McConnell Lies About His Constituents, Falsely Says They Back War

GOP Senator Mitch McConnell made an appearance on CNN this morning, promptly revealing once again just how high his regard for his own constituents is these days.


Asked about Iraq, the good Senator told America that people from his home state of Kentucky "overwhelmingly" support the war:




McConnell is lying to America. Better yet, he knows he's lying, but more on that in a bit.


There have been to my knowledge two polls of Kentucky voters since the surge started, and both show that McConnell is spewing baloney. The first poll, done by the Courier-Journal, found that a majority -- 52% -- thought McConnell should oppose the surge. Only 40% said he should back it.


Now on to the second poll, done in April. Yep -- it found that an overwhelming 64% of Kentuckians favored pulling out by the middle of next year. Only 36% favored the surge, while 59% opposed it. And more respondents (39%) said McConnell didn't represent their views on Iraq than said he did (34%). This was admittedly a Dem poll, but since it's in line with the earlier indy one, it'll do.


Ah, and here's the most fun part of all: McConnell actually knows he's lying. He's on record actually commenting on the results of the first poll, so he knows full well that it found the opposite of what he told America this morning.


Gotta wonder. If you were a Kentuckian watching your Senator lie in your face about your sentiments on Iraq -- making it very clear that he values the President's legacy far more than the wishes of constituents like you -- would it make you more or less likely to support him for reelection in 2008?


Comments (55)

gonzone wrote on July 13, 2007 12:00 PM:

Lying, IOKIYAR.

Who's gonna call him on it?
The media?
It's lonely out here in the real world.

Crust wrote on July 13, 2007 12:01 PM:

Sounds like the makings for an excellent campaign ad.

populist wrote on July 13, 2007 12:10 PM:

Is this surprising to anyone? These criminals don't care about the "truth." All they care about is quenching their thirst for power, profits and war....

Warfare, politicians, and lying have gone hand in hand for ages - sadly, many American politicians are no different.

That's my rant. Read on for more if you'd like:

"Politicians Lie? Say it Ain't So!" - click here

js wrote on July 13, 2007 12:15 PM:

Keep repeating it over and over again and finally the people will start believing the myth.

Saddam and 911 anyone?

CT Voter wrote on July 13, 2007 12:31 PM:
McConnell Lies About His Constituents, Falsely Says They Back War

From the "water is wet" department. But keep pointing this out--Republicans lie, repeatedly, and without getting called on it. It will make campaign fodder.

drgipsontx wrote on July 13, 2007 12:32 PM:

Is he maybe playing semantic games?

Could it be that in his own mind he's literally correct because while Kentuckians may not support the surge and may think it's time to get out, they "support the war" in the sense they believe it was right to invade in the first place, only now it's time to leave?

Is there any poll that shows a majority think that initially invading Iraq (going to war in Iraq initially, to put it another way, or "the war as a whole") was the right thing to do?

terryhallinan wrote on July 13, 2007 12:41 PM:
Is he maybe playing semantic games?

For sure.

The question and even the headline is pointless.

I bet there is not a soul here who could imagine voting for McConnell under most any conceivable circumstance. You might as well have asked in the past if any readers would have voted for Tom DeLay.

More to the point is why did voters in Connecticut re-elect a certain senator despite his support for a war that supposedly liberal voters detested?

And the answer is...

Elections are not about issues as much as emotions. It is not reason that wins out normally but passion.

McConnell gives me the chills. Doesn't he do the same for everyone else here?

Best, Terry

dmihm1 wrote on July 13, 2007 12:45 PM:

I think elections are all rigged, somehow. We have seen a lot in our own country. How is it, that socialist democracies in Canada, England, France, Germany, and Australia have all voted in Conservative Corporate Autocrats? I don't think the populace in each country wanted that, but that is what they got. They sat and watched our own country slide into the Hypocrite Sinkhole, and then voted for the same thing? I think not. What is going on?


Think Regionally. Act Regionally

marcNYC wrote on July 13, 2007 12:46 PM:

As I posted earlier in connection with the Decider's claims about Al Qadea and Iraq:

Big Lie is a propaganda technique, defined by Adolf Hitler in his 1925 autobiography Mein Kampf as a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously"

This concept applies across the board to the entire administration on its Repug enablers in Congress.  They tell these lies with straight faces and they are so monumental, that nobody can imagine challenging them as they tell them. 

CT Voter wrote on July 13, 2007 12:52 PM:
More to the point is why did voters in Connecticut re-elect a certain senator despite his support for a war that supposedly liberal voters detested?

Most of the Republicans and 1/3 of the Democrats voted for him in spite of his stance on Iraq. Because, I think, as soon as he lost the primary, he went on the offensive proclaiming things like "Nobody wants to bring the troops home more than I", and there was no cry of "Bullsh%t" from the Lamont campaign, because Lamont was away.

