Why President-elect Obama and Harry Reid should be weary of the senator from Connecticut.
I realize it's often tough to objectively evaluate a friend and colleague, especially when you are members of the most exclusive club in the world. When you see them all the time in the Senate cloakroom, laugh at their jokes, and nudge them to stay awake during Joe Biden's oratory, you can lose sight of the knife in your back.
Case in point, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who now says, "Joe Lieberman is not some right-wing nutcase...Joe Lieberman is one of the most progressive people ever to come from the state of Connecticut."
Where to begin? Well, let’s start in 2000, when Senator Joseph Lieberman, the Democratic candidate for vice president—in response to pressure from the Bush campaign and without checking with his own campaign—conceded hundreds of fraudulent overseas ballots supposedly from military voters that cost Al Gore the election, the notorious "Thanksgiving Stuffing."
Would Lieberman join a diminished Republican minority, have no chairmanship whatsoever, and enter a party in which he could never hope to win a 2012 election in Connecticut?
Let's skip lightly over Lieberman’s part in the culture wars, his sanctimonious rebuke of President Clinton on the floor of the Senate at the start of the impeachment charade, and his critical role as part of the so-called “Gang of 14” breaking Democratic resistance to putting Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court. Let’s jump straight to Lieberman’s December 6, 2005 speech where he rebuked his party:
It is time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be Commander-in-Chief for three more critical months, and that in matters of war we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril.
While Lieberman was quick to denounce Clinton for a private matter he leaped to the defense of Bush as even Republicans realized his strategy in the Iraq War was disastrous. Criticize George W. Bush and his conduct of the war and you're a traitor.
Lieberman subsequently told the New Haven Register that he opposed legislation that would have required all publicly funded hospitals to provide Plan B contraception to rape victims, saying "it shouldn't take more than a short ride to get to another hospital" (for which he earned himself the sobriquet "Short Ride.")
The 2006 Democratic primary campaign in Connecticut was in some respects a warm-up for Lieberman’s negative attacks on Barack Obama, ironic given that Obama endorsed him. Lieberman had been assigned to show the freshman the ropes in the Senate and Obama called him his “mentor.” Obama rushed to the state to deliver a ringing endorsement of Lieberman at the annual party dinner. No good deed goes unpunished.
Lieberman’s opponent, Ned Lamont, was a wealthy banker from Greenwich, an antiwar activist and gentlemanly. Supported by the Democratic establishment, Lieberman claimed he would abide by the results of the primary. But when he lost he ran as a member of a new political party, called the “Connecticut for Lieberman Party.” He blanketed cars in parking lots of African-American churches with flyers suggesting Lamont was racist. (Lamont had resigned from a country club, not because it practiced discrimination but because he felt it was not diverse enough.) Meanwhile, Lieberman stoked racial tensions by telling Jewish groups in Connecticut saying that Lamont had surrounded himself with people like Congresswoman Maxine Waters and Al Sharpton "who are either naïve or are isolationists or, frankly, some more explicitly against Israel."
Lieberman also declared himself a "non combatant" in the 2006 congressional races and refused to say which party should have the majority. The Bush White House and Karl Rove openly lent him support, winning him a vast majority of Republican votes and the election.
John P. Avlon is the author of Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics. He writes a weekly column for The Daily Beast and is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Previously, he served as Chief Speechwriter for New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and was a columnist and associate editor for The New York Sun.
Max Blumenthal is a senior writer for The Daily Beast and writing fellow at The Nation Institute, whose book, Republican Gomorrah (Basic/Nation Books), is forthcoming in Spring 2009. Contact him at maxblumenthal3000@yahoo.com.
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
Kevin Buckley was a reporter and Saigon bureau chief for Newsweek between 1968 and 1972. He is the author of Panama—The Whole Story (Simon & Schuster, 1991). He is a contributing editor of Playboy and an adjunct professor at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism.
Michael O'Hanlon specializes in national security policy at the Brookings Institution. He is senior author of the Iraq Index. As a defense budget analyst, he advised members of Congress on military spending.
