The Lieberman Fallout

One of the reasons I vote Democratic is because the Dems, more often than not, do things better than the Republicans. You get competent officials instead of cronyism, an attempt to make government better as opposed to trying to kill it off completely, and the never-ending quest to include everybody and make sure we all get a fair shake, whereas the GOP more often than not has an "I've got mine, so go fuck yourself" attitude. Ask Clarence Thomas about that one.

But we're honest here at Life Lessons, and I wouldn't be honest if I didn't admit that the Republican party does some things very well, much better than we soft progressives. Up until the Obama revolution, nobody campaigned like the GOP. They're much more effective at messaging, too. How can a reasoned and detailed argument for green technology compete with "Drill, Baby, Drill" chanted mindlessly ad naseum? And of course, for better or for worse, the Republican party has always been better at party discipline than the Democrats.

Which brings us to Joe Lieberman, recently returned to the party's good graces with no punishment for his crimes (and no, voluntarily stepping down from the environmental sub-committee doesn't count). Immediately, the pundits began talking about how the Democrats needed to pardon Lieberman, how party unity must trump all if President Obama is to get anything done. Punishing Lieberman would drive him into the open arms of the Republicans, widening the gap that much more against the Democratic quest for 60 votes in the Senate.

I disagree. While drumming Lieberman out of the party would be counter-productive, something had to happen this week, or else why bother having parties at all? If Joe Lieberman truly believed that John McCain was the superior candidate, fine. If he campaigned for McCain due to their friendship, that's fine, too. I'll even give you questioning Obama's experience. But to say that wondering if Obama is a Marxist is a good question? To call Obama naive, then aggressively campaign for Sarah Palin, who has proven herself to be legally retarded? To speak at the GOP convention? That's betrayal on the level of Zell Miller, and that kind of betrayal demands consequences.

If this had been the GOP? Forget about it. Lieberman would have been thrown under the bus at a mind-boggling speed. Look at what they did to Chuck Hagel, and he didn't betray the neo-cons anywhere near the degree Lieberman did the Democrats. Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reily, and the rest of the sycophant right-wing attack dogs would have eaten Lieberman alive.

But we're the Democrats, and we're soft. Soft is good at times, but it also can get in the way of what is right. Lieberman should have been stripped of his Homeland Security charimanship based simply on incompetence. He vowed to get to the bottom of governmental failures in the Katrina response, and we have yet to see any action from him. It has been 3 years since an American city drowned, and no one has been punished. Yes, the hurricane was an act of nature, but the hurricane wasn't what killed Americans. The failed levees are what drowned New Orleans, and people can be held responsible for that. Since Joe Lieberman refuses to hold anyone responsible, we must hold him responsible.

I've heard all the arguments. "Now he owes Obama". Let me ask you something: What if the Democrats called Lieberman's bluff? He said that losing his charimanship was a "deal breaker", but what would really have happened if we took it from him anyway? He's an independent already. Would he really have become a full-blooded member of the GOP? How could the Republicans trust him? It's like being the mistress of a cheating husband who tells you he'll love you forever. What kind of guarantee do you have?

Also, look at Lieberman's approval ratings, and you'll see that over 60% of his constituents disapprove of the job he's doing. He was elected because of his progressive leanings. If he went full neo-conservative, and voted that way just to spite his former party, I promise you he would be out of a job in 2012. Joe Lieberman is a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of them. He also has never been in the game for the Democrats or the Republicans: He's in it for Joe Lieberman. Sure, he would pout about losing his gavel, but he wouldn't betray everything that got him elected in the first place out of revenge.

Finally progressives, we need to give up the pipe dream of a filibuster-proof majority this time around. Right now with two independents caucusing with us, we have a 57-40 majority. We need to run the table on the open Senate seats to get to 60, and it ain't gonna happen. Mark Begich will win Alaska, and Al Franken might beat Norm Coleman, but I don't think Saxby Chambliss is going down. Besides, there are enough moderate Republicans in the Senate, and Obama is a savvy enough politician, that he'll be able to get to 60 on important legislation. Either way, Lieberman would not be a deciding factor.

Joe Lieberman should have been punished not out of revenge, but for the fact that he has not done his job well. He also should have been punished to send a message. If you want to enjoy the spoils of victory, you have to fight for the winning cause. After all, you don't get a piece of the winnings when you bet on the wrong horse.