Two rumours have resurfaced. One: Joseph Lieberman is being tapped to replace Rumsfeld for Defense Secretary. Two: Lowell Weicker, former Independent governor of Connecticut, former Liberal Republican Senator who lost his seat to a National Review-backed Democratic challenger by the name of Joseph Lieberman, and a man who endorsed Howard Dean in the last Democratic primary, will run against Joseph Lieberman. (As for Joseph Lieberman’s “bi-partisan war cabinet” — HARDY HAR HAR. That would be what? The Jon Kyl — Joseph Lieberman “Committee on Present Danger Take Three” form of bipartisanship??? I am… wary of calls for “bi-partisanship”, which often is just a call to “SHUT UP!”, as with Joseph Lieberman saying:)

It’s time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge he’ll be commander-in-chief for three more years. We undermine the president’s credibility at our nation’s peril.

No, Mr. Lieberman, Bush undermines the credibility of our nation. I acknowledge that Bush will be, barring a Nixonian or Lincoln-esque conclusion to his presidency, will be president — and thus “commander-in-chief” (and I’ve heard right-wingers use that phrase as a sort of defense-mechanism to stop any attacks coming at him) for three more years. And I prefer the Theodore Roosevelt bit on the matter of war opponents and critics to the Abe Lincoln answer.

With Joseph Lieberman, it both is and isn’t about the war. (Same thing with Howard Dean, actually, and I think I’ll get to a pro-Dean post that acknowledges his limitations in a later post). With Joseph Lieberman, it is about where that quotation came from — a darkly fascistic place. Which is to say: When Joseph Lieberman was tapped for Al Gore’s running mate (in large part to turn out Florida’s Jewish population, but sometimes I suspect a more sinister hand at work beyond everybody’s sight), I simply did not want to vote for that ticket. He validated Ralph Nader’s attack on the Republican-Democratic Duoplocy. His vote for the Iraq War Resolution and unwavering vote toward every line of torture and every John Bolton and everything that the Military Industrial Complex and the Neoconservative Military Honchos demand is simply an unsurprising and logical continuation of Joseph Liberman’s career.

It goes beyond his voting record, which is — for good or ill — mainline Democratic. (Deceptively so at times and with a corporatist tinge to the deception, as he recently voted against the Bankruptcy Reform Bill after voting it out of committee — thus able to satisfy his corporate coffers at the same time as getting the right vote for the liberal voting ratings to coalesce.) And even his unwavering and completely not hidden from view 200% supportive record for the Military Industrial Complex simply sits him with the cadre of conservative (red-state) Democrats.

Nay. It is how he carries himself into the media. How he moves the “center” of debate on the matter of war and peace to the most militaristic — and how this frames the debate. He speaks, it is recorded, and he supposedly speaks for a party, or how a party should be behaving if it were “sensible”. “Manufacturing Consent” to use the title of a Noam Chomsky book I’ve never read — and the classic Skull and Bones canard: limit the range of “acceptable” opinions a person may have to the point where it is “Stand Behind the Leader”. Recently Sean Hannity, praising Joseph Lieberman for a typical Wall Street Journal editorial, promised that he would help Lieberman raise campaign money. George Bush has cited him in a number of speeches as a “Democratic Leader” who “gets it”. These are simply continuations of his old William Buckley support. And another key to understanding Lieberman: he is extremely comfortable hob-nobbing with Sean Hannity, enjoying his positioning as a “sensible Democrat moderator”, against the “rabid Democratic attack Dogs”. (Remember, John Murtha has thrown himself into the “Michael Moore wing of the Democratic Party”, nevermind that John Murtha largely acts as a sort of conduit for the Pentagon, nevermind that his position is pretty damned near that of the majority of Americans at the moment, and nevermind that John Murtha’s position doesn’t actually end the war in Iraq — it simply situates American military to nearby stand-by so that we can attack terrorists by the air when believed necessary and let nationalist insurgents believe that we are not there to occupy their nation.) It is that John Murtha’s opinion is nearly that of the majority of Americans at the moment that the powers that be need Joseph Lieberman.

So that’s Lieberman. Now, who the heck is this Weicker guy? I note that two messages crept into my comments box in an old entry on the man who would be dethroning Lieberman:

Congratulations to Sen. Weicker for recognizing how disgraceful the behaviour of Joe Lieberman has been. As a registered democrat I am sick of his pandering to this discredited, corrupt and ineffective administration. Lowell- please run againsthim .I and most of my fellow democrats are behind you.

AND

2-6-05

Sincerely
Joe Pendleton

Yes, but realistically: Can Weicker pull it off? I don’t know the answer to that question. I will say this: If he is serious, he has to have Bill Hillsman serving on the campaign… Bill Hillsman having torpoeded Paul Wellstone’s first Senate campaign and Jesse Ventura’s gubernatorial campaign.

I sit here, not having a vote in Connecticut and not exactly ripping off any campaign funds to the Weicker campaign, saying: “I’m game.”

This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 7th, 2005 at 8:08 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.