Lieberman’s Electoral Fate Tests Power of Wirepullers

"Amoralism is only possible if you are…always somewhere else when the trigger is pulled."

— George Orwell [1]

The voters in the state of Connecticut may hold the key to the future well-being of our Republic! I’m not overstating this matter. If the rabid warmonger Joseph I. Lieberman, an unrepentant Israeli Firster, shameless pusher of the draconian USA Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Law, and a turncoat Democrat, now running as an Independent, can win a fourth term in the U.S. Senate against his Democratic challenger Ned Lamont, it could mean business-as-usual in the U.S. Senate, in 2007, and for years to come. Read Perpetual War and a Police State for America! This will be especially so, if the conscienceless Republicans maintain control of that hawkish institution after Nov. 7, 2006.

A Lieberman victory will also be welcomed by the Far Right regime of Israel’s extremist Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert. He once callously cracked while terrorizing the 1.4 million trapped citizens of Occupied Gaza: “Nobody dies from being uncomfortable!” The Bush-Cheney Gang will also be ecstatic with a Lieberman success. The latter clique is a loosely arranged entity, reeking with corruption, war profiteering and sordid scandals. It stretches from Halliburton and "Big Oil" to condoning torture, like "waterboarding;" from Randy “Duke” Cunningham to Tom DeLay; from Bob Ney to Irving “Scooter” Libby; and from the ultra-sleaze- bag Jack Abramoff to the disgraced politico–Mark Foley. [2]

It is probably more true than not, that President George W. Bush and his V.P. Dick Cheney may face impeachment charges for their supposed serial crimes, including their launching of the illegal war against Iraq, if the Democrats can gain a majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. [3] Although Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), the present House Minority leader, has indicated her opposition to such a process, I think a Democratic sweep on election day may create a transforming kind of dynamic that might soon change her mind and the minds of others. Why? Because I believe a majority of the people in this country are now so fed up with what has been going on in Washington, D.C. for the last six years, that they will demand change. They will insist, too, on initiating impeachment procedures against both Bush and Cheney. I suspect that Pelosi didn’t want to suggest that impeachment might be on the agenda in 2007, if the Democrats won, and if she became the new Speaker of the House, for fear of giving the GOP an emotional issue to unduly arouse their Christian Right base. The outcome of this election, nationwide, will be so close, that Lieberman’s fate in Connecticut may, indeed, be critical as to what comes next for our nation: Peace–or–more War!

Can Lamont pull it off? At press time, he has been quickly closing the gap which had existed between the duo in the polls. Lamont has momentum on his side. Lieberman has been on the defensive the last few weeks. Another big “if” is this: Will the good voters of Connecticut, appalled by the growing number of American military deaths in Iraq, and the soaring cost of that conflict, now reaching $340 billion, see the contest between Lieberman and Lamont as a referendum on the war itself? If they do, then all of Lieberman’s clever double-talking on that issue may be of no avail to him. If any member of the Senate is responsible for the Iraqi debacle, it is beyond cavil one Joseph I. Lieberman. At a debate on Oct. 18, 2006, Lamont charged: “‘Three-and-a-half years ago, President Bush rushed our country into war and Senator Lieberman cheered him on every step of the way.”

Another plus, the New York Times, on Oct. 29, 2006, has endorsed Lamont. Meanwhile, Gen. Wesley K. Clark is strongly backing Lamont’s candidacy. He accused Lieberman of not understanding "military issues" and of having "rubber stamped" Bush-Cheney’s dubious Iraqi War policies. Gen. Clark asks: "How can you ‘stay the course’ when you’re in a ditch?" [4] If there is any justice left in this country, Lieberman will be soundly rejected by the voters on Nov. 7th. It couldn’t happen to a more deserving warmonger.

Closer to home, another knee-jerk advocate of Israel, who seems never to see any of its wrongdoings, Rep. Ben Cardin (D-MD), wants to replace Democrat Paul Sarbanes in the U.S. Senate. (To be fair, with respect to that issue, on a scale of 1 to 10, Lieberman is a 10 and Cardin is about a 3 or 4). Nevertheless, Kevin Zeese, an Independent candidate for that office has dared to do the unthinkable–challenge Cardin not only on his pro-Israeli views, but also on related issues dealing with Occupied Palestine, Lebanon, Iran, the Iraqi War and domestic matters, as well. [5] Although Cardin voted against the war, he has consistently voted to fund it, including the building of 14 U.S. military bases in Iraq and the construction of the mother of all U.S. embassies in Baghdad. The gutsy Zeese is giving the voters of Maryland, for the first time in its modern history, a real choice for the U.S. Senate. At every three-way debate I have witnessed between Cardin, Zeese and the GOP standard-bearer, Michael Steele, Zeese has clearly prevailed over his opponents. [6] He has been addressing all the relevant issues that matter and also proposing detailed solutions to the problems facing the nation and Marylanders. Zeese’s energized campaign, which stands squarely against the powerful "Special Interests," is definitely on a roll. [7]

Getting back to the slippery Lieberman. He has regularly acted in the U.S. Senate as an Israeli shill. [8] Also, his loyalty to Israel always seems to come first with him, despite its baleful effects for decades on our national interests. [9] For example, he has been incapable of criticizing any of Israel’s excesses: including its abysmal treatment of the Palestinians; its recent unjustified and immoral 34-days invasion of Lebanon, which included it dropping over a million cluster bombs on the civilian population of that nation; and its horrific killing, with a 9-ton bulldozer, of peace and justice activist, Rachel Corrie, a native of Olympia, WA. The fact that U.S. taxpayers, too, are habitually shaken down for over $3 billion a year-plus contributions, via the "unmatched power" of the Israel Lobby over the Executive and Legislative branches of the U.S. government, for the benefit of the loathsome Israeli war hawks, like Olmert, doesn’t seem to bother Lieberman–at all. [10]

If the past is prologue, then I want to know this: How can Lieberman take a solemn oath of office to uphold the U.S. Constitution, and honestly say that for the next six years, he will represent all the people of Connecticut and that he will always put the interest of the American people first before his well-documented devotion to the Zionist state of Israel? The burden should be on Lieberman to answer that relevant question to the full satisfaction of the voters of Connecticut.

Finally, there is too much at stake in this election to continue to ignore the elephant in the room-the Israel Lobby-and how its faithful stooges in the U.S. Senate, like Lieberman, have been doing its bidding over the years. Not to raise a matter of this kind, sensitive as it is, is to be complicit. Lieberman wasn’t there when the "trigger was pulled," as George Orwell raised in my opening quote above. But in places, such as: Iraq, Lebanon and Occupied Palestine, he has consciously chosen to aid and abet those blood stained conflicts. Lieberman should be held responsible for the consequences of his hawkish conduct by the voters. It’s time for the American people to take their country back. Let them begin in Connecticut on Nov. 7th by tossing Lieberman out of office, and in Maryland, too, by electing Kevin Zeese. Enough is enough!


[1]. "Essays of George Orwell," Everyman’s Library, p. 237.

[2]. ttp://


[4]. New York Times, "General Faults Lieberman," Oct. 7, 2006, by Jennifer Medina.



[7]. and



voices.php/2006/07/11/p9326 and