In a midday speech at a Veterans of Foreign Wars post in East Hampton, Lieberman intends to offer a new approach for Iraq, without calling for a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops. "With his speech [today], Sen. Lieberman will leave no doubt about the clear choice the people of Connecticut have in this race - between Ned Lamont's dangerous plan to pull out all our troops nine months from now, no matter the consequences, and Joe Lieberman's constructive plan to change course in Iraq and get our troops home in a way that strengthens our security," Gerstein said.

A question for Mr. Gerstein - is that the good plan, the strategy for victory in Iraq that Joe was talking about last December?

The big problem Lieberman has is,well, he is a liar and an incompetent. On his campaign web site he says about Iraq:

What I don't think is right, as I have said over and over again, are many of the Bush Administration's decisions regarding the planning for and execution of the war.

Not in December 2005 you didn't.

And I have said that if I were President, I would ask Secretary Rumsfeld to resign. I first said that in October 2003.

And in 2004, you said Rumsfeld should not resign. And never said a word again until the Lamont challenge when, in desperation, in July 2006, you said he should resign.

I know as well as anyone we have made a lot of mistakes in Iraq and we have suffered more casualties than we should have. Don't think for a minute I do not grieve for every casualty of this war. In fact, as someone who voted for the war, I feel a heavy responsibility to try to end it as quickly and successfully as possible.

Quickly and successfully? All the while supporting the Bush Administration every step of the way. Please.

The last thing I want to do is needlessly add to that kind of heartbreak. I want to get our troops home as fast as anyone, probably more than most. But if we simply give up and pull out now, like my opponent wants to do, then it would be a disaster to Iraq and to us. We would run a high risk that Iraq would become like Afghanistan when the Taliban were in charge, and Al Qaeda had safe haven from which to strike us. And we would run a high risk that the chaos and violence would spread and engulf Iraq's neighbors.

Yes, because look at Afghanistan and Iraq now? And by the way, when folks were saying this about Iraq BEFORE the war, why didn't you listen?

What I will say is this: I not only respect your right to disagree or question the President or me, I value it. I was part of the anti-war movement in the late 1960s, so I don't need to be lectured by my opponent or anyone else about the place of dissent in our democracy.

Actully you do need to be lectured about it. You have been a prime mover in the attacks on the patriotism of folks who dissent from the Bush Administration.

You also need to know that I have never suggested that the President or anyone else - including me - should be immune from criticism. The best proof of that is I myself have challenged the President's policies on many occasions.

Yes you did say it. No you haven't challenged Bush on anything regarding Iraq.

It's precisely because of the horrible cost of the war, and the impact that has had on public support for our mission in Iraq, that I have tried to present an honest, non-partisan, balanced picture of what's happening on the ground there, offering criticism and advice where I believe it necessary. I have been encouraged by the formation of the Iraqi unity government. But like a lot of Americans, both supporters and opponents of the war, I am increasingly troubled by the sectarian violence in Iraq.

If this is true, then you simply are an incompetent fool who has no discernment, insight or intelligence. You have been wrong on Iraq every step of the way. Is your track record one that should be rewarded with reelection?

What we are doing is clearly not working. That is why I have called for new leadership and direction from the Pentagon. We also have to demand that the new Iraqi unity government do a better job of containing the sectarian violence, and working with our allies, the British in particular, we should convene an international crisis conference on Iraq, bringing in the Europeans and particularly the other Arab countries that are now worrying about what happens if Iraq collapses.

In December 2005 you said exactly the opposite. You were wrong. Grievously so. You are an incompetent who can not be trusted.

Going forward, we must not be trapped in the false choice between setting political deadlines for withdrawal or "staying the course," when both options will lead to failure. Instead, we should turn our passions, however much we may disagree with each other, into a common energy to bring about the best result for our national security and for the troops who are in harms way.

Fair enough. First step, fire the folks that brought us this Debacle. That means you Joe.

My goal is to work with both sides to bring our troops home from Iraq in a responsible way that does not lead to more terrorism in the region and less security for us here at home.

Yes, your famous bipartisanship. Look what you have wrought in Iraq. You Joe. The blame is yours too. Incompetents get fired. Here's your pink slip.