Since the last post is getting long, let's contrast the insider view via
David Gergen with the outsider view. Gergen makes good points, and is worth a read. This piece is from today's Hartford Courant and aimed at CT voters.
It's understandable that Connecticut Democrats are wondering whether to cast a protest vote against Joe Lieberman this Tuesday. With our world in a mess, all of us would feel better letting off a howl. But before taking frustrations out on the senator, voters should ask: Is this also best for the country?
Wrong question, and a bad start, David. Voters should ask if Joe is best for Connecticut. The trouble with DC insiders is that they think we exist for them instead of the other way around.
But if the Iraq vote were the only knock, the senator would be ahead going into this primary, as are other Democrats who also voted for the war. Unhappily, it isn't. One senses that much of the emotion directed against him in Connecticut goes beyond his war vote to what is now seen as an overly cozy relationship with an unpopular president. The senator is charged with deep disloyalty to the Democratic Party because he is too close to a Republican in the White House. That charge, if allowed to stand, will be highly destructive.
For much of the 20th century, the country applauded when leading members of the opposition party joined up with a president to forge a bipartisan front in time of danger. As World War II approached, Republicans Henry Stimson and Frank Knox joined Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt's Cabinet to serve as secretaries of war and the Navy. After John F. Kennedy was elected during the Cold War, leading Republicans took the helm at Defense, Treasury, the CIA and the National Security Council to help a Democratic president.
Without Les Aspin rounding up Democratic votes in the House and leaders such as Al Gore supporting him in the Senate, President George H.W. Bush could not have secured congressional approval for the first Gulf war. Working across the aisle, especially in time of national danger, is a time-honored tradition in America. Will Connecticut Democrats now throw it out?
David, if you want more comity, get rid of toxic Republicans like Santorum and Rove and then we can talk. George Bush is the most partisan president in modern history and ran his WH on a 50+1 strategery from the beginning. In decrying it, don't complain to Democrats about Democrats. And don't assume, as DC'ers do, that only your guy can do work across the aisle. In this environment, no one can.
Yes, I am biased in favor of my friend, but I also fear that if Joe Lieberman - a man, let's remember, who was the vice presidential nominee of his party only six years ago - is purged from national leadership, that would send a message rippling through both parties: that in our new politics, working too closely with leaders across the aisle can be political suicide. It's hard to believe that, despite all their frustration, that's what Connecticut Democrats really want to say.
You don't purge from the bottom. What happens from the bottom is called democracy. I respect sticking up for a friend, but suggesting anyone but Joe is 'extreme' (the title of the piece) is deliberately false. His replacement would be anything but an extremist. And until Congress changes, I don't want enablers representing me on Social Security and other issues that matter.
To help straighten David Gergen out, let's turn to the outsider view. These are Nutmeggers, CT voters. If Joe loses, here's why:
MERIDEN, Connecticut (Reuters) - Jocelyne Hudson-Brown says she no longer trusts Sen. Joseph Lieberman. John Reardon calls it a loss of confidence. Bob Walsh says Lieberman turned his back on his party.
For all three Connecticut Democrats, all one-time Lieberman supporters, the former vice presidential nominee's staunch advocacy of the Iraq war was the final straw that convinced them to back Lieberman's anti-war challenger Ned Lamont.
"I have no more confidence in Lieberman," said Reardon, an 83-year-old retired truck driver from Meriden. "He doesn't tell the truth. He goes to Iraq and says everything is great and I'm supposed to believe him? What am I, stupid?"
Said Hudson-Brown, a public relations adviser from New Haven: "The war in Iraq has changed everything. Lieberman was always with us before, we knew him and trusted him -- but not anymore."
Insiders speak up for Joe and DC, outsiders speak for themselves and their state. And I don't belittle Joe's 18 years in the Senate and his 30+ years as a good man. But in the end, all politics is local.
Update [2006-8-6 15:6:4 by DemFromCT]:: More
local coverage:
"But that's the problem with Joe," Ingallinera said, gesturing with his cane. "He doesn't listen."
Read it. Thnx, stilwell.