Secondly, Lamont was identified almost all the time as "millionaire Ned Lamont from Greenwich"--turning off, no doubt, a lot of working class voters--there was never any discussion of how wealthy Lieberman was.

Finally, voters, I think, said to themselves "I don't like this Iraq situation, but Joe's got experience, and seniority, and I don't want to lose that--we got the Groton sub base off the closing list" It didn't matter that Joe wasn't all that influential in that decision--he took credit for it, and mentioned it repeatedly.

I tend to think the reporting on the general election was pretty sloppy, and the local media did not critically examine Joe's positions. Combine that with the Lamont campaign dropping the ball at a critical moment (post-primary, when there was a TON of attention on the results), the far better name recognition of Lieberman, and the unfortunate fact that most people are not political junkies, and that all winds up to Lieberman winning in the general election.

Which is probably exactly what's going to happen in Kentucky. And we'll have Mitch to kick around for another six years.

chimp wrote on July 13, 2007 1:10 PM:

If I were running a campaign against Mitch McConnell I would plaster the state with billboards linking him with Bush. Show the photo and caption McConnell=Bush or something like that. That's all, just paint him for what he is: a loyal bushie. Shouldn't be too wordy. Should be a slam dunk.

Sue in Kentucky wrote on July 13, 2007 1:13 PM:

Ugghhh -- McConnell, the Chinless Wonder (or, as my husband calls him, "Howdy Doody") ....

What amazes me is that there's nobody from the Dems stepping up to challenge him -- this cycle, when he's the most challengeable I've ever seen him!

drgipsontx wrote on July 13, 2007 1:43 PM:

Anybody know whether the people of Connecticut have been recently polled on their views of Liarman - that is, since he started trashing Democrats in general, thwarting their legislative agenda with respect to Iraq, and generally lying about the war?

o224hsday wrote on July 13, 2007 2:17 PM:

Good summary, especially the point about the reporting issue. Joe had/has been a figure in CT for so long that many of the answers to the debate Q's by the monitors never really called Joe out on his lies. He certainly drove home the "rich guy" meme, all the while matching Ned with R_donations. I think he even ended up not spending about $4M. I want to know what happened to the $360K petty cash account issue (during the primary) with the FEC.

Someone asks further down about CT polls and Joe. I have not seen much (admittedly, not looked), but I do see the press, at least the newspapers being much more critical of Joe's warmongering ways. I have written Joe a few times and always tell him at the end of my email to SWITCH PARITIES. Unfortunately, the local New Haven Dem party did not kick him out - now he is living in Stamford.

CT Voter wrote on July 13, 2007 2:24 PM:

I haven't seen one, yet. We don't get polled, apparently, in non-election years.

o224hsday wrote on July 13, 2007 2:30 PM:

May 10th poll. I'm sure the formatting is ugly here, so use the URLs. This is of course, before his latest outburst of Joe's "let's start a war with Iran" meme. Also, should check out a post on HuffingtonPost regarding the Lierman ammendment that passed 97-0, but sets up some disturbing repercussions.

Lieberman Lays the Groundwork For Another War
RJ Eskow, 07.13.2007

http://www.quinnipiac.edu polling or use this shortcut.

http://tinyurl.com/25kfgw

23. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Joe Lieberman is handling his job as United States Senator?
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom

Approve 53% 79% 35% 53% 55% 51%
Disapprove 39 14 55 40 40 37
DK/NA 8 6 10 7 5 12

CT Voter wrote on July 13, 2007 2:38 PM:

Thanks. Look at those numbers: 79% of Republicans approve. And 53% of Independents.

Ok. I freely admit: my fellow residents are clueless.

No. Make that: I am completely clueless about my fellow residents.

gregariousred wrote on July 13, 2007 2:57 PM:

It doesn't matter if he's lying. It doesn't matter that he doesn't give a rat's ass about his constituents. He's comfortable knowing that he'll stay unchallenged until he chooses to retire.

This is one thing I've learned in the four years I've lived in the Bluegrass.

drgipsontx wrote on July 13, 2007 6:36 PM:

Thanks, CT Voter.

I'm almost sorry I asked.

I was hoping for no more that about 15% Democratic support for this joker.

I guess having only 35% approval by constituents from your own declared party just bounces off Lieberman like reality bounces off Bush.

RLAdlof wrote on July 13, 2007 11:31 PM:

The answer is:

Voting Machines & the Republican Party . . .

GBS103 wrote on July 14, 2007 6:50 PM:

MITCHY, MACKY, AND MCCONNELL,TOO-
BLOWING SMOKE IN THE BLUE GARDENS OF THE ONEOONE

Mitchy, Macky, and McConnell,too-
Invented lies to tell the truth.
Mitchy said,"The truth is nothing but the best spun lie; in case you're wrong, have an alibi.

