Disclosure: I worked for the Lamont campaign doing web design and production and some writing for the official blog (from 9/5/06 to 11/07/06).
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Journal-Inquirer on Joe's Times Freak-Out
Short version, it's all about a condescending man supremely scared that his position on Iraq is being revealed for what it is, an incomprehensible disaster:
But Joe Lieberman seems to care a lot about whom the Times endorses.
He seemed personally hurt by the Times picking Lamont.
His No. 1 flack wrote a long diatribe on the subject.
And Joe resorted to what has sometimes been his ultimate defense in this campaign: No one understands me.
If we did, you see, we would appreciate him sufficiently.
Lieberman's exact words about the Times editorial board were:
"I don't believe that they've ever really understood my position on Iraq." It's not every man who can out-condescend The New York Times.
Why not just say, "They have their views and I have mine"?
And, anyhow, who does understand Sen. Lieberman's position on Iraq?
Maybe professor Irwin Corey.
To the rest of us, Lieberman's position on Iraq has long been incomprehensible gibberish.
It's not just the Times that fails to understand Joe Lieberman's position on the war. Nobody understands it. Because it is contradictory and illogical on its face.
And why is that?
Because Joe Lieberman does not want to choose.
The choices in Iraq are three:
- Keep doing what we are doing.
- Get out - in an orderly way but a quick one.
- Send more troops and temporarily colonize the nation to save it.
Joe refuses to make any of those choices, and then he whines that those pointy-headed eggheads at The New York Times don't appreciate the position he never took.