Sunday, September 16, 2007

Conversations on Independence

1 comment:

D.K. said...

So, now voters were "fooled" by Lieberman? Is that the new excuse?

I'm sorry, but I don't ever remember Lieberman being portrayed as anti-war.

Lieberman never advocated pulling the troops out immediatly, whereas Lamont did. In fact, if I remember correctly, Lieberman advocated the exact opposite as his means to eventually "end the war". So, I'm not sure where the confusion is coming from.

I see this is nothing more than a lame attempt by the "independent establishment" (unfortunatly, we have one now) to throw Lieberman under the bus because they are still upset at him for two reasons:

1. He was not anti-war and won the election.
2. He was not anti-war and called himself an independent (that could hurt the establishment, which is now anti-war), even though running independently outside of a party is exactly what being independent is.