Lamont Letter to Lieberman RE:NIE

[The River]

Ned gives Joe a huge smackdown


Dear Senator Lieberman:

As I am sure you have seen, the New York Times today reported that the National Intelligence Estimate in April concludes "that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks." The NIE represents the consensus view of the U.S. government's 16 major intelligence agencies. The Times notes that the Iraq War is a major "reason for the diffusion of jihad ideology" and cites one intelligence official acknowledging that the NIE "says that the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse." 1 Let me put this news in terms that you can clearly understand: Our own intelligence agencies now confirm that the Iraq War is undermining America's security and credibility at our nation's peril.

With this report being released on the eve of your major address on Iraq, I and thousands of other citizens in Connecticut expect to hear your response to this news in your speech, considering you have echoed President Bush's claim that the Iraq War has made our country safer, and that staying the course will help keep us safe. As the NIE now shows, that is absolutely not the case - in fact, the Iraq War has and continues to unnecessarily endanger U.S. national security. Never again can a political leader claim otherwise, lest they deliberately ignore the concrete facts presented to us by our intelligence agencies.

Senator Lieberman, I sincerely hope you will provide answers to these questions in your speech, because there are many who feel that Time Magazine was correct when it wrote that when it comes to Iraq, "Either Senator Lieberman is so divorced from reality that he's completely lost the plot or he knows he's spinning a line." 2 Clearly, Iraq is the most pressing national issue of our time and like many others, I was perplexed a few weeks ago when you gave a major speech on national security but failed to publicly explain your position on Iraq. As one newspaper editorial said, "Any politician worth his salt should know what he thinks about Iraq, off the top of his head - and he should be willing and able to articulate it." 3 Similarly, thousands of Connecticut citizens are perplexed that you have skipped half of all U.S. Senate votes on the subject, including votes that occurred while you were in Washington, D.C.

by davidsirota. read the rest:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/9/24/17253/3670
or here:
http://nedlamont.com/news/1540/

[kentuck]

1. Ned is on Lieberman like white on rice...

:)

[Raster]

5. David Sirota works for Lamont, and he is a no one to trifle with. He's

also an unabashed liberal progressive and has the political pedigree to prove it. Sirota is the electoral trifecta, he can research, he can publish and he can publicly articulate. In Lamont's arsenal against Holy Joe, Sirota is his trump card. If Holy Joe continues in this travesty of democratic process, he can expect more of the same. Much more.

[Nickster]

2. That's the way to do it. Stay on him and don't let up. I can't wait to see

Ned get elected into the Senate come November.

[The River]

3. Lieberman Has Nothing Left To Run On

Turns out the view from Bush's Butt was a huge lie hey Joe?
What excuse will you use now for supporting war? Blame Clinton?

Go the Fuck away Joe and maybe history will
will ONLY consider you a major enabling tool
and not the self serving fool you really are.

[Stinky The Clown]

4. The self selected 3rd party candidate can kiss my ass

Connecticut is so much better than a hack politician running as a self-selected 3rd party spoiler for the Democratic candidate, Ned Lamont.