At this point, no one really listens to either side’s weekly national radio address. It’s more or less symbolic — a way for the White House and the Dems to highlight an “issue of the week,” and perhaps in the Dems’ case, offer some publicity to a deserving Democrat.
With this in mind, I don’t think this is a good idea.
Sen. Joseph I. [tag]Lieberman[/tag] plans to deliver the Democrats’ radio response to President Bush Saturday and urge that the president and Congress “hold the Pentagon and Army chain of command accountable for the neglect of our soldiers at [tag]Walter Reed[/tag]” Army Medical Center. […]
Lieberman, a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, plans to say in his brief talk today, which airs shortly after 11 a.m. in most markets, that the reports in the Post “have uncovered completely unacceptable living conditions and inadequate services.”
He listed some points: “Soldiers with brain injuries have gone weeks without being able to get doctors’ appointments. There is not enough staff with the right skills to treat and care for the severely injured troops. And rooms where some soldiers lived were found to be mouldy and infested with rodents.”
He talked about how the White House and Congress “have an urgent obligation now to fix the neglect at Walter Reed and the longer term issues that affect our wounded veterans.”
On the substance, I’m delighted that Lieberman is taking the Dems’ side and not offering some kind of bizarre defense for the White House. But on the symbolism, why is Lieberman giving the Dems’ address?
Now, I realize that the gig is not always exclusive to actual Dems. In December, the Dems turned over the microphone to the Rev. Jim Wallis, who is not publicly affiliated with either party. In this sense, offering Lieberman a shot, despite not being an Dem, is not unprecedented.
But Rev. Wallis hasn’t spend the weeks preceding his radio address:
* bashing the Dems’ war policy in the Wall Street Journal;
* defending the administration’s use of intelligence;
* and threatening to join the Republican Party.
Indeed, even on the Walter Reed scandal about which Lieberman is speaking, he told Don Imus that he believed replacing Maj. Gen. George Weightman with Lt. Gen. Kevin Kiley at Walter Reed was “a good first step,” despite the fact that the decision made no apparent sense.
There weren’t any other Dems available for the radio address? Or was this some gesture to keep Lieberman from leaving the party?