Blogs and Stories
What Made Joe Bitter
Kris Connor / Getty Images
As the Senate debates the health-care bill, Joe Lieberman is relishing his role as roadblock. Peter Beinart on how one of the most unpredictable senators became just another right-wing pol.
Once upon a time, Joe Lieberman was interesting—not always correct, in my view, but interesting. He was interesting because he thought for himself. On most issues, most senators line up pretty automatically with their party. A few others, the moderates—often Southern or prairie Democrats or Northeastern Republicans—split the difference: If Democrats want to spend $1 billion on some domestic program, and Republicans want to spend nothing, they furrow their brows, beat their breasts and then propose spending $500 million. The moderates generally annoy party activists and impress Washington pundits who view moderation as good in and of itself. But they’re just as conventional as the liberals and conservatives. It’s no more interesting to be predictably purple than it is to be predictably red or blue.
It’s not just that Lieberman’s arguments make no sense. They show that he’s morphing from an iconoclast into just another right-wing pol.
That’s why Lieberman stood out. On domestic issues, he was fairly liberal: supporting abortion rights, a larger social safety net and environmental protection. On foreign policy, he was a fervent hawk. He didn’t split the difference between left and right: He idiosyncratically mixed and matched. He hewed to an older ideological tradition—both pro-welfare and pro-warfare—that flourished in the industrial north before Vietnam. That’s what made Lieberman interesting. And that’s why his declaration last week that he would filibuster a “public option” on health-care reform is so depressing. It’s not just that his arguments make no sense. They show that he’s morphing from an iconoclast into just another right-wing pol.
In the 1960s and 1970s, interesting senators weren’t quite so rare. On the one hand, you had liberal hawks like Minnesota’s Hubert Humphrey and Washington state’s Henry “Scoop” Jackson. They embodied the worldview of the Cold War labor movement: pro-guns and pro-butter, all at the same time. On the other hand, you had conservative doves from the South like Arkansas’ William Fulbright: men with lousy civil-rights records and no love of government spending, but deep hostility to American military intervention in the third world. Today, a right-wing anti-imperialist like Fulbright would be politically incomprehensible. But Fulbright’s politics were just as coherent as Humphrey and Jackson’s: He embodied an older conservative tradition, rooted in the South, which distrusted grand, government-led efforts at social reform, whether at home or abroad.
Scientists say that America once had lots of quirky, regional species of apples. Now we have a few, homogenized types. The same thing has happened to American politics. We’ve smoothed out the jagged edges. There are liberals and there are conservatives, and there are difference-splitting moderates, and if you know someone’s position on abortion, you can probably predict their position on Afghanistan. Put Scoop Jackson alongside William Fulbright on a cable talk show today and it would be like they were speaking Greek.
There are still a few interesting members of Congress around. Pennsylvania’s Robert Casey, for instance, sees the world the way the Catholic hierarchy does: He’s pro-welfare state, but passionately antiabortion. Texas Rep. Ron Paul, by contrast, sees the world the way Calvin Coolidge did: He wants to radically downsize the federal government—not just the domestic parts, but the military, too.
• Peter Beinart: Half a Victory
• McCain talks about Lieberman's vote
• Max Blumenthal: The Senator Who'll Kill the Stupak AmendmentBut Lieberman was the most prominent iconoclast, at least up until now. For close to a decade, he got nearly perfect scores from the American Public Health Association, which backs a single-payer health-care system, and in lieu of that, the “public option.” Now, all of a sudden, he’s so outraged by a public option that he’s threatening to filibuster any bill that contains it. The arguments he makes on behalf of his new position are remarkably weak: He says the public option will raise costs, even though the Congressional Budget Office has said no such thing, and even though logic suggests that by competing with private insurers, a government plan will actually drive costs down. Some have accused Lieberman of shifting right in order to win backing from the insurance industry in preparation for a 2012 reelection run. But, in fact, he gets relatively little insurance money, and Connecticut politicos mostly think he won’t run.
