An Open Letter To Joe Lieberman
Dear Senator Lieberman,
Congratulations! You got away with it! So despite having supported and endorsed the Republican candidate for president -- and going so far as to question the patriotism of the Democratic nominee -- you've managed to keep your chairmanship. By rights, you should've been summarily ejector-seated from your committees, bonked on the head with your gavels -- cartoon-style -- and hauled from the Democratic caucus naked and on a rail whilst being pelted with wadded-up copies of your RNC address.
The aforementioned reasons for this still-lenient serving of justice fails to include the syllabus of other trespasses against you, including, first and foremost, your unwavering support for the Bush administration's unforgivable foreign policy -- a policy which has all but bankrupted our treasury and besmirched America's reputation abroad. Heckuva job, Senator!
One might be inclined to consider your conduct to date as somehow principled -- even mavericky, had it not been so transparently self-serving. Your behavior has been that of a man guided by nothing more than petty vengeance and retribution -- attention-starved opportunism not unlike grade-school instigators and gossip-mongers whose only path to relevance is to play two friends against each other. Worming your way from side to side depending on which kid or clique likes you more.
Now, I completely understand the political reasons for why President-elect Obama and the caucus ultimately chose to keep you around. Unfortunately, the Democrats need your stinky vote -- such as it is -- in order to theoretically break any future Republican filibusters. And there will be many of those to be sure. However, the closer we get to 60 votes in the caucus the better our chances of reversing the craptastical policies and legislation of your favorite Bush administration and the formerly Republican Congress.
Sure, there's no guarantee that you'll vote with the caucus, but you made it clear that you would have pitched a spasmodic, petulant fit and changed your affiliation to the Republican Party from the "Lieberman Loves Lieberman" party or whatever the hell it's called, had you been stripped of your chairmanship. Consequently, the Democratic caucus would've definitely lost your vote. It's an unenviable "possibly" versus "definitely" proposition. And with the caucus being this close to 60 against what will surely be an obstructionist Republican caucus, we have no other choice but to roll the dice with "possibly."
That is until 2010 when the Democrats will hopefully attain enough members, and thus votes, that they won't need your support anymore. Then you can storm off and mind-screw the Republicans for a couple of years until -- and it's probably not good strategy to tip our hand like this, but you know it's coming -- until you lose in 2012.
Nevertheless, you got what you wanted yesterday. Circumstances allowed you to keep your chairmanship irrespective of your weasely and contemptible maneuvering. And more than a few of us on the left actually agree with you for once: you managed to abscond off without adequate punishment.
You got away with it, despite those meddling kids, right?
Not so fast.
I submit to you, Senator Lieberman, that you were punished yesterday more than you realize. Stick with me on this. I'll explain.
I've been a supporter of the president-elect for the better part of a year now, and while I've always recognized a deep intellectualism and multilayered thoughtfulness in the man, it never fully occurred to me how he would use these strengths in a position of leadership. Until this week.
In sharp contrast to your behavior, President-elect Obama hasn't shown any predilection for pettiness or disloyalty, nor has he undermined his allies for the sake of political expedience. He's proved himself to be a man of great character. Of values. I don't need to remind anyone how he stood by Jeremiah Wright, for example, and at his own political peril when most would've tossed him overboard like political chum.
You, on the other hand, have shown an unapologetic contempt for the party that once nominated you for the vice presidency -- the party that welcomed you back to the fold even though you slipped through the system and defeated the fairly elected Democratic nominee, Ned Lamont, in 2006. You've betrayed your fellow liberals to settle a political score, Senator -- in order to exact some kind of ignoble payback against your former party, against your caucus and against the netroots for merely calling you out on your literal and figurative smooching of the president.
This is behavior President-elect Obama doesn't appear to be capable of. Because he's clearly better than you. In fact, it's not difficult to hypothesize that had you possessed a fraction of his political instincts or any small measure of his morality, you would absolutely not be in this position, Senator.
See, by allowing you to keep your precious chairmanship -- by letting you off the hook -- President-elect Obama, through his political bigness, punished you without punishing you. He beat you yesterday, Senator. He beat you because he let you be you, and underscored it with his demonstrably better angels and strength of character.
In the final analysis, the hard reality is that by not choosing retribution, he made you look...
...small.
And that, Senator, is good enough for me.
Cheers!
Bob Cesca
The Huffington Post
BobCesca.com
Order my new book: One Nation Under Fear, with a foreword by Arianna Huffington. Also available in stores.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Thats why I call him, SHAMELESS, REMORSELESS JOE 2 FACE!
