Amid rumors that he could be under consideration for Defense Secretary in 2006, and reports that the highly independent man he defeated for Senate may run against him when he’s up for re-election, Senator Joe Lieberman has now been pitchforked back into the headlines with this proposal:
Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, increasingly isolated in his own Democratic party because of his strong support for the Iraq war, today called on the White House and congressional leaders to form a special “war cabinet” to provide advice and direction for the war effort.
The Connecticut Democrat’s “Bipartisan Victory in Iraq Administrative Group,” designed to take some of the political edge off the war debate, would be modeled after similar panels during the Vietnam War and World War II.
Lieberman, whom the Bush administration has praised repeatedly for his war stance, defended the president. “It’s time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge he’ll be commander-in-chief for three more years,” the senator said. “We undermine the president’s credibility at our nation’s peril.”
There was no immediate response from the White House or congressional leaders.
Lieberman made his comments to an audience at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a sympathetic Washington research group. The war debate, Lieberman said, is being too poisoned by partisanship.
He cited the mood after Bush’s speech last week in Annapolis, where the president laid out a war strategy.
Instead of reasoned dialogue, Lieberman said, there were angry press conferences questioning the administration’s tactics. But look more closely, he said, and “there is broad bipartisan agreement on the goals. There are disagreements about the tactics.”
If you take a step back from the partisan prism on this (some Democrats: Lieberman is a traitor for supporting the war; some Republicans: Lieberman is the only sincere and motivated-by-patriotism Democrat in office) here’s what you can say about this:
- This isn’t a political ploy. Lieberman does believe it. If anything, he tempered some of his views when he ran for the Veepship on the ticket with Al Gore. He’s probably closer to the old-line Scoop Jackson Democrat than anything else. How will this play in Connecticut? There is likely to be some segment of his party that will be out to get him due to his stance on the war.
- Lieberman’s proposal will fail for one important reason: this administration has polarized the war issue as much or moreso than the critics to which it points on the Democratic left. It doesn’t quite cut it to blame the press and suggest that war critics are shrill when the administration has had people running around suggesting that those who criticize the war are unpatriotic or somehow don’t care about U.S. troops dying. If this had been a DIFFERENT KIND of administration (one that GENUINELY sought national unity) the idea would not be difficult to promote. Just precisely how many olive branches has the Bush administration extended to moderates — let alone liberal critics of the war? (FOOTNOTE: This writer has supported the war so spare us the comments about this being just another liberal attack. There are other issues at play here.)
- Again, Lieberman’s comments reflect his general beliefs (pre-Al Gore) so he can’t be accused of sticking his up finger to test the political the wind. But his comments, praise from Republicans (such as Dick Cheney yesterday) and rumors about him possibly joining the Bush cabinet DO suggest it would not be surprising if Lieberman becomes part of the Bush team in 2006. Other Presidents have surprised partisans by bringing in members of other parties. And these days Lieberman is probably sensing that his angriest critics are within his own party’s left wing. Why would he balk if a post is offered to him?
UPDATE: My DD’s Matt Stoler notes that Lieberman is vulnerable to a primary challenge. If you add all of these factors together you could speculate that he’s inching towards joining the Bush cabinet (but it is speculation).
UPDATE: It’s clear Lieberman will face real problems within his own party. This morning President Bush quoted extensively from Lieberman in his speech defending the Iraq war. Yesterday it was Vice President Dick Cheney. On one hand, administration officials are making the case that there is indeed some bipartisan support for their war policy. On the other hand, in pure political terms using Lieberman as an example and quoting extensively from him is the political kiss of death — guaranteeing that a segment of the Democratic party will be out there politically gunning for him when he runs for re-election.
UPDATE II: McCain on Imus talking about Lieberman (and read Crooks And Liars comments on all of this at the link).
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.