So why is he doing this? Because he’s bitter. According to former staffers and associates, he was upset by his dismal showing in the 2004 Democratic presidential primary. And he was enraged by the tepid support he got from many party leaders in 2006, when he lost the Democratic primary to an anti-war activist and won reelection as an independent. Gradually, this personal alienation has eaten away at his liberal domestic views. His staff has grown markedly more conservative in recent years, and his closest friends in Congress are now Republicans John McCain and Lindsey Graham. For Lieberman, the personal has become political, and it has pushed him further to the right.
The irony is that when Lieberman was officially a Democrat, he was ideologically independent—a living manifestation of the Humphrey-Jackson tradition. Now that he’s technically an independent, he’s becoming a standard-issue conservative. For people who believe—as Lieberman himself once did—in progressive health-care reform, it’s a tragic shift. It’s also boring. Another interesting senator bites the dust.
Peter Beinart, senior political writer for The Daily Beast, is a professor of journalism and political science at City University of New York and a senior fellow at the New America Foundation.
For More of The Daily Beast, become a fan on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.
How Rich People Smoke Pot
Paul Schrodt is a writer living in New York City. He has contributed to New York magazine, Radar, and Esquire.com.
Stars Celebrate the Super Bowl
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.
The Tea Partiers' Phony Populism
Peter Beinart, senior political writer for The Daily Beast, is associate professor of journalism and political science at City University of New York and a senior fellow at the New America Foundation. His new book, The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris, will be published by HarperCollins in June.
Obama Outsmarts the Terrorists
Peter Beinart, senior political writer for The Daily Beast, is associate professor of journalism and political science at City University of New York and a senior fellow at the New America Foundation. His new book, The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris, will be published by HarperCollins in June.
The Republicans' Reagan Amnesia
Peter Beinart, senior political writer for The Daily Beast, is associate professor of journalism and political science at City University of New York and a senior fellow at the New America Foundation. His new book, The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris, will be published by HarperCollins in June.
robjh1
Let's start with his failed presidential bid and then leaving the GOP. He simply isn't a happy man.
"and we are not saved..."
MaliciousDisorder
He's just another Arlen Spector, but no different than any other politician working to save his pay check. That's why we want the RINOS out. Let the democratics have them all.
Maezeppa
Not all politicians are "working to save their pay check". Lieberman was never a Republican.
AlanD2
We'll take them, Mal. And add to our majorities in the House and Senate.
Good luck on getting any conservative legislation passed!
Valkyrie607
Trade ya for the DINOs.
djenna8girl
please excuse my australian ignorace, but what exactly does RINO stand for?
DavidBarron
RINO: Republican In Name Only
DINO: Democrat In Name Only
Both, of course, not precise labels when applied to members of big-tent parties.
djenna8girl
Ahhh... Thank you! I have been trying to figure that out for days :)
YogiBarrister
Who the hell knows why Joe is so bitter
Too bad for us though, Joe is no quitter
oaklynne
Correction: Lieberman left the Democratic Party, became an Independent and now, apparently, a right wing pol.
HDway1
Bitter, good he's got my vote. The oppressive liberal left has made me bitter with their Draconian and unconstitutional Healthcare scams, and read them or keep your comments to yourself.
The actions of NY and US self-serving corrupt dysfunctional politicians has left me enraged and bitter. Not to mention the masses too lazy to look into the facts hidden in the muddy water of these massive Democrat healthcare bills. People think these corrupt politicians actually intend to provide a degree of healthcare when Obama has already organized entities to recommend reductions in cancer screening to force on the people. And, never before in American history has the government mandated the everyone associate and contract with the government for healthcare and criminalize any and all alternatives. All of this before the enslaving and oppressive cost of this veiled social dictatorship is taken into account.