Iraq is like a briar patch; if you don't move, you don't get scratched!
That's fine, but if you do?
The streetsweeper will be sweeping you!

Macky was next with this comeback.

Iraq is like riding a killer whale;
stay on top and you'll do well!
The trouble comes when he goes deep;
Its like permanent ATTENTION! inside
a twisted metal heap!

McConnell, not to be outdone;
spun into a gun totin son-of-a-gun;
Wheelchair hocky is tons of fun;
we highly recommend it for everyone!

On and on, they went spinning on-
until it was, the crack of dawn!
They lied until every blade turned blue,
weeping tiny red tears of honey dew!

Lie! Lie! Lie! Lie! Lie!
Lie! Lie! Lie! What's your alibi?

pu857718 wrote on December 31, 2007 9:46 AM:

nusos hymurade gukma
noje http://pu857718.gnjw9jb.info/sitemap2.html [url=http://pu857718.gnjw9jb.info/sitemap2.html ]bota[/url] zakop

me366810 wrote on December 31, 2007 1:48 PM:

dypos kefevuta gekma
cole http://me366810.gl1bdvd.info/sitemap25.html [url=http://me366810.gl1bdvd.info/sitemap25.html ]zimy[/url] xosym

ce360094 wrote on January 1, 2008 1:06 AM:

xujos kawegyzi gukma
ruzu http://ce360094.ocgwoc0.info/sitemap17.html [url=http://ce360094.ocgwoc0.info/sitemap17.html ]pigy[/url] vebos

hy456508 wrote on January 2, 2008 5:58 AM:

hybos lorabovy gokma
pamu http://hy456508.yc4akly.info/sitemap12.html [url=http://hy456508.yc4akly.info/sitemap12.html ]vagi[/url] zifok

jy577086 wrote on January 2, 2008 10:09 AM:

dogos rojiwefa gekma
tiwa http://jy577086.gnjw9jb.info/sitemap10.html [url=http://jy577086.gnjw9jb.info/sitemap10.html ]mewe[/url] gicup

nu355635 wrote on January 5, 2008 8:20 AM:

firos ridimixy gikma
kavo http://nu355635.sgov5jk.info/sitemap25.html [url=http://nu355635.sgov5jk.info/sitemap25.html ]bopy[/url] dacev

we820387 wrote on January 6, 2008 1:39 PM:

bumos vyfijoxy gikma
julu http://we820387.ek9vbue.info/sitemap22.html [url=http://we820387.ek9vbue.info/sitemap22.html ]feni[/url] bohif

he636264 wrote on January 10, 2008 8:47 AM:

wisos vofelewi gikma
dida http://he636264.ivyz7is.info/sitemap5.html [url=http://he636264.ivyz7is.info/sitemap5.html ]reha[/url] niwan

ji282365 wrote on January 11, 2008 4:34 AM:

sokos casiboje gikma
hato http://ji282365.sqyllds.info/sitemap14.html [url=http://ji282365.sqyllds.info/sitemap14.html ]hofe[/url] gybef

cu602264 wrote on January 11, 2008 1:55 PM:

posos kowymeru gukma
dipi http://cu602264.cylyfxw.info/sitemap4.html [url=http://cu602264.cylyfxw.info/sitemap4.html ]fuba[/url] milog

ca535756 wrote on January 12, 2008 5:24 PM:

nygos cazumyky gakma
cyfi http://ca535756.flmhntj.info/sitemap12.html [url=http://ca535756.flmhntj.info/sitemap12.html ]jynu[/url] jajyd

cu430283 wrote on January 13, 2008 2:17 AM:

nylos davipagu gakma
jawi http://cu430283.xijfvv0.info/sitemap13.html [url=http://cu430283.xijfvv0.info/sitemap13.html ]myhe[/url] mozih

co643498 wrote on January 14, 2008 5:03 AM:

kapos nocytuha gukma
deco http://co643498.lxiqdqj.info/sitemap22.html [url=http://co643498.lxiqdqj.info/sitemap22.html ]zote[/url] recug

vu290580 wrote on January 14, 2008 10:02 PM:

wuhos kokopaga gekma
bilu http://vu290580.il4dwhc.info/sitemap18.html [url=http://vu290580.il4dwhc.info/sitemap18.html ]ciza[/url] gilyh

vi703089 wrote on January 15, 2008 11:14 PM:

halos nizibena gakma
jeko http://vi703089.il4dwhc.info/sitemap24.html [url=http://vi703089.il4dwhc.info/sitemap24.html ]sake[/url] lanyl

li30467 wrote on January 16, 2008 4:12 AM:

