Posted on 01/15/2004 12:26:54 PM PST by areafiftyone
MANCHESTER, NH -- Joe Lieberman issued the following statement in response to the Drudge Report's discovery of congressional testimony from September 2002 in which Wes Clark made the case for war in Iraq. The report provides evidence directly contradicting Clark's repeated claims that he has been "very consistent" on the war "from the very beginning."
Statement by Joe Lieberman
"Yesterday, Wesley Clark attacked me for pointing out his multiple positions on the war in Iraq. It is no longer credible for Wesley Clark to assert that he has always had only one position on the war - being against it. His own testimony before Congress shows otherwise.
"He may think it is 'old-style politics' to point this out, but the only thing old here is a candidate not leveling with the American people. If we want to begin anew and replace George Bush, we need to level with the American people, which is what I have done in this campaign and throughout my career. You may not always agree with me but you will always know where I stand."
#
Yesterday on Good Morning America, Host Charlie Gibson told Wes Clark that "Joe Lieberman [is] saying Wes Clark had six different positions on the war."
Clark responded, "Well, has he ever named the six different positions, Charlie? I meant that's just -- that's old-style politics. You can go back to my record. I've even been on your show - while I couldn't t when I was on CNN. But, I was consistently against this since the guys from the pentagon told me two weeks after 9/11 we were attacking Iraq. It didn't make any sense to me. And I have been very, very consistent on this. This was a war we didn't have to fight. It was an elective war. I have said it at almost every opportunity."
Is he referring to Kosovo?
This is just like the classic scene from The Manchurian Candidate with Angela Lansbury and James Gregory.
Gregory plays a befuddled US Senator who is on a hunt for communists in the government. Every day, he makes a wilder pronouncement of the number of communists hiding in the US government, per Lansbury's oreders. One day, he says "Every day you tell me to say another number. I can't keep it all straight. Can't we just pick a number and stick with it?" Lansbury replies: "I want to keep creating the confusion. While they are all tripping over the confusion, they won't pay attention to what is really going on."
I suspect that a lot of that is happening with Clark. His handlers are giving him contradicting marching orders in order to confuse the press and the other candidates so that they won't be paying attention to what is really happening in the wings.
-PJ
I'd say Clark is the second kind of liar, eh?Screenplay, Lawrence of Arabia, Robert Bolt & Michael Wilson (1962)MR. DRYDEN (Claude Rains)
[to MR. BENTLEY (Arthur Kennedy)]:
A man who tells lies, like me, merely hides the truth. But a man who tells half-lies has forgotten where he put it.
Brave words, good sound bite, but what about when he was running for VP with Algore?
Yes, yes. Maybe Hillary showed up at his house one day in a sandwich board with the Queen of Diamonds on it. Now we just need to get Frank Sinatra to go there with a 52-queen deck, and next thing you know, Clark will be talking like Dick Cheney (again).
His manner also reminds me of one of those "Star Trek" episodes in which Kirk ends up making the computer smoke, spark and explode by feeding it illogical or contradictory information. "Error ... must ... sterilize ... Nomad ... !"
There he goes again, using that "consistent" word.
Uh oh, Princey!
We should have kept a list of this guy's lies, starting with the "somebody at the White House told me" thing on MTP.
Wesley Clark Tells AP He Wouldn't Back Iraq War (Another Flip-Flop)
IOWA CITY, Iowa - Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark backtracked from a day-old statement that he probably would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq, saying Friday he "would never have voted for this war."The retired Army general, an opponent of the conflict, surprised supporters when he indicated in an interview with reporters Thursday that he likely would have supported the resolution. On Friday, Clark sought to clarify his comments in an interview with The Associated Press.
"Let's make one thing real clear, I would never have voted for this war," Clark said before a speech at the University of Iowa. "I've gotten a very consistent record on this. There was no imminent threat. This was not a case of pre-emptive war. I would have voted for the right kind of leverage to get a diplomatic solution, an international solution to the challenge of Saddam Hussein."
Clinton cut classes to campaign for Lieberman in his first run at political office. In spite of Lieberman's public persona, they are cut from the same mold. I would not be surprised if Lieberman was(the Clinton's)the stealth candidate. He may have cut a deal with the Clinton's to keep McAuliffe as the head of the DNC. MJY1288 pointed out in a post yesterday that if a candidate wants Clinton's endorsement this must be a criteria.
You are much more forgiving than I could ever be. The media is guilty of actively avoiding such investigating and not mere laziness.
Like the old saying "you ain't seen nothing yet." At this point nothing would surprise me, I would not miss it for the world, and I think what is going to happen, will surpass the recount fiasco.!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.