From page 432, of HR 3200, PHYSICIAN'S QUALITY REPORTING INITIATIVE
Secretary shall include quality measures on the end of life care and advanced care planning that have been adopted or endorsed by a ""consensus-based organization,""
"if appropriate, Such ""measures shall measure"" both the
creation of and ""adherence to orders for life sustaining treatment.""
Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, "Measure" (3) : a fixed or suitable ""limit.""
Summary: Death panels will be known as consensus-based organizations.
Monk66
DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS
If you say it enough times it might come true.
bgeasyas123
Seriously?!? this argument again.....c'mon......you know that private insurance companies already do this
AlanD2
It's a Fox News talking point, bgeasyas123. Refuting a lie has no effect on conservatives.
HDway1
Make alternatives criminal? Stop, what is your gain? I gotta hear it!
bgeasyas123
One more thing to note HDway1, page 432 of HR 3200 explains the basis for EVIDENCED BASED MEDICINE! That doesn't determine when to pull the plug, it is merely a device for determining standard methods used in end of life care...read more than one page. This is intended to inform the patient of their choices and the impact they will have, which a patient has a right to know.
Also, said appointments will be optional once every 5 years......say it with me now......."OPTIONAL"
Maezeppa
Yes, Amerians are so "bitter" over their "oppressive" measures like Social Security and Medicare.
CitizenBloggerX
Sen. No Lieberman ( R) Israel needs to be bannished to an empty broom closet for the rest of his term then booted back to Connecticut ( If they'll even want him anymore )
crypto
Oh they'll take him. And very possibly a few more with him.. Joe's not bitter. He, like the rest of the logical thinking people, is just tired. You can't walk among that pond scum of a congress day after day and not be worn down. Pelosi, Rangle, Dodd, Franks, Reid, if you could somehow get 'em all on trial at once they would get at least 100 years in prison for their crooked ways. My hope is after 2010 we have several more just like JOE!!
ncsteeler
What crime do you think Pelosi or Reid have commited other than disagreement with you? (who is Franks???) Reid should have a little chat with Joe and tell him that if he filibusters even one minute he can kiss his chairmanship goodbye. Reid should also force these obstructionists to actually filibuster 24/7 right through the holidays - if they complain that the vital work isn't getting done then they can let the HCR come to a vote and move on. The filibuster needs to be gone and the way to kill it is to make it hard not easy.
CitizenBloggerX
Oh how those rose colored partizen glasses have shaded your vision of ethics and morality, There is no doubt that every member of Congress have done underhanded and possibly illegal activities, But so goes politics, However my friend do not compare what those on the left have done compared to the sexual deviancy and perversions of the right, Yes we have Barney Frank an openly gay and proud man, But your side gets Vitter and his Ho's Craig and his airport bathroom antics, Foley and his sick IMing of young boys, Libby and his writings of bestiality and let us not forget GW's personal religious advisor who smokes meth and frequents male hookers, And what makes your side so hypocritical is that these same gentlemen have denounced and condemned the very actions in which they participate.
winston1
ncsteele Feast your eyes on this article--
surprising admission from the DNC's Associated Press:
Reid got $1M in land sale
By JOHN SOLOMON and KATHLEEN HENNESSEY, Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON - Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid collected a $1.1 million windfall on a Las Vegas land sale even though he hadn't personally owned the property for three years, property deeds show.
In the process, Reid did not disclose to Congress an earlier sale in which he transferred his land to a company created by a friend and took a financial stake in that company, according to records and interviews.
The Nevada Democrat's deal was engineered by Jay Brown, a longtime friend and former casino lawyer whose name surfaced in a major political bribery trial this summer and in other prior organized crime investigations. He's never been charged with wrongdoing - except for a 1981 federal securities complaint that was settled out of court.
Land deeds obtained by The Associated Press during a review of Reid's business dealings show:
- The deal began in 1998 when Reid bought undeveloped residential property on Las Vegas' booming outskirts for about $400,000. Reid bought one lot outright, and a second parcel jointly with Brown. One of the sellers was a developer who was benefiting from a government land swap that Reid supported. The seller never talked to Reid.