Abby Ellin regularly writes the "Vows" column for the New York Times, and previously wrote the "Preludes" column for that newspaper about young people and money. Her work has appeared in a range of publications, including Time, Marie Claire, More, Self and Glamour. She is the author of Teenage Waistland, but her greatest claim to fame is naming “Karamel Sutra” ice cream for Ben and Jerry's.
by Jane Hamsher
Jane Hamsher is the founder of firedoglake.com. She is the author of the bestselling book Killer Instinct and has produced such films Natural Born Killers and Permanent Midnight. She lives in Washington, D.C.
If Reid doesn't grow a spine and fails to push forward with stripping the Judas of his chairmanship, he'll end up paying for it himself. Never mind that CT will not re-elect this Liarman in 2012, no matter what.
What's more, now Chris Dodd is also coming out in his "defense". This is outrageous! We don't care that Judas has voted 90% with Democrats. On the major issues, such as the war, and electing our next President, he failed us, and what's more BETRAYED us miserably. And that's what counts. Also, we now have 57 seats, so no good excuse to keep him. I think we should all keep the pressure on Reid & Co, bombard them with emails and calls, lest they forget they work for the people, and their personal camaraderie in the Senate is of no importance to us. We won't stand for a traitor among us. Period!
Your comments ring hollow from a party that abandoned Lieberman. I thought the democratic party was open to all or is it all if you follow the party line.
LindaFromCT
I can't tell you how many people in CT who gave Joe the benefit of the doubt in 2006 and supported him have emphatically told me that they will NEVER vote for him again. He couldn't even be elected dog catcher. Joe's already a Republican for all practical purposes, and I think he supported McCain so vigorously because only through McCain could Joe hold any kind of office, elected or appointed, once his current term as Senator is over, since the neocons don't trust him either. Joe's over, and I think he knows this. There is no need to placate him or try to woo him back into the fold; he broke his word time and time again and even in the political world he can never be trusted again. He can never redeem himself enough to secure election again so all he has left to look forward to is troublemaking. Don't give him any platforms; give him nothing important. Joe lost his CT constituency over Iraq; he didn't accept or respect the will of those constituents; so if he doesn't play ball with the Democrats he is welcome to go over to the other side. It's time to start counting down to the time we can say "Goodnight Joe."
Lieberman-
as I sit here trying to comment
my mind becomes awash in disgust.
He's like a little boy who didn't get
the biggest piece of cake, so he threw a
tantrum and knocked over everyone else's plate.
I have long felt that Joe Lieberman was more the senator for Israel than for Connecticut. He may support the Democrats on some issues, but his sanctimoniousness drives me crazy. I say strip him of all committee chairmanships. If he wants to caucus with the Republicans, let him. If he is an honest man and votes his conscience, that means he will still vote with the Democrats 90% of the time. If not, well so be it. He has earned the right to no longer be in any position of power in the Democratic party. I have been waiting for this to happen to him for two years at least.
Sorry mgibson, just because lieberman didn't win the primaries doesn't mean he was "abandoned". When Will Rogers said "I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat." He was being sarcastic. Lot's of people lost in the primaries but still remembered the term loyalty.
Lieberman has proven be totally untrustworthy and should be all but shunned. He is a disgrace to all the people who voted for him. Maybe the people of CT need to oust him in a recall.
First, a public apology would be nice. Lieberman, McCain, Palin, Bachmann et al need to apologize for the stooopid comments made during the campaign. Then, perhaps, they can be welcomed back into the human race.
Lieberman is with us on everything except everything
John McCain wore Joe Lieberman like a flag in his lapel. Joe must go!
There are two passions about senatorial politics I have that cloud my reason: 1. The hope and dream that the people of CT will realize they've been had and start a recall procedure and 2. Harry Reid loses his job as Majority leader. Hillary Clinton bumping off Reid would make the victory complete.
I don't like the idea that democrats, and I am one, have no place for dissentors. Never been a huge fan of Leiberman and complained loudly to anybody who would listen way back in 2000 when he was picked as Gore's running mate.
And that was years before he became the turncoat he is today. I can't say I'd vote for the man.
But I'd like to think our Party is beyond punishing people for their convictions.