Guess this means that reaching across the isle is just a slogan. You must believe that either party loyalty is a sacred obligation or the thought of speaking ill of Obama is treasonous. By your reasoning no Republican or Democrat should ever go against their own party to support a plan or candidate who they believe is best for the country. I am not saying that McCain was better. But by your logic one party member should never support an idea or person not of their party. Really dumb.
As a Democrat, but also a loyal American, I can accept the idea of a highly principled statesman following his conscience if he truly believes that the opposing party’s candidate is a better candidate. What I cannot accept though, is such a man then resorting to out & out LIES to slander his own party’s candidate.
Joe dared to parrot the GOP’s twisted lie that Obama had voted to withhold funds from our troops. Joe is a Senator --- he was there in the Senate. He knew the TRUTH about all the votes that Obama & McCain had made on the various war bills. He KNEW how many times McCain voted against both war and veteran funding.
When asked if Obama was a Muslim? Joe responded that was a good question! What in heaven’s name did that mean! As a Jew hasn’t Joe been exposed to the harm of religious prejudice and fear?Why didn't Joe show some personal courage and ask the question only Collin Powell dared to ask?
Some issues are matters of opinion or judgment. Such are valid and fair game. FACTS, however, are NOT distorted by a highly principled man. Joe Liebermann, a man once held in high regard by this nation, is now just another sorry example of how personal pettiness & ambition can destroy a man’s character & reputation. This week his smugness and obvious lack of remorse were just the last shreds of decency dropping like a snake’s shedding skin from the face of
So true Bob. He showed how big he can be. He NEVER told that he will avenge anything, that is not his style.
This goes to show that no matter what Obama does in the next 4 to 8 years, people like Bob Cesca will always find a way to give it a good spin. I expect we'll see more of that in that coming years.
Hah, hah.
Fact is, Lieberman outmaneuvered Reid. Again.
Obama read the tea leaves and thought better to woo Lieberman toward the gang of 60 than the gang of 40. Plus,it gave Reid, also a vote-counter, air cover.
kinda like o'reilly and hannity. no matter what obama does, they try to spin it a negative way. did you know that stock market crisis (that has been brewing for years) is Obama's fault according to Hannity. and o'reilly is spinning the tale that the dems are going to reinstitute the fairness doctrine so that (gasp) Rush may be taken off the air!!!
Neither of which are true.
What is true, Obama is the bigger man than Lieberman. Lieberman did not just come and say, "here are the many wonderful reasons why I support John MccCain" (which is what Colin Powerll did in endorsing obama), nooooo, Joe had to trash the dem candidate. He didn't have to do that. He could have supported McCain in an honorable way.
Not only did JL trash Obama--but implied he is a *commy.* That goes beyond the pale......
Great article. Too bad we don't have the British system of "no cofidence" votes to foist the likes of Lieberman, Bush, Cheney, et al out of office when they have proven so detrimental to their country and state constituencies. Is there not something to explore in the realm of Homeland Security legislation regarding insurance swindles and/or inadequacies (vis Katrina,and Ike), considering that the chairman of that committee's wife, Mrs. Lieberman, is a lobbyist for the insurance industry?
Barack and the Dems own Joe, now. He is in servitude to the Senate Democratic majority. He is on their short and tight leash. He cannot vote against soon-to-be President Obama and the Senate leadership on any thing important because if he does his chair position will be yanked in a flash, and he knows it.
So what, the little man will just join the repugs where he belongs anyway. where is the big threat/punishment of that?
The Godfather said " Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer." How better to insure that all of his actions are very visible and so that he can be watched every minute.
Hey Joe,
I really hope you turn- coat again in 2012 and buddy up with Palin for a run for the Whitehouse !!!
He was a traitor to Obama, and I hope they vote him out in the next election. It is sad that he wasn't condemned because they will need his vote in the future, but can he be trusted to stick with the dems when they need him? I respect Obama for his forgiving spirit; I just hope he won't be sorry for turning the other cheek.
I wouldn't say forgiven, just not punished..
Why is it that Liberals here always appear to be so negative? Joe Lieberman is a decent man who has given much of himself to the American people and has always been a man of honor who does the best he can for what he believes is right and just!
MRCOMMONSENSE,
If you think calling someone a "liberal" everytime they question an act that you disagree
with is using ;"COMMONSENSE" than I'll stick to identifying myself as conservative.
A commonsense person doesn't belittle others to get their point across,nor do they past
judgement on anothers opinion,we except that others are different with different opinions
so we listen and try and find some common ground,realizing none of us are right all the time.