- In 2001, Reid sold the land for the same price to a limited liability corporation created by Brown. The senator didn't disclose the sale on his annual public ethics report or tell Congress he had any stake in Brown's company. He continued to report to Congress that he personally owned the land.
- After getting local officials to rezone the property for a shopping center, Brown's company sold the land in 2004 to other developers and Reid took $1.1 million of the proceeds, nearly tripling the senator's investment. Reid reported it to Congress as a personal land sale.
The complex dealings allowed Reid to transfer ownership, legal liability and some tax consequences to Brown's company without public knowledge, but still collect a seven-figure payoff nearly three years
ncsteeler
Liebermann is bitter - he even looks like he just ate a lemon. Has he ever explained why he supported a public option in 2006 and now thinks it so bad? Maybe it was lack of support from primary voters and party establishment in 2004 and 2006. He has to know this is his last roundup. If he runs in Dem. primary in 2012, Ned Lemont (or Hartford's dogcatcher) would crush him. If he runs as an independent, he will attract very few Dems. or left leaning Inds. and there just aren't that many Reps. in Conn. In 2006 - he could reasonably attract those who had voted for him in primary and Inds. with a liberal domestic agenda, party seniority, and (or in spite of) hawkish foriegn policy views. Now what does he have?
ndspinelli
ncsteeler, I heard the "Lamont will crush him" last time from your ilk. what's Lamont doing these days??
nortonclybourn
It's not entirely fair to contrast Lieberman with Scoop Jackson, former Senator from Boeing. The latter had a huge economic incentive to be a warmonger. Lieberman--I don't know whether he's bitter or has actually had a stroke. He's flopping around all over the place--spreading hysteria that vaccines cause autism, complaining that there isn't enough flu vaccine, taking positions and abandoning them and then taking them up again. Clearly the man has lost his way. It would only be humane to have him put to sleep.
NterthaW
HDway1 - I'm confused. You mention "self-serving corrupt dysfunctional politicians," but then rant only against Democrats. Are you angered by pols or just Democrats? Please clarify.
crypto - I'm not condoning any "crooked ways" of senators, but I would like to point out that the names you mentioned are not the only perps. There are plenty on the other side of the aisle too.
HDway1
I am a Democrat, why should I accept corruption from my party or any other? What if these political parties ran from the people up instead of the money, George Soros, down? I am a Traditional Constitutionalist I believe in unalienable rights, right to the point were they encroach on the those rights of others. Government's job is to protect those rights and an atmosphere conducive to commerce so that you can pay for your own healthcare. Go without insurance companies if you don't like it. Hell, the artificial demand created by social programs is one of the greatest problems. But, I have yet to see a full accounting of what we tax-payers currently contribute to the healthcare industry from the federal to the county and town level. Let's see it.
bgeasyas123
So you believe that if one doesn't have insurance they should not be able to receive any medical care whatsoever?
Forgive my low example, but how does the fact that you HAVE to have car insurance sit with you?
What is the typically the most significant factor in prices dropping? Saturation.....the price drops once everyone already has it....so if everyone had insurance we could see prices drop drastically as hospitals no longer have to worry about getting nothing back from the patients who currently just run to the ED
crypto
AHHHHhhhh. this is only good natured scraping. None of it matters anyway. They, the politicians, are gonna do what thay want. I'm certain this economy is going on to hellinabasket. But we can't stop it. Just try to hold on to what you have.
jms8038
He is a strange little man...enough said.
johnstafford
=A really thoughtful and informative piece--nice to be reminded that things weren't always totally two-dimensional in our national politics.
=In fact, the most discouraging aspect of the whole health care reform debate, other than the Democrats' willingness to "compromise" anything to get it passed, is the monolithic
opposition of the right. It makes them seem more reminiscent of the Reichstag than the Republican party I once knew.
