Well, we should certainly have some laughs with this one. The Democratic Leadership Council's latest
New Dem Dispatch takes a few potshots at Kossacks, Democracy for America (and indirectly, Howard Dean and the DNC), and MoveOn for our efforts to unseat Joe Lieberman this fall:
This phenomenon is best illustrated by the nationally driven campaign to deny re-nomination to Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT), with MoveOn.org and Democracy for America (an organization founded by DNC chairman Howard Dean and now run by his brother, Jim) playing an especially active role in recruiting money and volunteers for the challenger, Ned Lamont.
Call me crazy, but my theory is, we're not denying re-nomination to Lieberman; we're forcing him to show us why he deserves re-nomination, something he hasn't had to do in years. (My people call it "the democratic process.") So far, Joe's come up short.
It gets better....
As it happens, we don't agree with Lieberman's views on Iraq in every particular, but we respect his point of view. It is especially odd that some liberal activists who are forever telling Democrats they should stand up for their principles without regard to polls and fashions are now determined to purge this senator for doing exactly that, as part of a divisive intra-party revisiting of the original war resolution. That's why Harry Reid said of Lieberman: "Very few people I've known in my lifetime are as principled and decent as Joe Lieberman. I don't agree on every position he takes, but he has an unquestionable commitment to the progressive principles that make our Party great."
Sen. Barbara Boxer of California, whose liberal credentials no one could doubt, has also endorsed Lieberman despite a strong difference of opinion over Iraq, saying: "We must focus on the vast number of differences we have with our Republican opponents. While you may not agree with Joe on everything, he is truly a leader on women's rights, the environment, education, health care and so many other issues that concern our families and define our party."
My favorite "leadership" action of Lieberman's has to be on women's rights, specifically that women should have the right to drive dozens of miles all over the state of Connecticut in search of emergency contraceptive after being refused it by God-fearin' hospitals "on principle." For further shining examples of Joe's leadership on those other issues, see KissJoeGoodbye.com (although being the liberal fundamentalists that we are, we no doubt sleep with a copy of them under our pillows.)
Sen. Barack Obama perfectly captured the dangers of liberal fundamentalism last fall, in a diary he posted on the DailyKos blog site, a hotbed of anti-Lieberman sentiment:
[T]o the degree that we brook no dissent within the Democratic Party, and demand fealty to the one, "true" progressive vision for the country, we risk the very thoughtfulness and openness to new ideas that are required to move this country forward. When we lash out at those who share our fundamental values because they have not met the criteria of every single item on our progressive "checklist," then we are essentially preventing them from thinking in new ways about problems. We are tying them up in a straightjacket and forcing them into a conversation only with the converted.
Beyond that, by applying such tests, we are hamstringing our ability to build a majority.
We couldn't agree more. A party with no room for Joe Lieberman -- or for that matter, such occasionally lonely dissenters on the left as Russ Feingold or Bernie Sanders -- is a party with no prospects for a majority. It's the worst possible time for Democrats to make that choice.
Gee, I guess the members of the DLC don't read DKos much, because if they did, they'd know we hold Senator Feingold and Rep. Sanders in high esteem, even though (and here's the shocking part) we may disagree with them on occasion.
I haven't decided yet if the opinion of this Dispatch amuses or angers me. A little of both, I think. In a few days I'll be writing my response to the DLC. In the meantime, though, I think I'll send another $10.01 to Ned Lamont, as well as point out something that is obvious to us liberfundies but not to the DLC: Protecting the Dem establishment is not a liberal value.
As for labeling those who fight to return the Democratic Party to its "true progressive vision" of equality, opportunity, and freedom for all Americans, I say fine. I will wear the label "Liberal Fundamentalist" with pride.