Posted on 07/31/2006 5:06:20 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
When Play-It-Again-Sam crooned, "A kiss is just a kiss ..." in that smoky Moroccan saloon so long ago, the celluloid, star-crossed lovers played by Bogie and Bergman knew better. As time goes by, so does Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman. The big smooch that President Bush appeared to lay on Lieberman after last year's State of the Union speech has become so much more than a kiss. It may indeed be the smack of political death for the longtime senator from Connecticut.
Lieberman is scrambling in a solidly Democratic state in which an aggressive primary challenger has reared his well-coifed head. A presidential smooch, along with Lieberman's unforgivable support of the Iraq war, has plunged this Big Mac-er of moderation into the dogfight of his political life. It couldn't happen to a nicer guy.
Let me explain where this columnist sits on this issue. Wars have consequences, as do political positions and actions. The 2003 American invasion of Iraq, for example. To call this an unmitigated fiasco of the highest order is putting it mildly. Thus, consequences should ensue. Heads should roll.
The Democratic electorate is obligated to send a message to its leadership. (Hillary, are you listening?) The war in Iraq was a colossal mistake, it continues to be a colossal mistake, and it will and should cost any and all congressional supporters their jobs if they continue to support this harebrained and thickheaded emasculation of American democracy.
That starts with one Joseph Lieberman. Let's hand him his head on a silver platter.
A Quinnipiac University poll released July 20 put Lieberman and his primary opponent, Ned Lamont, in a statistical dead heat. Lamont was once a very long shot in the Aug. 8 primary -- until Lieberman's kissy-face with "W" caught up with him. Left-leaning activists and bloggers have been lambasting Lieberman for months, leaving Lamont, a wealthy businessman in the cable industry, the chief beneficiary.
Bush appeared to dole out the infamous peck on the floor of Congress after the 2005 State of the Union speech. Lamont and other Lieberman critics opine that it was a sign that the Democrat had sold out to conservative Republicans on the wrong side of the most important political divide of a generation -- the Iraq war. Lieberman denies that he was the beneficiary of a kiss -- it was just a hug, he says. (Maybe it was only their first date. After all, Lieberman is a notorious prude).
Still, there's no doubt that Bush's affection for his once-bitter opponent is rooted in Lieberman's early and abiding support for the war. Strange bedfellows indeed, considering that the senator was half of the Democratic presidential ticket in the bitter (perhaps swindled) loss to Bush/Cheney in 2000.
Lieberman's war stance has put the 18-year veteran senator in the unlikely predicament of being perched on the cusp of losing his seat to a no-name opponent. Things are looking so bad that he has vowed to mount an independent bid in November if he loses to Lamont.
Doesn't that sound oh-so-statesmanlike? Maybe Lieberman can join Ralph Nader in the pantheon of Independent Party Heroes.
Meanwhile, evidence mounts that the nation may be in a throw-the-bums-out mood. An NBC /Wall Street Journal poll conducted by Bill McInturff and Peter Hart indicates that Lieberman may be road kill, thanks to his close ties to Bush's Iraq policy.
The poll, conducted from July 21 to 24, reveals that 58 percent said they were "less confident" that the Iraq war will end well. Furthermore, 60 percent of American voters said the nation is headed "off on the wrong track" instead of "in the right direction."
Thirty-eight percent of Americans say they plan to use their vote to register opposition to the president, compared with the 21 percent who will use their vote to support Bush.
Lieberman may find himself in the precarious position of becoming the whipping boy of two constituencies: Democrats who despise Bush and Republicans ready to protest his policy. That's double trouble. For Democrats who supported the Iraq war, it is the kiss of death.
mailto:lauraswashington@aol.com
LAURA WASHINGTON = pathetic little creature.
I wouldn't mind seeing Joe gone. He is an okay senator (spectacular for a dem) but i'd love to see the Dems lose another voice of moderation. That'd make them even less palatable to mainstream americans.
Laura Washington
Evidently, Laura has never noticed her "sistas" in congress at the SOTU, elbowing their way toward the Capitol aisle, trying to get a big one laid on them by President Bush.
I hope Bush has his Purell wipes....
No, no, no... I won't comment on that skank.
Laura Washington is a reminder why so few women make it big in journalism. Aside from the emotional purple prose the article feeds off scores of articles already written by much more serious journalists.
Another example of just how @%^&ing mentally ill the liberal ratmedia is.
Connecticut ping!
Please Freepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent Connecticut ping list.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.