=Once upon a time, believe it or not, the Republicans had a "progressive" wing. In New York alone, we had Jake Javits, Nelson Rockefeller and that guy whose son is now Commissioner of the NFL.
ThinkAgain
Both sides have been losing people in droves this year which is Americans distancing themselves from the far left and far right nutjobs.
I guess we just want to force the majority of the people who view themselves as moderate to have no choice but to choose between dumb and dumber?
BunnyLee
Did anybody see 60 Minutes last night? The point was made that there are worst things than death. Like elderly dying patients being seen by thirty or more specialists, weeks before the end, hooked up to machines, no real chance, no quality of life....all on tax payers $$$$.
Open up your eyes America. Death panels, or a specific time that all life saving measures should stop is kin to abortion. Not utopia but necessary. And when you say you don't want YOUR tax dollar funding abortion well...I don't want mine funding war.
ThinkAgain
National Defense is an appropriate function of the Federal Government. Dictating morality is not.
TwainsYankee
War is not a morality question? Oh please
bgeasyas123
but allocation of taxpayer money IS...and by not funding abortions you are dictating morality as well becuase it is a medical procedure
crypto
I don't like war either Bunny. But some of our involvements are the only reason you and I are sitting here talking about it, with the freedom to do so.
TwainsYankee
Nonsense. WWII was a long time ago and everything we have been involved with since then is little more than macho posturing.
nortonclybourn
Right, Bush Jr. saved us from Saddam Hussein coming over here to take away our rights.
ndspinelli
If Joe was making the "correct" choice on this issue, then the syncophant author of this piece would be singing his praise. Progressives[that's an Orwellian label they give themselves] have made this issue simple. Either you drink the koolaid and accept the public option[the 1st step to single payer] or you're a pariah. They had the same edict on Iraq. Joe told them to shove it, kicked Ned Lamont's ass, and was proven right on the surge. Joe CONTINUES to think for himself and will be proven correct on this issue again.
Maezeppa
Joe is just bitter and clearly hates Ct. voters more than anyone. I'm sure you can relate.
ndspinelli
Maezeppa, You're projecting on the hate issue. Anyone who knows Joe, including those who strongly disagree w/ him, will say there is not an ounce of hate in him. That is a product of several factors; including, but not limited to, his ethnicity and devout faith. You know faith...that's one of the many topics about which you spew hatred. What is truly inspiring is how much hate has been directed toward him, and he remains a good, decent, loving person.
AlanD2
With a single-payer health care system - and getting rid of insurance companies - we could save $1 trillion a year on our health care costs.
I guess Republicans don't care about saving taxpayer money any more, ndspinelli.
crypto
What's wrong with me just taking care of myself and you do the same. then this argument wouldn't even be.
ndspinelli
AlanD2, You are assuming a fact not in evidence. I am not a Republican.. I am a proud independent. You may have heard about us...we decide elections. I donated $ to Obama; the first time I've ever given $ to any pol. It's looking like I bet on a 1 termer, and that truly upsets me. Obama is a good man, but then again, so was Carter.
AlanD2
Well, ndspinelli, it is a fact that Americans spend twice as much per person on health care as any other industrialized country.
My only assumption is that we can be smart enough to follow the example of these countries and cut our health care spending from $2.2 trillion a year to about half of that.
Perhaps you are suggesting we aren't smart enough to do this?
Trunk-Monkey
crypto - What's wrong with me just taking care of myself and you do the same
or to paraphrase: Every man for himself, and the devil take the hindmost! (isn't that the GOP motto?)
bgeasyas123
spinelli, what? you don't remember joey backing a single payer system and a public option back in 2006.
ndspinelli
No I don't, bgeasyas123. But I'm open to reading documentation. I'm not a progressive or a conservative, I have an open mind.
ndspinelli
bgeasyas123, I took you @ your word and started searching for proof that Joe "supported a single payer system in 2006." I've not found any. I'm still waiting for your wealth of knowledge.
