The Sweetness of Lieberman’s Defeat
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN AND JEFFREY ST CLAIR
08/09/06 "Counterpunch" -- -- Any morning which carries the
fragrance of a defeat for Joe Lieberman is one that should be
savored. And his humiliation at the hands of Connecticut voters
yesterday is all the sweeter for the fact that it looks as though we
may be able to enjoy another Lieberman defeat in November. No longer
able to run as the junior Democratic senator from Connecticut
Lieberman insists that he will run as an independent in the fall
election. If he does so, it may deny victory to the man who defeated
him yesterday in the primary, Ned Lamont, but Lieberman himself will
plummet once again. There are a lot of people in Connecticut who
quite rightly can’t stand the guy.
There are no mysteries to what happened on Tuesday. A lot of
Connecticut voters don't like the war in Iraq and don't like
Lieberman who has been one of the wars keenest supporters. When he
was first challenged by Lamont, the New York Times insisted that the
senator was hugely popular in his home state. He wasn’t. Al Gore
made the same mistake when he put Lieberman on the 2002 ticket in
the hopes that his vice presidential candidate would win him
Florida. Instead Lieberman showed in his amiable “debate” with
Cheney that he was a de facto endorser of the Bush ticket.
Lieberman’s rise as a national politician coincided with the
Democratic Party’s refashioning as full-time corporate
whore-without-shame, in the late 1980s. This was when the Democratic
Leadership Council was ramping up, with denunciations of the
Democratic Party as a sinkhole of of old liberals in the mold of
George McGovern or Walter Mondale. Lieberman, a former prosecutor,
berserk Zionist, cultural conservative and race-baiter was exactly
what they were looking for.
In his ensuing three terms as senator Lieberman never deviated from
servility to Connecticut’s arms and pharmaceutical manufacturers,
insurance companies and financial sector overall. He did the heavy
lifting on the Bankruptcy bill so eagerly sought by the banks and
credit card companies. He was among the most vigorous advocates of
telecommunications “reform” in the mid-90s, which made instant
millionaires of men like Ned Lamont, who amassed the fortune in
cable tv that enabled him to spend $4 million of his own money, to
beat Lieberman.
Today the press is agog at what the political pundits are calling an
exhibition of the power of the bloggers. We don’t see it that way.
$4 million in greenbacks carries a lot more clout than electronic
drizzle from the blathersphere. Hillary Clinton has now hired a
“blog outreach adviser”, but her husband is no doubt reminding her
that elections are won by promising the Fortune 500 and the National
Association of Manufacturers everything they want.
Sweet too was the humiliation of Bill Clinton whose campaigning with
Lieberman seems to have precipitated the final collapse of the
senator’s campaign. All those who tied themselves to Lieberman, like
Barack Obama, or Hillary Clinton, or Barbara Boxer have been bruised
by the admirable good sense of the Connecticut voters.
The simplest message of all that comes out of Connecticut is that
the war in Iraq is hugely unpopular, and since that war was
supported by about 90 per cent of the US congress, all its members
have something to fear from the voters, which is why many of them
are redeploying as advocates of withdrawal.
But the question remains whether there is any home in the Democratic
Party for a true progressive. Lamont’s victory in the primary
certainly doesn’t answer that question. On most issues he’s almost
indistinguishable from Lieberman. On Tuesday you had only to travel
down I-95 to Georgia to see what happens to real progressives, where
the Democratic Party conspired with Fox News and the rest of the
press to try to destroy Cynthia McKinney’s political career. For the
second time.
The Democratic Party won’t tolerate any outspoken dissent. It is a
cheerleader for Israel’s destruction of Lebanon. Just listen to
Jerry Nadler, a New York congressman identified as among the most
progressive in the Democratic congressional caucus. On a pro-Israel
rally on July 18 Nadler asked the crowd, “Since when should a
response to aggression and murder be proportionate?” In other words,
a green light for war crimes, such as Israel has been committing
every day. Despite all the schedules for withdrawal suddenly offered
by candidates such as Hillary Clinton, or Maria Cantwell, it’s still
a Party of War in the service of empire. Who is the leading
mainstream political voice calling for an immediate ceasefire in
Lebanon? The Republican senator from Nebraska, Chuck Hagel. The
Democrats rushed to attack him, with Joe Biden winning by a nose,
from Charles Schumer and the rest of the pack.
Are Comments Offensive? Unsuitable? Email us