| Submit your comments on this article | |||||
| Home Front: Politix | |||||
| Lieberman Wins Republican Friends, Democratic Enemies | |||||
| 2005-12-10 | |||||
The Connecticut Democrat's strong public defense of Bush's handling of the Iraq war has provided the White House with an invaluable rejoinder to intensifying criticism from other Democrats. In public statements and a newspaper column, Lieberman has argued that Bush has a strategy for victory in Iraq, has dismissed calls for the president to set a timetable for troop withdrawal, and has warned that it would be a "colossal mistake" for the Democratic leadership to "lose its will" at this critical point in the war. Lieberman's contrarian behavior is not out of character -- he is far more hawkish than the majority of Democrats, and he has vigorously backed invading Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein from the beginning. But the latest defense of Bush and his stinging salvos at some in his own party have infuriated Democrats, who say he is undercutting their effort to forge a consensus on the war and draw clear distinctions with Republicans before the 2006 election. Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is troubled by Lieberman's comments, Reid's aides said. "I've talked to Senator Lieberman, and unfortunately he is at a different place on Iraq than the majority of the American people," Reid said yesterday. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told reporters this week that "I completely disagree" with Lieberman. She added: "I believe that we have a responsibility to speak out if we think that the course of action that our country is on is not making the American people safer, making our military stronger and making the region more stable."
There have even been rumors that Lieberman is being considered as a replacement for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, if the embattled Pentagon boss retires. Lieberman dismisses the speculation as a "Washington fantasy." But he caused tongues to wag when he had breakfast with Rumsfeld at the Pentagon on Thursday. Lieberman shrugs off the criticism by fellow Democrats and seems perfectly comfortable with the compliments he has received from Republicans about his views on Iraq. "They're not misquoting me," he said in an interview this week. "I've had this position for a long time -- that we need to finish the job." But Lieberman, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, acknowledged that his words in support of the administration's war policy carry a different weight. "Somehow it gets more notice when it's coming from a member of the other party," he said. Lieberman, 63, a former Connecticut attorney general, has long been admired within his party for his independence of thought and his civility, although he is more conservative than most Democrats on cultural issues and foreign policy. He played a leading role in helping pass the Persian Gulf War resolution in January 1991, after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, and he called for a "final victory" over Hussein. After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, Lieberman strongly backed Bush's call for a war against terrorism in Afghanistan. Later that year, he was one of 10 lawmakers who signed a letter urging Bush to target Iraq next.
The latest flap began after Lieberman traveled to Iraq last month. He returned to write a Nov. 29 Wall Street Journal column in which he contradicted a core Democratic criticism -- that the administration has no strategy for victory in Iraq. "Yes, we do," Lieberman wrote, brushing aside calls from Democrats and some Republicans for Bush to set a timetable for bringing troops home. "What a colossal mistake it would be for America's bipartisan political leadership to choose this moment in history to lose its will and, in the famous phrase, to seize defeat from the jaws of the coming victory," Lieberman wrote. Bush repeated the statement in a speech meant to bolster sagging public support for the war. Then, at a Tuesday news conference on Iraq, Lieberman gave his party a tongue-lashing for pressing Bush too forcefully. "History will judge us harshly if we do not stretch across the divide of distrust to join together to complete our mission successfully in Iraq," Lieberman said. "It's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be the commander in chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war, we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril." Many Democrats were appalled by Lieberman's comments, although few were willing to reprimand him publicly. "Senator Lieberman is past the point of being taken seriously in the caucus because everything he does is seen as advancing The liberal antiwar group MoveOn.org is weighing whether to back a challenger to Lieberman. MoveOn Washington director Tom Matzzie called Weicker "a very attractive candidate" but added that "the easiest way to take out Joe Lieberman would be in a Democratic primary." Weicker was a Republican when Lieberman ousted him from the Senate in 1988. Weicker is facing some pressure to enter the race as a Democrat but says he is not much happier with that party on Iraq. "The Democratic silence has been deafening on this for the past two years," Weicker said in an interview. "I have no more respect for them." But if Lieberman doesn't begin to distance himself from Bush's war policies, he said, "that's it -- we go to the mat." Lieberman said the backlash against him deepens a concern that he has harbored for much of his political career: the lack of civility in Washington. In war matters in particular, he said, "politics should stop at the water's edge."
