CNN wankers

Transcription de wankery (0.00 / 0)

  BLITZER: He's supporting the president when it comes to the war in Iraq, and he's also calling for a new tax to keep America safe from terror. The very independently minded Senator Joe Lieberman, he's standing by to join us live.

  [...]

  BLITZER: He's an outspoken backer of the war in Iraq, which may anchor -- anger, certainly has some -- at least some of his Democratic colleagues in the United States Senate. Joining us now from Capitol Hill, Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut.

  He's also proposing a special tax now to fund the global war on terror. We're going to get to that, Senator, in a moment, but I'll ask you a question a lot of your constituents and others are asking, presumably. How much longer do you give the president to get it right in Iraq? How much more time realistically do you -- you think he has before even supporters like you start to back you away?

  LIEBERMAN: Well, look, the important thing to say here, Wolf, is that how we end Iraq is going to be very important to our security and our progress in the war against the Islamist terrorist who attacked us on 9-11, so I'm supporting this latest plan, the new plan with a new general, a new secretary of defense, 'cause I really do think it has some -- some significant hope of working.

  And you know I'm not planning for -- for failure. General Petraeus told us when he was before the Armed Services Committee that he thought, by this summer, we'd have the beginning of a -- of a idea about how -- whether this was working or not. I just -- I'm going to do everything I can to support it and I hope it does work and that we won't have to think about what's next.

  BLITZER: So you're -- you're willing to give it at least another six months, maybe a year, or maybe even longer? I don't want to put words in your mouth.

  LIEBERMAN: Yeah, no -- I think here's the important point. I want to see progress. I don't think any of us should hold out the hope that we're going to see an -- an end of all violence in Iraq any time soon, but I want to see progress, which means that our forces and the Iraqi forces will make Baghdad more secure so that people can go back to their normal lives and that the government can stand up and take responsibility. That's the key.

  In the end, we all know that it's not we Americans who are going to make Iraq a successful state, defending itself, it's the Iraqis. And we're trying to give them some opportunity to do that.

  BLITZER: Here's what your Democratic colleague in Connecticut, Chris Dodd, said the other day -- basically saying the White House doesn't care what Congress does. They're going to go it their own way no matter what. Listen to Chris Dodd.

  DODD [video clip]: So, despite this resolution that may be -- may pass, the White House has no intention of paying any attention to what we're suggesting here.

  BLITZER: Is he right?

  LIEBERMAN: Well, I think in the sense that the president has made his decision as commander-in-chief, which the Constitution authorizes him to do, to do what he thinks is best for the security of our country. That's why I thought it was so important that we stop that nonbinding Warner-Levin resolution because it was just an expression of opinion. It -- nobody took responsibility for what was in it. And my fear was that it wouldn't have accomplished anything, but it would have discouraged our troops as they go into battle at the order of their commander, and it would have encouraged our enemy.

  To tell you the truth, Chris Dodd has had the nerve to say that he would not just have a meaningless resolution that might discourage our troops. He's prepared to get in there and talk about requiring authorization from Congress for more troops, limiting funding, whatever. That's what ought to happen.

  We ought to have a debate here about Iraq, but it ought not to be on the kind of inconsistent, vague, and ultimately meaningless resolution that was coming up earlier this week.

  [...]

  BLITZER: Coming up, Joe Lieberman ran as an independent this past election. In next year's presidential race, will another independent take on the big two political parties as a third-party candidate?

---

by: Scarce @ Thu Feb 08, 2007 at 19:21:01 PM UTC