Open Letter to Joe Lieberman

Dear Mr. Lieberman~

Unlike many other residents (and in my case former resident) of Connecticut, I will not lie to you. You, sir, are a disgrace to the United States of America. Not to a political party, mind you, but to the country you profess to serve.

I did not vote for you in the 2000 election. I did not vote for one of my favorite candidates (Mr. Gore) because of you and his wife Tipper. At the time I did not think you a dangerous warhawk, I thought you dangerous for your desire to take away American's rights of free speech and freedom to share information. I was opposed to the censoring of music, television, movies, and video games that you were advocating.

You continue to do this even now, at the same time you demand freedom and democracy for the Middle East. Iran already censors their information, Senator, they do not need your help to do it. I understand that war is fun. They show the cool night-eye vision goggles on CNN and things go BOOM Their are bright colors and fires and chaos and cool weaponry for the History channel. I understand. What I think you are failing to grasp is that their are human beings involved in this war. Real breathing (or formerly breathing) people. And they are dying on both sides in the tens of thousands.

I know you were and continue to be for the war for your own personal religious reasons. I have read and re-read the Old Testament and have yet to find the "blow the shit out of your enemies" section of the text. I did see the "turn the other cheek" part but that assumes that you were hit on your cheek in the first place. I read the "love your enemies" part and the "be kind to your fellow man" area but something probably got lost in the translation.

Recently, you encouraged the president to not only continue in Iraq but to expand the war into Iran.

"I think we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq," Lieberman said. "And to me, that would include a strike over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers."

You were able to come to this conclusion by traveling to Iraq and speaking with the soldiers. Sir, these men are soldiers. There job is not to give you answers but to protect our country and our people. In turn, they ask for honesty and for you to look out for them. With armor, weapons and necessary equipment to fund a war and the best care available if they are injured while fighting for the country. You took their answers to your questions and parlayed them to us falsely then had the gumption to act shocked that they are not happy.

During Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (I-CT) trip to Iraq two weeks ago, McClatchy published an article highlighting how several soldiers who met with Lieberman had wanted to ask him, "When are we going to get out of here?" Others told McClatchy, "We’re waiting to get blown up," and "We’re not making any progress," but said they didn’t feel comfortable telling Lieberman their true feelings. One said he thought he would be demoted if he spoke openly.

This morning on CNN, Lieberman was asked about the article and appeared to blame the soldiers for not being honest with him. "I was really upset about it," he said, because "I sat at a table with a bunch of our soldiers there" and "was asking them to speak to me from their heart."

I also have issue with your reaction to the politicalization of the Department of Justice. You recently voted against cloture in the lack of confidence vote against Alberto Gonzalez. You claimed that you voted against ending the discussion claiming "[i]t is an expression of opposition to spending any more time on a resolution that will accomplish nothing, instead of going ahead with the next item of business, which is energy legislation." You realize the irony in that statement, right? You voted against ending the discussion of the no confidence vote because you did not want to talk about it. There were more important things ahead.

Well, the politicalization of the Justice Department is one of the most crucial items that our Congress should work to fix. The basis of our democracy rests on it. This is not a political stunt. This is defense of our constitution.

In the past year, there has been an increase of defendants claiming that the charges brought against them are political ploys and not true charges.
The controversy has drained morale from U.S. attorney offices around the country. And now, legal experts and former Justice Department officials say, it is casting a shadow over the integrity of the department and its corps of career prosecutors in court.

There has long been a presumption that, because they represented the Justice Department, prosecutors had no political agenda and their word could be trusted. But some legal experts say the controversy threatens to undermine their credibility.

"It provides defendants an opportunity to make an argument that would not have been made two years ago," said Daniel J. French, a former U.S. attorney in Albany, N.Y. "It has a tremendously corrosive effect."

Defense lawyers in political corruption cases often argue to juries that the prosecution was motivated by politics, especially when the prosecutor happens to be of a different political party than the defendant.

Let me decipher this for you because you seem to have issues doing it yourself. There are three branches of government. Each with separate and independent powers, They are the Executive, Legislative, and the Judicial. This is Separation of Power. The founding fathers thought that with human nature being the way it is one day we just might elect a person because we would want to have a beer with them rather than by who would do the best job. In turn by having others make sure that they don't do anything like start an unfounded war or turn the government of this country into a Corporate Branch.

The most important of these is the Justice Department. It's job is to ensure that whatever else happens, there will be a non-political set of eyes on the issue and it will be resolved fairly. Congressman, you are trying to put an end to a fair and just criminal system.

You have recently said about Alberto Gonzalez, "... Attorney General Gonzales is the chief law enforcement officer of the United States, and it's time for him to really look into his own heart and soul, as tough as it is, and ask whether he should continue in this job. And it is time for the Senate to move on right now..."

Unreal. You, sir, should look into your heart and soul and decide, as tough as it is, and ask if YOU should keep your job. You should decide now if you are with America or against her. Decide well. Our country depends on it.

One F