A Eulogy for Lieberman
First off, a hearty congratulations to Ned Lamont. I didn't think he would pull it off. But he did. Congratulations as well to the many people on and off line who made Lamont's win possible.
But I honestly think many people have been unfair to Joe Lieberman. He is not and never has been like Zell Miller. Zell Miller's entire voting record was right in line with the most rabidly right wing Republican. He was in every way a nut case.
Lieberman's political career may now be dead. Perhaps even more so if he runs as an Ind and the Democratic Party does the right thing and turns its back on him. Maybe his career will survive, but I don't think so. But I think we should be fair to Lieberman.
Lieberman, more than many Democrats, was a man of conviction and strong beliefs. This affected how he viewed politics. He viewed politics as a conservative, religious man, yet managed to maintain (in sharp contrast to Zell) a reasonable voting record on choice, the environment and labor, at least according to LCV, NARAL and AFL-CIO. He was on our side in many fights throughout his career. And when he wasn't on our side it wasn't because he was triangulating. It was because he believed that what he was doing was the correct thing to do. I admit that I admire that about Lieberman. He did what he thought was right.
In Greek tragedy an admirable characteristic carried too far becomes a fatal flaw which brings down an otherwise admirable man. Joe Lieberman's convictions, admirable in and of themselves, became just such a flaw because he carried them too far, refusing to see when they led him to make a horrible mistake. It was those very convictions that led to the possible demise of his career.
Joe Lieberman believes in the Iraq war. He believes that we really are spreading Democracy, that Hussein really was a threat and that the world, including Iraq, will be better off in the long run for what America has done. I think he is wrong, but I do think he believes these things. These beliefs led him to support Bush and his war. If you really believed those things, wouldn't you have supported the war? I would have.
Where this all turns tragic in the ancient Greek sense is that Lieberman's beliefs, so deeply held right to the end, are so deeply misplaced. Bush lied to the world to get us into this war in Iraq. Not only did he lie, but the lies shifted as each lie was revealed. The war never was about Democracy or helping Iraq or even making the world a safer place. The war seems to be nothing more than a macho game for foolish neo-Cons and a money making scheme for the CEOs of Halliburton, Exxon and other such Bush buddies. Lieberman's convictions led him to place his trust in Republican lies. That is one thing he has never been able to face and his desperate, pathetic "concession" speech shows that he continues to hold onto his faith that America did the right thing and that Bush didn't lie to us.
But Bush and his cronies DID lie to us and the war is a fiasco. That is the reality that CT voters faced up to when they voted to nominate Ned Lamont to take Lieberman's place. I applaud those voter for making the right decision and being mature enough to face up to the stark reality that the Bush administration is comprised of a bunch of greedy, lying scumbags.
Perhaps "evil" is an appropriate term for the Bush administration because of their willingness to lie and to sacrifice our troops and national security for their own greed. But Lieberman was not evil. His fate was typical of Greek tragedy, with an admirable characteristic turning to a fatal flaw and with his hubris leading him to believe in his own infallibility, preventing him from facing up to his misplaced trust in Bush's lies.
I celebrate the victory of Ned Lamont. But I do not celebrate the tragic downfall of a good man. Joe Lieberman was a good man whose convictions led him to trust evil men and that is what destroyed him.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
Accountability | Conservatism | Culture of Corruption | Extreme Right | Ideology | Politics | Triangulation | War | 2006 Elections | Connecticut | Democrats | Joe Lieberman | Primaries
Joe is an honorable man?
But wait, if Joe's dead as the victim of frenzied agitators in his own party conspiring to stab him and take over, then why give the Mark Antony eulogy against HIM, as if he were instead Brutus, claiming the seat of his slain rival as rightful spoils? --
Seems like now would be the time for someone fair and loyal, elected and respected, to make the ironic and damning "NED is an honorable man" speech . . .as he stands over the bodies of Joe and what's left of (and right about) the viable Democratic national party.
So we have a complicated cultural casting problem. We don't need Netroots or grassroots, we should turn to our Power of Story roots!
Shall George or Joe play the betrayed and assasinated Caesar? (Or perhaps John Kerry, or Uncle Sam himself?) Shall Joe or Ned play Brutus? (Hmm, not Markos and his army, because he's no senator much less potential caesar, and why would Greek manipulations support ANY Roman senator infighting, except to bring down the whole empire? oh never mind.)
Not that I see much hope, muddled or not, of mirroring Mark Antony's political artfulness and successful results in this situation. No matter how we cast the roles in a revival of that morality-in-politics play, we may be so much further gone, down cultural Rome's decadant path to the fall of its civilization already, that no politics can change our collective fate.
Could be it's time to drop the Shakespeare and turn for a fitting morality play to the little Dutch boy bravely giving his city the finger to save it from devastating but largely unrecognized threat. Come to think of it, he's an interesting character to cast today, too -- Hans Brinker must've been a rival's knife in politic clothing, created as he was not in Holland but by an AMERICAN author using Germanic names, while our own civil war (the last one I mean, not this new one we're kindling) blazed through our divided-to-death nation incinerating everything in its path including civil and principled politics -- meant to make children brave, loyal, trustworthy and god-fearing! --
So I don't know what most of this means culturally, artistically, politically, just that it does have significance and it's not simple stuff to tell brutes from their tactics in this country or any other. What I have finally figured out for myself is that despite the calculated and sometimes cryptic speeches, we make up stories to fool ourselves and each other into going along with some very big lies. There are no plucky little heroes anywhere in real partisan politics, sacrificing themselves to save us all. They ALL could put their positions, fingers and knives to better use than they do, but I saw none of that from anyone in the latest drama. So what is there to celebrate this morning -- another day, another stabbing among petty rivals, another hole in the only dam still standing between us and the waters we still pretend we control for the whole community.
Another Hole in the Whole?