Oh COMON!! This guy still has the nerve to want to show his face and continue in politics?!?! He is the biggest LOSER, and charlatan and turncoat I have seen in politics. He runs with Gore in 2000, then realises that Bush and his cronies might be a better bet (at the worst time in history - during the rise of probably one of the most charismatic U.S. leaders in Obama) and now he wants back after losing disgracefully whilst running alongside McCain? And his speech at the GOP Rally was dispicable. The gall he had to stand in front of all those Republicans and berated OBAMA?!?!...This guy Lieberman bought at the highs and sold at the lows. He's a MORON. And get this, the Jewish lobby actually went more for Obama. Ha! Even your own people didn't go for you Lieberman. Freedom Man. Yeah, free to do your own thing and make your own bed. Now lie in it. You ain't going nowhere. Total loser.
@bybrandy:
I agreed with you, but after reading this article and talking to a very good friend of mind that is very well versed in all things politics domestic and foreign, I've come to a different view. I wouldn't hold it against Lieberman for having his own views, but he's also blocked important investigations using both of his important chairmanships. Those are key functions of government oversight that should respected in a nonpartisan manner. There are valid, substantive reasons that Lieberman should lose his chairs and probably be kicked out of the caucus for the disrespect he's shown for his colleges and the party he supposedly supports. Be critical of your party, but if you're going to go your own way, be honest about it.
That said, I still agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment of your post, especially when the republican party is facing a serious leadership void, muffling the still-useful dissent that is needed in the legislature.
You know, at first, I was thinking that maybe the Democrats should "let Lieberman back in." But now reading this article, and realising that maybe if they forced him out he would have to run as a Republican in Connecticut in 2012, that would really serve him right. Personally, I find him to be one of the most repulsive members of the Senate going all the way back to Gore choosing him for VP in 2000, which will probably go down in history as the worst VP choice ever... oh wait. Anyway, I no longer see any benefit to continuing to capitulate to Lieberman's ever-devolving and petulant actions. Dodd should really rethink his position, lest it cost him political capital down the road.
Lieberman should have been given the boot long ago. He's a shameless opportunist, a man I have despised since before he was made Gore's veep.
Harry Reid and Chris Dodd are idiots if they think we need to keep him around. We have him on the ropes right now, and should demand he stay in step with the ideals of the Democratic party. He's free to switch parties now that we don't need him in the caucus.
I'm reminded of a comment I read last week in an article here-- "Politics is a team sport." If a player demonstrates a willingness to change sides in midgame, SEVERAL TIMES, you know you have someone more interested in their own play than the game. He wants to be the team star by bringing down the other players rather than upping his own game. He'll do more harm staying than he can ever do by leaving. Send him out. Reid's offer was too generous.
You know, I'm cool with other Democrats thinking Iraq is okay. I'm extremely liberal. I'm so liberal that I believe that you're allowed to disagree with me. However, at this point I just don't see how Lieberman can be trusted. Let him think what he thinks and let him say what he believes, of course. But for God's sake, Joe, keep your damn word! If you tell your constituents that you want to be senator to help ensure a Democratic victory in 2008, if you really think the Democratic candidate is a bed pick, at LEAST don't actually campaign for the Republican.
It's a pity. I admired Lieberman once upon a time, but I don't trust him anymore.
Leiberman is a politician, albeit not a very savvy one. He is Charlie Crist without the sterling principles. I say if Obama wants to use him, do so, but don't ever turn your back. The man is one vicious little dog, but dogs then have loyalty.
There are real reasons why Lieberman is a liability but good luck trying to get someone to voice them in public.
lilmama51, as far as I'm concerned, Lieberman "has all the attributes of a dog, except loyalty".
The Democratic Party would be discredited in my eyes if they buckle to Lieberman, as if he had the one vote that counts, and reward him for his vicious, underhanded behavior. It would be the clearest signal that the Democrats have total disregard for principle.
The only reason to let the traitor caucus with the Dems is that they can treat him as a traitor, asking him to leave the room whenever strategic considerations are on the table and banning him from any chair or membership of howsoever in which commission he want to take part.
Much of this is a smear. I suggest people read the article by Lieberman's former chief of staff in the Augusgt 31stWashington Post, which is referenced at my website.
BTW Lieberman voted AGAINST confirmation of Alito to the Supreme Court.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.