I don't believe it

**SmokinDVM** · 08-11-2006, 12:38 AM

Originally Posted by Shelby07

Edit:

I base most of my opinion on the things that I remember, since I am very skeptical of the news media, be it MSNBC or FOX. I do watch them both and see very different slants in their stories and commentaries. But what I remember is everyone jumping on the bandwagon when we first went into Iraq. There was no uproar or dissention from politicians or even the news media. Battle lines were drawn during the election campaigns when both parties were maneuvering for votes. I will admit that I don't have the answers as the news slants everything, but I do remember very clearly how it all played out. I can believe that our intelligence may have been wrong, but I just can't see how Bush was able to dupe every single member of the democratic party the way they are all claiming, except for Lieberman.

Question about Lieberman's failed bid. Do you think that if the events that happened today had occured a few days earlier it would have made a difference in Tuesday's primary election?

Considering that the neocons had control of all the intelligence involving Iraq, and that the party leaders were publicly producing "evidence" of biolabs and such, that even they later admitted were stretches of their imagination, and proven to be bullshit, coupled with the anti-islamic fervor that was whipped up by the war-mongers, I can see how many were fooled into believing the bullshit.

I don't think recent events would have changed the outcome for Lieberman. He was seen as being to far away from the Democratic party thinking on too many critical issues. He lost because he ignored what his constituents wanted.