Why Won't the Press Get Lieberman to Talk About the War?

Messaging (0.00 / 0)

The problem is that Ned Lamont will answer the press' questions. Joe Lieberman can just ignore such questions as so many petty annoyances and stay above the fray.

(I'm only half joking with this response, sadly. Journalistic integrity doesn't alwayss elsl papers, or put bums in front of the tube. And if your boss is a Lieberman supporter, well...)

---

by: Scarce @ Thu Jul 27, 2006 at 15:15:59 PM UTC

Because They Want Joe To Prevail (0.00 / 0)

Maura, I've commented on the problems with the MSM before in your diaries. It's really creepy, isn't it? Are there any proffessional journalists left who aren't these: http://www.goarmy.co...

The publicity around this primary could very well be an obvious clue.

"If those in charge of our society...can dominate our ideas, they will be secure in their power. They will not need soldiers patrolling the streets. We will control ourselves." ~~Howard Zinn

---

by: lakezoarian @ Thu Jul 27, 2006 at 15:17:04 PM UTC

Hey, our Connecticut reporters (4.00 / 1)

have, on the whole, done a good job on this.

What pisses me off is Senator Lieberman's unwillingness to hold ANY public forums. It's downright un-American, and instead of writing about Joe's "sneakiness", they show up like trained animals to his bogus Diner stops.

---

by: TrueBlueCT @ Thu Jul 27, 2006 at 15:29:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And they wonder why we resort to "ambushing"! (0.00 / 0)

As a Connecticut voter, I want to know if Lieberman still believes in the Bush Doctrine of pre-emption. If Joe does, I think we ought to hear about how he might like to see it applied vis-a-vis Iran.

In my opinion Iran represents a much graver threat than Saddam ever did. Why are we giving them so much time to develop nukes? Don't get me wrong, I don't want to invade. But according to the Bush/Lieberman logic we should be.

Also, I'd like to know more about our country's intentions towards Iraq. Are we building semi-permanent military bases, and is it true that the Embassy complex we are building in Baghdad would be the biggest in the world?

---

by: TrueBlueCT @ Thu Jul 27, 2006 at 15:22:38 PM UTC

Indeed (0.00 / 0)

Those bases have always bothered me. Here's Wayne Madsen from today:

July 26, 2006 -- Our intelligence sources report that the Israeli Defense Force attack on Lebanon is being carried out as a joint Israeli-U.S. military operation. Moreover, there are joint Israeli and U.S. war rooms coordinating the U.S.-supported Israeli attacks on Lebanon. The ultimate aim of Washington and Jerusalem is not only to eliminate Hezbollah as a political force in Lebanon but also to remake Lebanon as an American and Israeli client state...

Rest herre:  http://www.waynemads...

And here's a huge base right outside Tel Aviv with a mysterious purpose:  http://www.rense.com...

"If those in charge of our society...can dominate our ideas, they will be secure in their power. They will not need soldiers patrolling the streets. We will control ourselves." ~~Howard Zinn

---

by: lakezoarian @ Thu Jul 27, 2006 at 17:09:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Now we know why Condi did diddly squat on her trip to the Middle East (0.00 / 0)

There is no way that Israel and the US will make Lebanon a client state.  At best, they will make it a neutral state between the Muslim/Arab nations and Israel.  For Israel and the US to eliminate Hezbollah as a political force, they would have to kill most or all of the Shiite Muslims in Lebanon and wouldn't that be the US-Israeli version of the Final Solution?

---

by: Larkspur @ Thu Jul 27, 2006 at 17:16:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Good point (0.00 / 0)

Many think they know what Lieberman's position is, but what is it?

I really think he has just hid behind what Bush platitudes ("we will stand down as they stand up").  But what is Lieberman's plan to get out of Iraq? What are the steps he would take?  He really has never articulated how this will work.

---

by: ctpublius @ Thu Jul 27, 2006 at 15:26:01 PM UTC

I blame Steinfels (4.00 / 1)

She's the gatekeeper between Lieberman and the press.

She works for Lieberman the candidate, but reporters should be able to get past her to ask questions of Lieberman the Senator.  Because answering (or refusing to answer) these questions damages his re-election efforts, I lay the responsibility at her feet for not allowing anyone to ask the Senator anything about anything.

Lieberman has all the advantages of incumbency, and he's so afraid that he might lose that he's put his life into "safe mode" (if you use Windows, you know what I'm talking about).  It's bullshit.

I agree with TrueBlueCT that the local press (and Nat'l for what it's worth) have covered the campaign pretty well.  I think Steinfels definitely reads the blogs, especially CTKeith's comments, because she knows that the more Joe speaks, the less people like him--and she's operating under those facts.

|Spazeboy.net|Spazeboy's Guide to Political Videoblogging|

---

by: spazeboy @ Thu Jul 27, 2006 at 17:08:26 PM UTC

What we will not hear from the paid-for-press is that (4.00 / 4)

A vote for Lieberman is a vote for the continued occupation of Iraq, long into the future.

A vote for Lieberman is a vote of confidence in the Bush administration and of George Bush personally.

A vote for Lieberman is a vote of confidence in Republican control of congress and the courts.

A vote for Lieberman is a vote to pursue more failed foreign policy, failed economic policy and failed domestic policy.

A vote for Lieberman is a vote in support of incompetence, arrogance and simple all encompassing stupidity.

A vote for Lieberman is a vote for more "heck of a good job" Brownies.

A vote for Lieberman is a vote to gut Social Security.

A vote for Lieberman is a vote supporting torture.

A vote for Lieberman is a vote supporting illegal wiretaps and illegal political surveillance.

A vote for Lieberman is a vote to intrude in a Teri Schiavo issue.

A vote for Lieberman is a vote to stay the course and turn another corner...

Right back to where this all started...

And do it all over again.

A vote for Lieberman is a vote for more of the same.

---

by: notcho @ Thu Jul 27, 2006 at 17:28:59 PM UTC

I posted about Lieberman's Snubbing (0.00 / 0)

over at Firedoglake, if anyone wants to check it out.

|Spazeboy.net|Spazeboy's Guide to Political Videoblogging|

---

by: spazeboy @ Thu Jul 27, 2006 at 21:26:15 PM UTC