Abandoning Bipartisanship
Two years ago, Joe Lieberman campaigned throughout Connecticut in attempt to convince Democratic primary voters that he was the true Democrat in the race and that I was "Republican-lite". He promised significant American troop reductions by the end of 2006 - and just enough voters believed him in November 2006 to earn him re-election.
This evening, at the Republican National Convention, Senator Lieberman will likely reprise Ronald Reagan by claiming that he has not left the Democratic Party, but that it has left him. He will likely claim that the Democratic Party has abandoned the strong foreign policy tradition of Truman, Kennedy, and Clinton. He may even cherry-pick a phrase or two that he commonly lifts from Kennedy's inaugural address - framing Kennedy's famous call to "pay any price and bear any burden" as a call to arms.
But the call in John F. Kennedy's inaugural speech was clear, and resonates even louder today as the trumpet summons us again - not as a call to bear arms, not as a call to battle, but as a call to bear the burden in the long struggle against the common enemies of mankind - tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself.
Kennedy did not praise unilateral military excursions around the world, he praised the United Nations as "our last best hope in an age where the instruments of war have far outpaced the instruments of peace." Kennedy did not call for a military answer to every question, but for real statesmanship and leadership, warning that we must "never negotiate out of fear, but never fear to negotiate."
This is the Democratic tradition that Joe Lieberman is slamming the door on tonight. And this is the bipartisan foreign policy consensus that Lieberman, Bush, and McCain have all abandoned over the last eight years, with such disastrous consequences.
*
Joe Lieberman and George Bush and John McCain have deserted the core bipartisan principles of American foreign policy that every president from Truman to Kennedy to Reagan and Bush's father understood. Strong alliances, a strong military, and forceful diplomacy helped us to win the Cold War and will help us to subdue the rogue nations which harbor terrorists wishing to do us harm today.
Five years after the unfurling of the Mission Accomplished banner - five years and a trillion dollars and tens of thousands of dead and wounded later - our military is stretched to the breaking point and Iran is resurgent. Yet Joe Lieberman will likely claim tonight that the surge has been a huge success and that the decision to invade Iraq was the correct one.
Some months ago, under the cloak of darkness and unannounced, Dick Cheney donned his flak jacket and flew a Black Hawk helicopter into the Green Zone in Baghdad. After a short briefing, he slipped out the same way he came in, and announced from Jordan that the surge was a success.
About the same time, Iranian bad boy Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - richer than ever thanks to a tripling of oil prices - flew into Baghdad in the middle of the day and was literally welcomed with flowers and marching bands at the airport. Once there, he did not hunker down in the Green Zone, but was rather greeted by his new ally Iraqi Prime Minister Al Maliki and the Iraqi cabinet. At the first of four press conferences, he saluted the brotherly ties between Iran and Iraq, denounced America as Al Maliki stood by, and then enjoyed a peaceful rest in one of Saddam Hussein's palaces. Not one shot was fired or one IED exploded in Baghdad during his stay.
Yes, there is less violence in Iraq today, but the reasons are complex. Our troops have made a difference, the bad guys have moved on to Afghanistan, Iran has brokered a wait and see peace, and most importantly, the Iraqis themselves have stood up.
Now is the time for us to start standing down and let the Iraqis to take control of their own destiny. We need to stop giving their historical enemies, the Iranians, a pretext to make mischief in that region.
And now is the time for America to be itself again.
Two hundred and fifty years ago, Alexis de Tocqueville said that America is not good because it is great, but rather, it is great because it is good.
America the good represented a symbol of hope for peoples around the world who wrote constitutions and promoted democracy, who named their major boulevards after Roosevelt and Kennedy - to be like America.
We weren't greeted as liberators when we marched into Baghdad, but that is just how President Eisenhower was greeted on his first Presidential visit to Berlin. Tens of thousands roared when President Kennedy rallied the world with the words: "Ich Bin Ein Berliner." Tens of thousands more turned out to cheer when Ronald Reagan stood in the same place and said "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall," and soon saw the Berlin Wall come tumbling down without a shot being fired.