| |||||
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #14 Pelosi's sound bite has a subject and verb, but gets lost in a tangle of clauses and weasel words. Just what is her point, anyway? |
| Posted by: mom 2005-12-10 22:55 |
| #13 Further polarizing puts the DNC even further from mainstream votes -- I hope Reid and Dean and their ilk keep spouting off for at least three more years. And I'll take Lieberman over sKerry, Gorey, or Hillary any day of the week for anything -- at least he's got a brain and a clue. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2005-12-10 15:46 |
| #12 And meanwhile, the Democratic National Committee is going ballistic over that "White Flag Democrats" ad the GOP released yesterday, and fortifying their anti-war stance. John Hinderaker over at powerlineblog shows an e-mail he got from the DNC... |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2005-12-10 12:31 |
| #11 " '...unfortunately he is at a different place on Iraq than the majority of the American people,' Reid said yesterday." Be careful on extrapolating on that one, Mr Reid. Americans do believe military action is sometimes necessary, even if they disagree with the Iraq War. Most Democrats seem committed to the notion that military action (violence) is never justified. Their parents and grandparents who won WWII with blood and pain must be mortified. |
| Posted by: jules 2 2005-12-10 12:21 |
| #10 In the ship's Apse sir? The what? I can't remember where, but I stumbled across the entire MP3 album set. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-12-10 11:45 |
| #9 from Firesign's Star Trip: "Cap'n, Cap'n, all the stars have gone out!" "You've pressed the view screen button, Lt. Uhuru." Later: "Cap'n, Cap'n, all the stars have gone out again!" "Lt. Uhuru, if you press that button again I'll have you ejected into hyperspace though the garbage chute." Later, as Capt. Quirk searches for his communicator, finds it missing and grabs for Lt. U's: "That's my box. Take your hands OFF MY BOX." And much much more .... heh |
| Posted by: lotp 2005-12-10 10:17 |
| #8 "There have even been rumors that Lieberman is being considered as a replacement for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld" NB: the only people passing those rumors around have been Democrats. They want to remove Rumsfeld and Lieberman, in order to weaken the president and, well, Lieberman. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-12-10 10:15 |
| #7 If you remember Firesign Theatre then you weren't really there, wink, wink. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2005-12-10 10:09 |
| #6 Nick Danger, Third Eye! /no, I'm not dating myself much... |
| Posted by: Raj 2005-12-10 09:55 |
| #5 Wow, someone else still remembers Firesign. |
| Posted by: Whiskey Mike 2005-12-10 08:48 |
| #4 "I believe that we have a responsibility to speak out if we think that the course of action that our country is on is not making the American people safer, making our military stronger and making the region more stable." Note the 'if' above in Nancy P.'s statement. She still doesn't know what she believes about the war in Iraq. No doubt she's gettting recalibrated by here DNC poll watchers. |
| Posted by: Thimble Slater4565 2005-12-10 06:51 |
| #3 Maybe Lieberman should form a new Democratic Party in an attempt to save the Democrats from drowning themselves in complete irrelevance. He could steal the old Firesign Theatre campaign slogan "Not Insane". |
| Posted by: SteveS 2005-12-10 01:13 |
| #2 Weicker has a lot of baggage and Connecticut has a long memory. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2005-12-10 00:51 |
| #1 "There have even been rumors that Lieberman is being considered as a replacement for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld" I was thinking this too, but he wouldn't leave his safe position. |
| Posted by: Jan 2005-12-10 00:46 |