Joe Lieberman: The Lorax
With John Kerry out of the picture, it is difficult to find a Democrat whose political stock has fallen more than Joe Lieberman.
There is much to admire about Lieberman, but much to dislike, and the portrait that Jeffrey Goldberg paints of the self-described “independent Democrat� from Connecticut in a New Yorker profile titled “The Lorax� (after the Dr. Seuss character) is not flattering.
An excerpt:
To Democrats, Lieberman’s most vexing quality is not his early support for the war—Clinton, Dodd, and Edwards, among other senators, voted for the Iraq-war resolution in 2002. It is that no development—not the absence of weapons of mass destruction, or the Administration’s innumerable and well-documented mistakes in post-invasion Iraq—has lessened his admiration for President Bush or his belief that the war has aided America in its fight against Islamic terrorism.
“I’ve had a lot of disappointments along the way here,� Lieberman said. “So why do I trust President Bush in spite of the mistakes that were made, consequential mistakes? Because having watched him, having talked to him, I believe that he understands the life-and-death struggle we are in with the most deadly and unconventional enemy, Islamic extremism. And that he has shown himself, notwithstanding all these mistakes, willing to go forward with what he believes is right for the security of the country, regardless of what it has done to his popularity.�
“Isn’t President Bush responsible for losing this war?� I asked.
“Insofar as you have to hold the Chief Executive accountable, he bears responsibility for the mistakes that were made on his watch,� Lieberman said. “But I think he understands that now. And, look, Rumsfeld is no longer there. Gates�—Robert Gates, the new Secretary of Defense—“is there. There are a lot of changes happening. We’ve got a totally new plan for how to succeed in Iraq.�
More here.
14 Responses to “Joe Lieberman: The Lorax”
I am still a Lieberman fan. I respect his independence, courage and leadership in focusing on the dangers of extremists who use terror as a tactic. I think he respects the President’s similar stand but with little respect for his competence. I see him in a high profile role in the next GOP administration.
I support him on the surge. But also think we have to set a deadline to withdraw from the civil war to force the stakeholders to participate in making mutual accommodations.
Lieberman is a man lacking vision, and one who never refuses to let reality get in his way. He’s a disgrace, but all too the model for modern politics.
Joe Lieberman now says “I think you hold the Chief Executive accountable.” But for six years he has done just the opposite. He’s uncritically supported Bush’s war policies, allowing the president to claim bipartisan support. He also avoided holding Bush accountable for what the WH was doing prior and during the Katrina debacle. Despite pledging a thorough investigation with subpoena power during his campaign, the new chairman of the Homeland Security committee dropped the matter as one of his first acts of business. I don’t see him as a man of integrity, but as an opportunist.
Lieberman wasn’t Kerry’s running mate.
“There is much to admire about Lieberman”
May I ask: Exactly what?
Uh, Shaun, anon Jim is right: Lieberman ran on the Gore ticket in 2000.
Oops! Error noted. Correction made.
Gray:
I did not convey my disgust for Lieberman in my post because it was about the New Yorker article and not my own views. But since you ask, beyond Leiberman’s myopia about the Iraq war, he has backed and voted for a number of health, welfare, education and womens initiatives that I support.
One of the things I will always despise about Lieberman was his support and role in the Terry Schiavo fiasco. Indeed, that entire episode was one of the darkest for this country and Lieberman was right there, voting with the wingnuts as they decided that a husband, despite a Florida court order, could not remove a feeding tube from a brain dead woman (hey, Republicans, remember all your states’ rights arguments?), Nothing smacks more of Big Brother State Intrusion than that case and it is chilling to review Lieberman’s participation.
Since when has Joe been worried about the Bush administration???
Jason – This is also when I really soured on the Bush Administration, pander politicians(Republicants and Demonocrats) and cable pundits. The farce of the ‘kid gloves treatment’ of two despicable characters, Hammesfahr and Terry, was an embaressment to serious news and politics. To excite the anti-BDS crowd, I don’t recall Bush travelling in PJ’s while NOLA and Iraq burned.
And the mistakes just keep on coming. It now turns out the president has decided that US troops and the Iraqi army, such as it is, will operate under different command structures during the Baghdad surge. And this despite the fact that Lt. Gen Petraeus, the administrations new man in Iraq, has stated that he knows of no military operation which has succeeded under dual command.
That Lieberman continues to support a president whose only plan is not to ‘lose’ Iraq on his watch, even if it means sacrificing more American lives, is bad enough. That he sees this as courageous is despicable, and a true indication of the speed at which Liberman’s character is disintegrating.
I do not see this as a sign of courage and strength, and so have no reason to appreciate Lieberman for believing it. It is a sign of weakness and incompetence to go from mistake to mistake, and never go outside your small circle for solutions. The surge plan was not drawn up by Gen Petraeus, but by a couple of conservative neocons, who have never fought a counterinsurgency.
Lieberman may want Bush to fight Israel’s battles and was willing to buck his own party to get this done. He has criticized his own party severely for not being more deferential to the CIC in a time of war. Is total deference to a president earned automatically in wartime?
LBJ did not recieve a kid glove treatment in the 60′s, nor did Truman or FDR in the 40′s and early 50′s. Clinton was blasted by the right for what was characterized as misuse of the military during Kosovo. Those efforts with the possible exception of Vietnam, handled more competently than Iraq has been. So where does Lieberman get off with his sanctimonious stance???
I always thought of Joe Lieberman (anyone else ever notice the fact LIE is in his name, and get shocked when he does lie? LOL) as Droopy Dog. Same voice, and face