• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Beating Up Lieberman Is Cover-Up for Lefts Problems

    The Left is lost without a villain. You can’t have victims without one. To maintain its cult of victimology, the Left must identify (or create) bad guys. Hence, according to the narrative from the Left:

    • Our economy struggles because fat cat bankers are selfish and George W. Bush left Barack Obama a mess.
    • Health care is expensive because insurance companies are greedy.
    • And we cannot enter health-reform paradise because Joe Lieberman is blocking the doorway.

    The Democrats’ choice for Vice President in 2000, Sen. Lieberman (I, CT) is now Public Enemy Number One to the Left. Heaping blame on him is also a convenient way to hide the divisions among Democrats, including several other Democrat Senators who did as much as Lieberman to quash the most recent version of health care legislation. It’s easier to scapegoat a villain than to admit your ideas fail because they’re flawed. The Left prefers to drop someone from hero to zero than to acknowledge that liberals have overreached.

    When Lieberman helped kill the “public option” and Medicare expansion provisions of the Senate’s health care overhaul, moveon.org placed a multi-million-dollar bounty on his head. Within 24 hours, the far-left group had raised the first $1 million of this amount through their web site. Fellow-stater Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D, CT) wants Lieberman recalled. Liberal blogger Jane Hamsher went after Lieberman’s wife, Haddaseh. The proprietor of firedoglake.com insisted that the Susan G. Komen breast-cancer charity fire Mrs. Lieberman. (The punishments to be rained on the Lieberman children and family pets have yet to be determined.) Michael Moore tweeted: “People of Connecticut: What have u done 2 this country? We hold u responsible. Start recall of Lieberman 2day or we’ll boycott your state.”

    A poll of HuffingtonPost readers found 81% want Lieberman stripped of his chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D – NV) says that’s not likely. That only pushed Reid into the target sights of angry left-wingers.

    But “What to do about Joe Lieberman?” is an old question for the Left. It was asked when he supported the Iraq war. That position led to his defeat in the 2006 Democratic primary. But Lieberman then ran as an independent candidate and won re-election to the Senate. It was asked when he supported Sen. John McCain (R, AZ) for President and even spoke at the Republican National Convention in 2008. The question remains. The answer still eludes.

    Lieberman’s gutsiness has endeared him to conservatives. But much of his politics does not. He remains a leader in efforts to impose cap-and-trade burdens on our economy. He just pushed through committee an expansion of federal benefits for same-sex partners. As one Democrat blog noted, “He’s a liberal on the environment, civil rights, taxes, abortion, gun control.”

    But he bucks the party often enough that dyed-in-the-wool liberals give the Grinch more love than they give Joe. While they condemn the GOP’s supposed lack of tolerance and diversity, the Left speaks of Lieberman in terms that would be labeled hate speech if uttered by a conservative.
    As CNN reported:

    The Huffington Post asked readers, what would you give Joe Lieberman for Hanukkah? And got suggestions like a muzzle or a horse’s head like in ‘The Godfather.’ The left-wing Daily Kos posted a poll asking which word describes Joe Lieberman and offering only the same word (a vulgar term for a donkey’s anus)- so much for multiple choice. On YouTube, Joe Lieberman’s eyes and other body parts were fried in hell (video of eggs frying).

    Other samples from the left side of the web:

    • “He seems willing to cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in order to settle an old electoral score.”
    • “One man’s tantrum should not determine the fate of the entire Democratic party’s policy decisions.”
    • “His snooze-inducing delivery masks the sheer stupidity of his arguments.”

    He also takes the heat when others won’t. The Medicare expansion was not doomed single-handedly by Lieberman. It was doomed when 10 Senate Democrats wrote Majority Leader Reid a letter saying their states’ doctors and hospitals could not survive the lower fees they would be paid under his plan. But 10 Senators are too many to make an object lesson. The attractive alternative? Pick on an already-unpopular Joe. (Signers of that letter were Senators Maria Cantwell of Washington, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Tom Udall of New Mexico, Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden of Oregon, and Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken of Minnesota.)

    Liberals want to send “their” party a strong message: Conform or else. Joe Lieberman is the most convenient whipping boy. To them, he demonstrates the old adage that if nothing else, you can always serve as a bad example.

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    2 Responses to Beating Up Lieberman Is Cover-Up for Lefts Problems

    1. Freedom of Speech, T says:

      The party of tolerance unless you have the courage to disagree with them. Besides, why is the left so upset? Last time I checked Lieberman was an Independent.

      If it means the far left is going to throw a temper tantrum because the majority of Americans do not share a far-left world view -than I say to them – tough.

      We will never go quietly or loudly into the night and just shut up. We are the only ones preventing the destruction of a Republic.

    2. Roger S., Ma. says:

      Call them Liberals, Progressives, Leftists, any label you deem appropriate. Since the inauguration of Woodrow Wilson, nearly a century ago, they have been fascist wolves in liberty's sheep's clothing.

      The proof is their advocacy of the "modern administrative state" which would provide the "benefits of prosperity for all", regardless of talent, choice, effort, or accident.

      That none of the terms employed in such slogans are definable in any rational sense was no oversight. Undefined, the terms might assume whichever limit could be agreed upon to suit the "needs" of a moment. In the terms propounded by Wilson and Goodnow, his mentor, the modern state would favor a Darwinian process of "social evolution". Guided by an "enlightened" elite, Plato's visionary republic might at last become reality!

      That this process must erode all manner of individual liberty and responsibility, as the power to decide outcomes shifted to exponentially increasing Government regulations, was welcome. Inside every Progressive lurks a "Babbitt" who is only too glad to be able to rely on "authority" to tell him how to think and act, especially if that prevents those capable of successfully exercising individual liberty and responsibility from upstaging him.

      In short, "Progressives" don't produce. They "manage" other people's production. That's a lot safer: all the "glory" for none of the risks. That's why they hate Capitalism — and non-conformity: the contrast would be too unsettling, to be reminded that in the face of reality they are "frauds". They will stop at nothing to massage their self-image as the "creators of progress", in the miraculous sense, namely without "getting hands dirty".

      The "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval" is the never-ending goal and essence of Progressives' actions. It's why people like a Joe Liebermann, or for that matter a Sarah Palin, who take the risk to stand apart in support of a principled choice, incur their instant and virulent hatred. Motto: "How dare you show us truth! Conform, or else!"

      Envy is the true mark of a culture of mediocrity, conformity the mark of Guilds and Unions. So it all fits: in the course of a century the "wolf" is revealed, as it were "progressively". Their "problem" is really their false premise, long forgotten, that "virtue" cannot be redistributed: it must be individually earned.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.