When Kos talked about Marshall Whitmann's pure comedy gold the other day, I was interested to see what he wrote. Turns out it was both humorous (from one point) and just plain insulting in another. When Whitmann calls Ned "Limousine Liberal Lamont," I wanted to throw something at him. How dismissive can you be of someone?
So, I decided to write him with a little bit of snark and my usual civility when I engage those I have distaste for. My letter is after the jump.
To: BullMooseBlog@gmail.com
Subject: "Swiftboating of Joe"
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 1:26 AM
Dear Marshall,
As is my custom, I shall try to be civil when engaging in discourse with those I disagree with. I suppose this will sit well with you, since you have a problem with all those "angry left bloggers."
Once upon a time, I linked to you from my blog, and would read you fairly regularly and agree with you from time to time. This stopped several months back, as you've shown an increasing detachment from reality. Upon looking into your background, and seeing that before McCain, you worked for the establishment religious right, well, that answered a lot right there.
Joe Lieberman is not being swiftboated. He is not a veteran, has not served in combat, and so the term is wrong to use in the first place. Secondly, Ned Lamont is not some limousine liberal coming in to serve the liberal blogosphere. He's running on principle, something that Joe has shown himself to be without these past few years.
The reason so many of us (and I'm pretty moderate, btw) are anti-Lieberman has nothing to do with the war, but rather with the way he treats the Democratic Party. He rushed to the Senate floor to denounce Bill Clinton during the start of the Lewinsky affair. He repeatedly undercut his party in the Senate to work deals with Republicans. He voted for Alito and Bolton. He has refused to stand up to the President, his fealty to him so complete that they've exchanged a rather famous kiss on national television, and he made a comment that will go down in the annals of history as one of the low points of political discourse.
Remember this: "It is time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be Commander-in-Chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war, we undermine Presidential credibility at our nation's peril."? Senator Lieberman fails to acknowledge the rather obvious issue, that our credibility is already shot because of this president, and also that to criticize is not to undermine, but rather to force changes to failed policy.
Geopolitical issues and war are not follow the leader issues. They are not black and white, as our president so famously claims, but instead they are shades of gray. Robert McNamara speaks of this in his retrospectives on Vietnam, and many others have commented much the same throughout the course of history. Right now, in fact, the entire Middle East is a palette of grays, something that the Bush 41 administration, that the Clinton administration, that many other previous administrations understood. This adminstration is so ideologically pure and so loath to admit mistake that we are mired in an impending disaster. These traits are shared by the senator from Connecticut, and they are not favorable ones either.
Michael Wade of Time magazine, who has spent so much embedded time with the military in Iraq, wrote of his utter surprise and dismay at the rosy comments of Senator Lieberman, who viewed Iraq through the prism of the Bush filter. He showed an astonishing lack of knowledge about the realities on the ground, and has yet to stake out a position that demonstrates any lucidity. And no, Marshall, stay the course is not a position.
Finally, and this is very important, Ned Lamont pledges to support Joe if Joe wins the primary. Joe has refused to extend the same courtesy. Instead, he believes he is so entitled to his seat that he's going to run as an independent if he loses. He even flirted with the Republican ticket. In short, he has done an awful lot to insult the intelligence of Democrats, both locally in Connecticut and nationwide, and THAT, Mr. Wittman, is why Ned Lamont is running, and why the left is so furious with Senator Lieberman. It's not Iraq, it's EVERYTHING.
Sincerely,
Thad Zajac
Los Angeles, CA
P.S. If you're going to talk about swiftboating, why don't you look into the Murtha situation?
And the one thing I forgot to say is that Lieberman and so many others were perfectly happy to undermine Clinton's authority then when he was trying to go after al-Qaida, and then again when he decided to attack Iraq in December 1998, so those sorts of statements are the worst sort of hypocrisy. The Congress repeatedly undercut the authority of one of our smartest, ablest presidents in recent memory, and then roll over and play dead for the biggest dumbass to hold the office since Warren Harding.
We need to challenge these people, regardless of party. This isn't about purity of party, it's simply about being honest, having principles, standing up for them, and doing the job they were elected to do. Basically, Lieberman has spent the past six years reneging on his contract from the people of Connecticut, and who's fault is that?