Lieberman Confronted By Troops In Iraq: ‘When Are We Going To Get Out Of Here?’
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) made an unannounced trip to Iraq today, telling reporters, “what I see here today is progress, significant progress.” Hours later, he was confronted by U.S. soldiers with a very different message: “We don’t feel like we’re making any progress.”

McClatchy reports tonight on Spc. David Williams, who collected questions for Lieberman from 30 other troops.

At the top of his note card was the question he got from nearly every one of his fellow soldiers:

“When are we going to get out of here?”

The rest was a laundry list. When would they have upgraded Humvees that could withstand the armor-penetrating weapons that U.S. officials claim are from Iran? When could they have body armor that was better in hot weather?

Williams missed six months of his girlfriend’s pregnancy when he was given six days’ notice to return to Iraq for his second tour. He also missed his baby boy’s birth. Three weeks ago, he went home and saw his first child.

“He looks just like me,” he said. “I didn’t want to come back. . . . We’re waiting to get blown up.” […]

Next to him, Spc. Will Hedin, 21, of Chester, Conn., thought about what he was going to say.

“We’re not making any progress,” Hedin said, as he recalled a comrade who was shot by a sniper last week. “It just seems like we drive around and wait to get shot at. … It’s just more troops, more targets.”

In the past two months, the unit has lost two men. In May alone, at least 120 U.S. troops died in Iraq, the bloodiest month in 2007 and the highest number since the battles of Fallujah in 2004.


Spc. Kevin Krasco, 20, of Medford, Mass., and Spc. Kevin Adams, 20, of Moosup, Conn., chimed in with their dismay before turning the conversation to baseball.

“It’s like everything else in this war,” Adams said, referring to Baghdad. “It hasn’t changed.”

Later, Lieberman walked in to see the soldiers “wearing a pair of sunglasses newly purchased from an Iraqi market that the military had taken him to in southeast Baghdad.” In response to their questions about leaving Iraq, Lieberman said it would be a “victory for al-Qaida and a victory for Iran.”

Digg It!

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/30/lieberman-iraq/


Leiberman shows that he to is out of touch with the troops and reality much like his buds in the GOP who cannot seem to come to grips with the clusterfluck that is reality on the ground in Iraq. Funny how the right likes to claim that the troops want to "complete the mission" but do so without actually talking to the troops. I wonder how long before the right decides that these guys are just malcontents or better yet anti-American cowards?

You can be sure that they will be called names if only becuase their truth does not match the truthiness of war's cheerleaders.

There's two things that are good about Joe Lieberman.

A. He chose to caucus with the Democratic Party.

B. He knows that if he changes the I to an R or if he chooses to caucus with the Republicans; there will be no next time around.

It's going to be really easy to defend our country when no one will sign up for the military......but hey as long as we complete our mission in Iraq that's all that matters, right?

__________________
Most people think Great God will come from the skies But if you know what life is worth You will look for yours on earth And now you see the light You stand up for your rights

Just goes to show the extreme left wing has taken over the DNC.

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

Many Democrats didn't like Lieberman back in 2000, I know I didn't. He rode Gore's coattails; it was a mistake on Gore's part to choose him as his running mate. IMO, Gore chose Lieberman thinking that he could pick up some republican votes since Lieberman is conservative. Conservatives didn't like him in 2000. Funny how "conservatives" hated Lieberman back then. That just goes to show Lieberman's true colors. He's an opportunist.

I don't think Lieberman's changed at all. What's changed is the issues that surround him.
In 200, all the conservatives could talk about was his stance on gun control. I remember a video game in which the easiest mode was called "Liebermode". He was depicted for his liberal stances.
Then the focus became the war... and all people talk about is his stance on the war. So everyone, libs and cons both, is willing to overlook his Crat cred.

Lieberman, as a man, has shown he doesn't flex on issues. Whether you agree with him or not, like him or not, he's been consistent.
I don't think the liberal wing of the Crats has ever liked him. Seems it's more the conservatives and moderate anti-war Crats that are doing mental gymnastics around him.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

Actually he was and that was part of the reason that he was such a drag on the ticket in 2000...thusly opening the door for the great theft of the election by the Supreme Court. Nope He was not well liked as I recall by anyone on the dems side of the aisle. In fact, those of us who met him in 2000 found him to be the perfect republican candidate. He talks down to people, treats the help like crap and all in all was and still is an elitist peice of trash. Those of us who voted for Gore in 2000 did so in large part DESPITE the lieberman rather then becuase of him.