TwainsYankee
Progressives were right about slavery, civil rights, medicare, medicaid, and social security. What the hell do conservatives have to crow about?
AlanD2
Tax cuts for the rich, TwainsYankee?
"Wide Stance", Vitter, and Ensign?
C Street?
The Iran-Contra scandal?
Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq?
And it was Dwight D. Eisenhower that sent the first "military advisers" into Vietnam.
I'm sure people can come up with a few more...
larebil
Peter Beinart may be on target regarding Lieberman, but equating Hubert Humphrey's views on foreign policy with Scoop Jackson and Joe Lieberman's hawkish views on foreign policy shows little insight to what Hubert Humphrey was about. Humphrey's reputation continues to suffer because of the tragic mistake of his boss, Lyndon Johnson, regarding Vietnam. But Johnson's views and Humphrey's views on that war were not the same. Humphrey was a liberal on foreign policy as well as domestic policy. Yes, he believed in a strong foreign policy, but that in no way made him less of a champion for peace. Shame on Peter Beinart for perpetuating revisionist history.
mzkitti
The Real
DEATH PANEL. these people want to Deny 50 million people to LIFE?
(R) Michael Stephen Steele (R) Orin Hatch, Charles Schumer, (R) John Boehner, (R) Ben Nelson, (R) Jerrold Nadler, (R) Jon Kyl, (R) Michael Bennet, (R) Kent Conrad / (R) Charles Grassley (D) BLANCH LINCOLN, (D) Kit Bond, SARAH PALIN, (?) Joe Lieberman, (R) George Voinovich.
And STOP millions of JOBS this Public Option will produce.
All the time sending 10 BILLION dollars to Israel, that has Nationalized Medical Insurance.
For forty years Liebermann is up front when sennd money to Israel.
You would think he would do the same for merican citizens of which he is one. He is so adamently opposed to health care reform... is he afraid there will not be enough money to send to Israel next year?
bryanlevi
If you change your "principles" because you get mad at someone, then they aren't really principles.
Joe Lieberman is one of the lowest of the low-lifes in current politics. His 2004 Presidential bid was borderline insane, and at least completely delusional. How could he be so completely bad at reading public opinion of the idea of his run? That is entirely his own problem, and if he is mad at the Democratic base for not supporting him, he is more petty and pathetic than even I thought.
I am truly repulsed by Joe Lieberman, and have been in awe of any Democratic support for him since Al Gore made the fatal and beyond stupid mistake of choosing him for a running mate in 2000.
Hey Joe- nobody likes you, and it is all because of your own actions. Yeah yeah, we all know you are the Republicans little kiss-ass now, but do you honestly think they respect you any more than the Democrats do? Do yourself a favor and crawl into reviled obscurity where you belong.
maspring
Everything about his behavior suggests that he's milking this for all the attention he can get. Right now the whole nation is wondering what he'll do and why. If he were to give clear insight into his goals and rationale all of this attention would cease.
My guess is that he wants to affect the outcome and to get something in return. Maybe a little revenge against those who backed an anti-war Democrat against him. Maybe some sweetheart deal for some of his corporate donors. Maybe more power and prestige within the Senate.
Either way he's going to hold out as long as possible. Otherwise no one has much incentive to treat him with any special deference.
To screw over the Democrats at this point in the process would mortally wound them for the next three years. That might rob him of a chance to affect the next big initiatives: energy policy and reform of the financial institutions.
Also, it's possible the Democrats would strip him of his chairmanships in retaliation.
So in the end he'll probably cave on the procedural vote to end debate. His actual vote on the legislation after that doesn't much matter. The Democrats will give him something for it. Otherwise he'll lose face as having held up healthcare and gotten nothing for it.
I'm sure he knows this. So the time for him to play the "maverick" is right now, because doing so later wouldn't amount to anything. And in the end he'll stop playing "maverick" on healthcare so that he can move on to playing the "maverick" on other legislation later.
Stay tuned...
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.