Jonah Goldberg and the last of the Democratic hawks

Jonah Goldberg wrote an op-ed yesterday about Joe Lieberman's departure from the Democratic party.

The theme is a good old Goldberg favorite:

But let's be clear: Lieberman fascinates political junkies because he's an outlier, like an albino rhino or the last of the Mohicans. And his loss doesn't usher in a new reality so much as confirm the familiar one.

And the familiar reality, of course, is that Democrats are all namby-pamby McGovernite pacifist babies ...

As for Lieberman's hawkishness, it seemed anachronistic -- and just plain odd. He supported Bush on the war more forcefully than many Republicans, justifying his refusal to criticize the president on grounds that politics should stop at the water's edge, particularly during a war. That's sweet, but rumors that such restraint is a respected American political tradition are greatly exaggerated. It was a lack of such restraint by Sen. George McGovern that created the latter-day Democratic Party, from which Lieberman sticks out, sore-thumb-like, today.

The following is my response, which was published in today's Miami Herald.  For the first time, they didn't chop the hell out of my letter, only fixing a couple of minor grammatical things.  

Jonah Goldberg's column on Joe Lieberman's estrangement from the Democratic Party depends upon a flawed definition of ''hawk'' (The last hawkish Democrat leaves the building, Other Views, Aug. 14).

Goldberg's hawks must unquestioningly support a war that serves no strategic purpose and that is harming the nation's long-term security and prosperity. His hawks must unquestioningly support a president who takes advantage of a threat to national security to bring unprecedented power to the executive branch. I'm more than a little pleased to see the last hawk of that ilk leave the building.

But there are plenty of Democratic hawks left. Men and women who served in our armed forces long and well. Men and women who understand and support the use of military force when it is necessary, but who also understand the profound obligation to be sure of that need, to fully support that effort and to know what the whole plan is through to the end game.

These men and women are dedicated to real security and prosperity for this nation, not just jingoism and hollow slogans backed up by massive deficits, stop-loss orders and body bags sneaked in the back door.

JAN ROOTH, North Miami Beach

•  People do read the LTEs

  What the hell ... every little bit helps.

  by jrooth on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 04:33:57 AM PDT

  •  Excellent letter,

    and it is true that people do read LTEs. I do.

    The Dems need to counter the Lieberman, Goldberg, Rove, neocon meme that the Dem party's grassroots base consists of fringe crazies by getting the message out that it is the GOP (and its enablers like Lieberman) which has become the crazoid fringe party. 60% of the electorate are not with them and their extremist, destructive, divisive agenda; they are with us.

    by revbludge on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 04:59:43 AM PDT

    •  This one got good placement

      in the hardcopy paper.  Top left corner of the feedback sction, just to the right of the lead editorial.  So I think it has a good chance of being seen by most.

      I was real pleased that they didn't chop anything out.  They're usually pretty bad about that.  But I think I was a little punchier than I usually manage to be.

      by jrooth on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 05:06:17 AM PDT

  •  Simply Excellent

    I concur.

    Congratulations for clarity and for taking the time to set that pompous prick straight.

    by kidneystones on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 05:48:34 AM PDT

  •  Great job

    jrooth!

    by Parker Lewis Cant Lose on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 06:41:29 AM PDT

•  He's the Last of the Mohicans alright.

  A crappy novel written by someone who had zero clue about reality. Read Mark Twain's critique of James Fennimore Cooper here. It's a classic.

  That said, Goldberg the Hack perfectly encapsulates the psychic trauma the Right feels at the implosion of their favorite muppet. Lieberman's near constant shilling for the crazies in the GOP will be missed by fools like Goldberg who find themselves without their figleaf and their shortcomings visible for all the world to see.

  by Splicer on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 04:46:02 AM PDT

•  well, I'm sure glad the SOB is gone!

  From the moment I saw him cozy up to Cheney in the Vice Presidential demates, I knew this one was no leader for me. Yes I voted for Gore/Lieb but I could tell they were going to lose when I saw that disgrace. Cheney won that one because he knew how to fight--Liberman lost because he was too anxious to get along.  This is definetly a "go along" person.
  WWe need some new faces and ideas in the Democratic Prty, Liebrmans smiling yes-man face doesn't do it.
  And what he's doing to the Democratic Party now shows what a weasel he is and always was.
  When the Republicans want a Democrat elected this bad, its someone I want kicked out of the party

  by exlrrp on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 05:36:05 AM PDT

•  from one ltte writer to another

  thanks for speaking out. If your paper carries Robert (Traitor) Novak, how about taking a bite out of his latest execrable defense-of-Lieberman column.

  by elouise on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 06:08:42 AM PDT

  •  Have to let a little time pass

    between letters.  The Herald won't publish two letters by the same person very close together in my experience.

    I'll take a look over at the Sun-Sentinel and see if they carry that column, in which case it would be worth giving it a shot over there.

    by jrooth on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 06:26:01 AM PDT

•  Not that it needs to be said AGAIN

  Or maybe it does. But there is zero correlation between one's view on the Iraq war, and one's "hawkishness". Jim Webb, Wesley Clark and John Murtha are just a few good examples.

  And by the way, in what bizarro world does supporting an endeavor that actually weakens our military, weakens our security and weakens our position in the world, translate to being a hawk or being tough on national defense? Isn't that like, the exact opposite?

  by Parker Lewis Cant Lose on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 06:40:35 AM PDT

  •  I thought about listing names

    but decided that either the list would get too long or I'd be leaving too many important people out.

    That's why I went with the "men and women" formulation.

    by jrooth on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 06:46:18 AM PDT

    •  Hey jrooth

      I know this is kind of a side issue, but how much does it irk you that the people who are always going on about this stuff are little twerps like Jonah freaking Goldberg? The guy probably sleeps with a nightlight.

      by Parker Lewis Cant Lose on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 06:53:28 AM PDT

      •  101st Fighting Keyboardists

        He's a charter member.

        by jrooth on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 07:00:30 AM PDT

•  Jonah Goldberg...

  ....is a crazed, psychotic, bloodthirsty coward. But we knew that already.

  by metal prophet on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 08:20:58 AM PDT