One question for Joe Lieberman

Nearly everyday, Joe Lieberman is bombarded from the left with vitriol and from the right with praise. However, for all of his press coverage, no one has had the guts to ask him the question that gets to the heart of it all: Is there a war against Muslims that you do not support?

 
  September 11th, 2001 was the saving grace for the not only the Bush Administration, but the necon movement as we know it. Prior to the attacks, George Bush was well on his way to being a one term, forgettable fop. Much like his minority-elected predecessors, John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes, and Benjamin Harrison, he was destined for the dustbin of history. In an instant, he and the neocons, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, et. al were converted into not only heroes, but relevant policymakers.  Striding arrogantly out of the smoldering remains and into the forefront of jingoism came recently deposed VP-to be Joe Lieberman.

  The selection of Lieberman for the VP spot baffled most longtime Democrats from the beginning. Many understood that Gore wanted to distance himself from the sexual indiscretions of Bill Clinton, however, Lieberman's backstabbing of his party's titular head on the brink of an illicit impeachment hardly seemed to qualify him for the number two slot. In the election, he managed, almost miraculously, to humanize the living demon, Dick Cheney, while adding nothing electorally, ie. Connecticut was never "in play." Within weeks of Bush's coronation by the Supreme Court, Lieberman was shoulder to shoulder with the Boy King touting his "Faith Based Initiative." Something was certainly rotten in the State of Denmark.

  On the heels of that and many other forays into his brand of "bipartisanship", came the Case against Saddam.  Early on, even the most casual observer knew that the evidence against Saddam and Iraq was paper thin at best. However, this did not stop "Fightin'" Joe Lieberman from leading the charge into battle, albeit from his desk and podium in the secure confines of his nation's capitol. Even as the war spiraled hopelessly out of control, Lieberman threw his hat into the ring to be the presidential nominee of the "opposition" party, while playing head cheerleader to the wanna be Quarterback-in-Chief.

   Without rehashing all of the events of the last election cycle, we are left today with a Democratic majority in the Senate held ransom captive by Joe Lieberman. Despite not being elected as a Democrat, he has been allowed to maintain his seniority and even his committee chairmanship. How has the majority been rewarded? With unprovoked attacks and endorsements of opposition candidates.  Now, along with John McCain, Lieberman stands as the leading congressional mouthpiece for the Iraq quagmire and the Keith Moon of the war drums beating against Iran.  

   Taking all of the events of the last seven years into mind, Lieberman must be confronted with a serious question. Is there a war against a Muslim nation that he is against? Furthermore, he and the necons claim that America's security is their primary concern, however that seems dubious at best. The only country that they really seem to care about is Israel. Some of them, like Lieberman, are obvious Zionists, others, like Tom Delay and the extreme evangelicals, have apocalyptic visions of the need for a Jewish state to be judged by the risen Christ.  Either way, American security is the least of their priorities.  In the current socio-political climate, we hardly need extremists like Lieberman being the counterpoint to extremists like Bin Ladin.

  Here is my suggestion: immediately remove Lieberman from the Democratic caucus. I realize that if he joins with the Republicans, it will cost us the majority; however, it will send a powerful message.  That message being that the Democratic Party stands for a measured and reasoned approach to foreign policy and for being a fair broker in the Middle East.