Democrat Liar Liar Pants On Fire Running For Senate In Connecticut (vote, Iraq)

[LauraC]

And the NY Times caught him.

“'We have learned something important since the days that I served in Vietnam,'” Mr. Blumenthal said to the group gathered in Norwalk in March 2008. “And you exemplify it. Whatever we think about the war, whatever we call it — Afghanistan or Iraq — we owe our military men and women unconditional support.” There was one problem: Mr. Blumenthal, a Democrat now running for the United States Senate, never served in Vietnam. He obtained at least five military deferments from 1965 to 1970 and took repeated steps that enabled him to avoid going to war, according to records."


"In an interview on Monday, the attorney general said that he had misspoken about his service during the Norwalk event and might have misspoken on other occasions."

The three page article is here:

Blumenthal’s Words Differ From His History - NYTimes.com

Misspoke? How about flat out lied? You might misspeak once but on more than one occasion? If he fabricates something like this repeatedly what else does he/will he lie about?

I haven't been following Connecticut. Is he running against any other Dems in a primary?

[padcrasher]

Did you see his press conference? Flanked on both sides by military veterans. He handled it very well.

It doesn't look good for those hoping that this is some fatal blow to his campaign.

Plus. Nutmeggers are not stupid. They are not going to vote for some tool who will vote against their middle class interests just because their candidate hyped and lied about his war record.

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by padcrasher

Did you see his press conference? Flanked on both sides by military veterans. He handled it very well.

It doesn't look good for those hoping that this is some fatal blow to his campaign.

Plus. Nutmeggers are not stupid. They are not going to vote for some tool who will vote against their middle class interests just because their candidate hyped and lied about his war record.

Intelligent people don't vote for known liars.

[Smash255]

If this was going to be a close election than it might have hurt Blumenthal, but this was going to be a landslide. Blumenthal will win by 15-20 instead of 35.

[padcrasher]

Originally Posted by arctichomesteader

Intelligent people don't vote for known liars.

Intelligent people vote for the best of two options dependent on who would advance their interests the most. Period.

These are not redneck ignorant bible thumpers your are dealing with.

They have more info to gone on beyond some candidate's personal failings.

[dcsldcd]

What a scumbag this Demoncrat is! He is an all out dirty dog liar. Oh wait, the Dems love those types!

[ringwise]

Originally Posted by padcrasher

Intelligent people vote for the best of two options dependent on who would advance their interests the most. Period.

These are not redneck ignorant bible thumpers your are dealing with.

They have more info to gone on beyond some candidate's personal failings.

This is not a personal failing. It is a systematic web of lies intended to make him more electable.

Intelligent people vote for the candidate with the best character. Intellectuals vote for someone who advances their self interests, not matter how many lies they tell, credentials they inflate, or interns they get bl***bs from.

Gotta love Libs - always resort to namecalling when they're got no intelligent argument.