And last month, tens of thousands again turned out in Berlin as Barack Obama followed in the footsteps of Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Reagan.
That's how America starts winning again.
This week, as you hear John McCain and Joe Lieberman talk about their "bipartisanship," remember the bipartisan foreign policy tradition which they have cast aside with such disastrous consequences to our nation's reputation and security.
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
Senator Lieberman is a traitor to the democrats........period
Joe LIE berman has shown himself to be the traitor we have all suspected he was. His appearance
at the rebugglican convention(talk about a roach motel) is final confirmation that the DEMS need to cut ties with this wolf in sheeps clothing. Connecticut I know you can do better than this!
Mr. Lamont, wishing you better luck next time.
The Democratic Party didn't abandon Sen. Lieberman, he abandoned his sanity.
- a vet for Obama
You should have won Ned! Voters in CT let us down!
Trust me, many of us CT Voters were let down harder. Many Ct Republicans helped put Lieberman in office. Many Ct Dems believed Joe to be what he once was without question.
Let's try again, and see what happens...
Hi Ned: Tom Smith here , a faithful Veteran for Ned. I don't know if you remember that concession night speech-I brought some flowers for you and Anne. I have moved to Asheville NC and am very active in Vets for Obama-we have set up a GOTV table across from the VA hospital in Asheville (can't get on grounds to register VETERANS to vote!!).
I really appreciated your comments on Lieberman speaking at the Republican convention tonight. What a loser. Anyway my best to you and Anne and family. Hope your Dad is doing fine too. Please keep in touch.
Hoa Binh
Tom Smith
By Lieberman siding and joining Bush/Cheney/McCain he's also abandoned any hint of fiscal responsibility.
My older brother had the chance to vote for you, Mr Lamont, and he stubbornly voted for Lieberman. I tried for weeks to change his mind, but he was so pigheaded he refused to even listen. He's always been that way!
So, admittedly a bit immaturely, I returned the gift I'd bought my brother for Christmas, and donated the money to your campaign instead. I then gifted my brother a subscription to Mother Jones instead. Mostly just to support Mother Jones and annoy my brother -- but, I'm gleefully reporting that my nephew has renewed the subscription faithfully, and now he's turning 18 just in time to vote this year.
So I thank you for inspiring that!
Does anyone seriously believe that all of the assembled Republicans who cheered Joe L tonight (even gave a slightly muffled cheer at Lieberman's odd positive mention of Bill Clinton) will leave St Paul and sit down with the Democrats and sing Kumbaya together?
Because if you do, I've got some swampland in McCain's home state to sell you. They put up a good game with their "Country First" theme, but they are going to leave St Paul and become partisans for their cause and positions and platform once again. Is that bad (George Washington's advice about political parties, which was dispensed with immediately after he left office, to the contrary)? No. But just don't sell yourself as something you're not.
Mr. Lieberman, the Democratic Party did not abandon you, you fled defeated. You departed because you embraced the Unitary President, Wars of Aggression, Torture, and Domestic Spying Without Warrant. These aren't Democratic values. They aren't American values. So long Joe.
Nope......you missed the boat on the message. What he did, however, was establish the Republicans as the true reform ticket for this year.
Lieberman's speech didn't bash the Dems. It bashed the partisanship block on solving our problems.
Another chicken for Colonel Sanders
WHAT???????
Just finished watching Joe beseech "fellow Democrats" to vote for McCain. I feel a little sick.
Ned, I live in FFld and will work hard on your campaign should you choose to run in '12.
Joe Lieberman does have a bipartisan foreign policy. It's just that it's Republican-AIPAC, not Republican-Democrat.
The words of a jilted opponent?
Bipartisanship is impossible. Don't criticize Republicans for abandoning it, because Democrats do it too. Look at HuffPo bloggers.
The Democratic party has indeed abandoned abandoned the proper path of foreign policy. They confuse "diplomacy" with "kowtow" and would genuflect before anyone who told them no, if it meant the world and Europe held them in higher regard. Real diplomats are unafraid to bare their teeth. America was a nation borne of force and wielding force and that is how it succeeded. England failed in WWII with Chamberlain's mistake of appeasement; now the liberals are making the same mistake (and Obama, slave to opinion, even if it's someone who doesn't matter, will follow it).
