pretty good job this year in getting in their faces, so to speak. Its sad we have to but after all, they changed the tone. Great letter.

[DeeDeeNY]

2. Great letter!

Does it look at all promising for Lamont? The few polls I've seen show that Lieberman has a commanding lead,
which doesn't make sense to me. What's going on there?

[Toots]

3. 95% of Republicans and 20% of Democrats will vote for him

It is still possible that most Republicans will just stay home and sit this one out. I am not sure many of them really want a continuation of this Cabal of which Lieberman is a part... When asked by a poll they say they will vote for him but when the actual day comes will they go out???

[CTyankee]

4. I want to think you are right and they won't vote while

Lamont people are on a mission. We are dedicated. But so are some of the Lieberman supporters when I talk to them. It gets me down.