GROW UP,THEN YOU'LL HAVE THE RIGHT TO CALL YOURSELF COMMONSENSE.
And that "best" is falsely accusing a presidential candidate of being unpatriotic? The dems made a deal with him to speak at RNC. He promised that he would talk about McCain. Instead, he lied about Obama, when along with the bullshit express and broke his word. How does that equal honor? I am a card carrying certified liberal (note the small l). I didn't agree with his participation, but would have respected his right to speak for out for a fellow senator and honor him. He broke his word. By participating in the hate fest at the RNC and not recognizing it for what it was, he lost whatever honor he had. As much as I hate what happened to Gore in 2000, I guess the only consolation prize is that Lieberman did not get to be VP.
(the tiniest sliver of good from the 2000 election/selection process for sure ..No Lieberman as VP or presumptive heir apparent after Gore...!! He never should have been on the Gore ticket..th
Let me ask you one simple question MrCommonSense. If the case were to be reversed, would the then Pres.elect republican welcome a betrayed republican senator who moved into the democratic fold? I don't think so. He would have been thrown under the bus at the first instance. So you have got to put on your thinking cap before criticising the liberals. It just shows Pres.elect Obama's bigness.
I enjoyed this letter Bob, you still are just so very kind to Joe the Schmoe Lieberman !!!
This guy is like Bush he is a Poison on America !!!!
MrCommonSense,
What fantasy realm do you occupy? Why are Liberals so negative. Hmmmmm . Let me seee. Could it be that we have had to live in a world full of snakes who are continually doing their best to poison it.
As usual, Mr. Cesca, very astute analysis. Sometimes you just have to hold your nose and do the deed you would rather not do in order to make the gains you need. I have no doubt Mr. Lieberman will not be able to fool the constituents in Connecticut a second time. We just have to put up with him four more years. Hopefully, he will be a non-issue after the next elections in '10 and we have the filibuster proof majority we need without him. I say, good riddance to him and his weasely self serving attitude.
One statement I've made through this Presidential campaign:
"I don't want a President I can have a beer with; I want a President who can beat me at chess."
Looking at this Lieberman issue, I'm thinking "Why did he put his bishop THERE?"
Also, is my timetable off, or did Obama resign from the Senate just before the Lieberman vote, and therefore did not have to vote either way?
I want a President that I CAN have a beer with and one who can beat you at chess. (I don't have the patience for chess) I want an intelligent President who looks beyond his circle of advisors to see what is really happening in the world. Michelle will keep Barack grounded which help him make the right choices.
"I want a President that I CAN have a beer with..."
This is arguably THE primary problem with American politics: the supremacy of manufactured image over substance. Hence, so many inexperienced incompetents and become politicians.
I suppose that's why THE primary intellectual qualifications for modern American President are: height 5'11+, no facial hair, not fat, not bald and not too ugly. I guess FDRs and Kuciniches of the world need not apply.
Obama resigned before the senate vote on Leiberman's case.
Yes, but he did this on purpose: this way, HE did not decide about the chairmanships - it came from the caucus.
Democrats should be grateful to Lieberman for getting his loser stink, his 'joementum', all over John McCain. He only helped us win the election.
Is that why Lieberman is the Senator from, what is it, Conneticut and not Ned Lamont? What amazes me is that peoplel are treating the Clintons with much less respect than Lieberman and they haven't done to the party one tenth the damage Lieberman did.
May I remind all of you, pro and con, that Lieberman has to toe the line or he can still be voted out of his chairmanships? More than one Democratic senator pointed this out prior to the caucus that let him keep them for the time being. With the sword of Damocles hanging over his head, he will probably be astute enough not to jeopardize his much prized power. That fact, in itself, is a triumph of sorts over the (expletive deleted). He can gloat all he wants, but it's a hollow victory for him.
Exactly! If Joe Lieberman shafts the Dems in a filibuster battle, giving them 59 votes for cloture when they need 60, I expect the Democratic Caucus to call an emergency meeting to strip him of his chairmanship and THEN chuck him out of the Caucus!
Let Lieberman run as REPUBLICAN in 2012 for re-election.
When you change parties, you have to make a complete change. Even then you'll probably never be fully trusted, but this back and forth leap-frogging, just for power and influence? I don't remember a senator ever doing this before.
Zell Miller
AMEN! Spot on, Bob!
The adage is old and worn, but what comes around goes around... I have no doubt LIEberman will get his due. Wonder if he'd have any noticeable reaction if he actually read this column and the responses.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
