At one point early in the debate last night Joe Lieberman turned to Ned Lamont and began to say, "Why don't you have the courage and honesty.." It doesn't matter what the rest of the question was. That line and those two words said it all for me: "courage" and "honesty."
Courage? It is Ned Lamont who has displayed the courage to stand up and fight to end this disastrous war in Iraq that Lieberman and Bush have got us into. Ned Lamont didn't have to take up this challenge. He runs a successful business, and he could have sat this out. But he displayed the courage to take on Lieberman and Bush and the whole right-wing attack machine, all to help put an end to this miserable, bloody mistake of a war. It is Joe Lieberman who doesn't have the courage to admit that the adventure in Iraq is a dismal failure fought for a lie.
Courage? Isn't it ironic that when Lieberman and Bush and Chris Shays and Dick Cheney were asked by their country to show courage by joining the military during the Vietnam War, they all found something better to do. Now, however, they display easy bravado by sending other parent's children off to be killed and maimed in Iraq, while their children are safe and sound here at home.
Honesty? I went back to Greenwich Library and looked up all of Lieberman's references to Lamont's cutting the library and education budget while in Greenwich town government. Lies all. Honesty? Please!
Honesty? How is Joe Lieberman being honest by making an issue out of Lamont's wealth? Lieberman never uttered a peep of discontent about those other Greenwich, Connecticut millionaires- George H.W. and George W. Bush. He's never complained about Ted Kennedy's wealth, or Mark Dayton's wealth, or John Corzine's wealth- all Democratic colleagues in the Senate. He never denigrated the contributions to our nation of John F. Kennedy or Robert F. Kennedy because they came from a family of privilege. Honesty? Did Lieberman ever raise the issue of Dick Cheney's considerable wealth when he debated him in the vice presidential debate? Of course not. It was a non-issue for Lieberman.
Honesty? What is honest about professing to be a life-long Democrat, but then relying on Republican votes to send you back to the Senate? What is honest about saying you're a loyal Democrat, but giving the back of your hand to loyal Democratic voters who show up to cast their ballots in the party's primary?
Last night we saw that after eighteen years in the Senate Joe Lieberman is a morally bankrupt hypocrite who only musters the will to fight when he is attacking a fellow Democrat. But last night Lieberman didn't just attack Ned Lamont; he attacked every Democrat in this state who is fed up with Lieberman's support for George Bush, for right-wing judges, and for the Iraq War.
Now it's personal.