Negotiations only work if there is something the mutual side wants, and here, it's not the case. Iran wants to be a nuclear power. You don't trust a pyro with matches just because they're not lit. Iran denies the Holocaust, we don't. They don't appreciate our secular culture, we don't like their religious one. And Obama has an abject lack of diplomatic experience to turn the disadvantages around.
When it comes down to it, Bush and Obama are not much different. The real difference is his blackness, his prettiness, and that he says whatever people want him to say.
You rant about Iran, but the Republican running the country's "Strategy" has just about negated any military threat we might have had over Iran. How are we supposed to show Iran a Military stick, when we are stretched so thin, as to represent no threat? That and we now have many American troops within easy striking range that will make tempting easy targets should we make a move on Iran. The war in Iraq has severely limited our ability to exert force. Power and force have to be used intelligently, not with no thought as Bush has done. Bush did the one thing that most emboldened Iran by removing it's number one enemy Iraq. Brilliant strategy isn't it?
War is not solely about troops. This is a basic truth that even amateur tacticians know. There are other methods of waging battle, not to mention other weapons. There are always options on the table, even if they are not well-liked. The situation is not ideal, but it is not bleak. America is trying to run a war on the good guy post with a "splendid little war" when people in war don't really care about playing nice. If America simply refused to play nice, this war would be over rather quickly.
As far as things stand, America has nothing to gain from hostile action in Iran. However, that doesn't mean hostile action is off the table. "Striking distance" doesn't mean a whole lot when even missiles in the 60's could strike Nebraska from Siberia.
As for Iraq, that is hardly Iran's enemy, nor was it an enemy to really worry about. Iran is polemic even in the Arabic world. Iraq only had proximity as a factor. Which is odd, considering there are a couple nuclear powers beside Iran, and those nations aren't on friendliest terms.
Former Republican John Dean documents Republicans nearly achieved one party rule during Gingrich/Delay's reign of power. Republican partisanship was unprecedented, passing legislation without opposition input and not permitting opposition see legislation until it was passed. Democrats never practiced that level of partisanship when they controlled the House by huge margins.
Negotiation works when parties talk because common ground is often unclear without talking. Under Republicans, bipartisan negotiations never occurred and GOP foreign policy consisted of American overreaction. Even when two parties disagree and seem incapable of resolving differences (the Cold War) negotiations kept us from destroying ourselves. America's position towards Iran has a problem in that it doesn't accept that Iran has a position. That's what makes negotiations impossible under Bush. Iranian leadership is almost as intransigent but then there are no Iranian forces in Canada/Mexico while we have Iran surrounded.
There's a difference between Bush/Obama. Intellectually vacuous Bush is Cheney's sock puppet and Cheney has 30+ years of poor judgement on virtually every issue he's considered. Obama may be many things but he isn't vacuous.
Americans love criticizing Chamberlain but we don't understand 1938 European attitudes. WWI cost Europe more than 40 million causalities including 20 million dead; reasonably, they preferred avoiding a repeat. Hitler knew this and exploited it. Americans have never experienced such horror but 9/11 and 3000 deaths suggests a reaction: We blissfully gave up our individual rights to the first strongman to promise to protect us.
I find it very interesting that not ONE CT voter, who supposedly voted for the rat LIE berman )as an independent), has responded to the calls from the commenters here to come forward & explain, apologize, or defend their vote for LIEbrman in '06. I'm thinking that, since LIEbrman switched to Indy, all his rePUCK buddies voted indy & got him the win THAT way. Face it, NO self-respecting Dem. would've fallen for his BS and elected him as an Indy after they defeated him as a Dem. CT Dem's, I'll forego judgement...until the NEXT time LIEbrman's up for re-election. We got our EYES on you!
Ned,
Nice article. I voted for you in 2006 and would do it again.
A disenchanted Jewish middle age male.
Obama/Biden
And Ned, you know me. I'm same as this commenter.. Thanks. Great piece.
Jim Fine
Westport
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
