I know, in my heart of hearts, that Joe Lieberman isn’t in the same league as fake-Dems like Zell Miller. But, somehow, he seems to be getting closer all the time.
For example, you know it’s a problem when Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is tougher on the administration than Lieberman is.
Last week, Lieberman raised the ire of Dems everywhere with a convoluted statement at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, arguing that the Abu Ghraib prison scandal didn’t require an apology because terrorists didn’t apologize for the attacks of 9/11. It was, of course, offensive demagoguery, especially for someone who holds himself out as a Dem leader. Worse, Lieberman’s incoherence was outshined by Republican senators like Graham and Susan Collins, who struck a more sensible tone at the same hearing.
Today, Lieberman wants to make it abundantly clear (as if there was any doubt) that he’s backing Donald Rumsfeld, writing an op-ed for the one of the most conservative pieces of news real estate in the country — the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal.
Many argue that we can only rectify the wrongs done in the Iraqi prisons if Secretary Rumsfeld resigns. I disagree. Unless there is clear evidence connecting him to the wrongdoing, it is neither sensible nor fair to force the resignation of the secretary of defense, who clearly retains the confidence of the Commander in Chief, in the midst of a war. I have yet to see such evidence. Donald Rumsfeld’s removal would delight foreign and domestic opponents of America’s presence in Iraq.
So, who can we get to challenge Lieberman in the 2006 Dem primary? John Larson? Rose DeLauro? Ralph Nader? How about Richard Blumenthal?