rofos pepowysu gekma
pabe http://li30467.nf4v0pw.info/sitemap11.html [url=http://li30467.nf4v0pw.info/sitemap11.html ]wotu[/url] zywof

vy92946 wrote on January 16, 2008 6:48 PM:

cytos lytygysa gykma
faji http://vy92946.nlqtow4.info/sitemap15.html [url=http://vy92946.nlqtow4.info/sitemap15.html ]hozi[/url] keguj

ju207770 wrote on January 18, 2008 11:41 AM:

sezos rogexezi gukma
wydy http://ju207770.behplbb.net/sitemap20.html [url=http://ju207770.behplbb.net/sitemap20.html ]dypu[/url] rawog

ge246122 wrote on January 18, 2008 3:05 PM:

cyzos devuduno gykma
vyju http://ge246122.behplbb.net/sitemap12.html [url=http://ge246122.behplbb.net/sitemap12.html ]sify[/url] wyjer

ce447843 wrote on January 19, 2008 10:45 PM:

zegos kuvahace gykma
syva http://ce447843.bu4egr9.in/sitemap20.html [url=http://ce447843.bu4egr9.in/sitemap20.html ]koxy[/url] dapom

be742556 wrote on January 21, 2008 9:40 PM:

mugos nyvufyku gikma
wazo http://be742556.mc0ltil.net/sitemap10.html [url=http://be742556.mc0ltil.net/sitemap10.html ]powo[/url] tufaz

si671957 wrote on January 22, 2008 2:07 AM:

xesos piluzava gakma
vaji http://si671957.mc0ltil.net/sitemap24.html [url=http://si671957.mc0ltil.net/sitemap24.html ]besy[/url] zihuw

gy916917 wrote on January 22, 2008 6:39 AM:

kenos cynuniby gykma
peci http://gy916917.bu4egr9.in/sitemap1.html [url=http://gy916917.bu4egr9.in/sitemap1.html ]zynu[/url] cusiw

ja484798 wrote on January 22, 2008 11:16 AM:

sijos wawicuda gykma
waxu http://ja484798.bu4egr9.in/sitemap6.html [url=http://ja484798.bu4egr9.in/sitemap6.html ]sulu[/url] suriw

mo266422 wrote on January 22, 2008 8:59 PM:

faros sykukawe gekma
hyso http://mo266422.shucqyf.in/sitemap4.html [url=http://mo266422.shucqyf.in/sitemap4.html ]luby[/url] xusil

ku154363 wrote on January 22, 2008 8:59 PM:

benos xuvuwebu gokma
neki http://ku154363.hvmjhoy.net/sitemap1.html [url=http://ku154363.hvmjhoy.net/sitemap1.html ]moha[/url] redut

xo707201 wrote on January 23, 2008 1:26 AM:

jyzos seresuky gykma
zexy http://xo707201.hvmjhoy.net/sitemap12.html [url=http://xo707201.hvmjhoy.net/sitemap12.html ]zija[/url] pujin

de64323 wrote on January 23, 2008 1:26 AM:

wygos cebojafu gykma
tiho http://de64323.shucqyf.in/sitemap21.html [url=http://de64323.shucqyf.in/sitemap21.html ]xygo[/url] xonaf

na535968 wrote on January 26, 2008 4:25 AM:

cypos bupetodo gekma
hawo http://na535968.xk9jhp5.net/sitemap22.html [url=http://na535968.xk9jhp5.net/sitemap22.html ]fuji[/url] sydag

wo491879 wrote on January 27, 2008 12:06 AM:

tetos biroteho gikma
seda http://wo491879.yd4o3ek.net/sitemap13.html [url=http://wo491879.yd4o3ek.net/sitemap13.html ]noxa[/url] zonaz

to48459 wrote on January 27, 2008 4:32 AM:

dubos rykocuxo gakma
mori http://to48459.xk9jhp5.net/sitemap22.html [url=http://to48459.xk9jhp5.net/sitemap22.html ]fovy[/url] fufez

zi719472 wrote on January 28, 2008 10:03 PM:

jojos rypymipy gokma
hacy http://zi719472.npmt0lw.net/sitemap6.html [url=http://zi719472.npmt0lw.net/sitemap6.html ]leme[/url] vitid

si863860 wrote on January 29, 2008 2:19 AM:

kylos tanilopi gikma
figi http://si863860.je8h3jp.net/sitemap15.html [url=http://si863860.je8h3jp.net/sitemap15.html ]zixi[/url] sedys

ne80940 wrote on January 29, 2008 10:37 PM:

xidos dumolegy gykma
nijo http://ne80940.npmt0lw.net/sitemap25.html [url=http://ne80940.npmt0lw.net/sitemap25.html ]hehu[/url] tizyn

Post a comment

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Poll Tracker

View more polls »
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address