The Mental Collapse of Poor Joe Lieberman

I hope the Butterfly Net Brigade is on red alert, or readied for code blue, or in some other appropriate state of colorful preparation, because Joe Lieberman is now publicly embarrassing himself beyond all rational defense.

Thursday, Joe gave a morning talk at The Johns Hopkins University Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, and Friday, I read it in an advanced state of stupefaction. Here was a United States Senator talking, and talking ... and talking, and sealing his diagnostic fate with every word. He had come with a dagger in his teeth, but proved only the need for a needle in the arm.

His target? Democrats. Pretty much all Democrats -- the base, the candidates, the blogospheric backgrounders and any peripheral hangers on. That in itself, God knows, is no sign of insanity, since no one excels at self-loathing like Democrats themselves. But it was the foils that Joe chose to make Democrats look ridiculous that boomeranged throughout, paradoxically making the latter's case and utterly destroying the pixilated prosecutor.

There was far too much in Joe's unhinged torrent to cover in detail here, but a few droplets should suffice for your reasoned consideration.

"Since retaking Congress in November 2006," Joe began, "the top foreign policy priority of the Democratic Party has not been to expand the size of our military for the war on terror or to strengthen our democracy promotion efforts in the Middle East or to prevail in Afghanistan. It has been to pull our troops out of Iraq, to abandon the democratically-elected [sic] government there, and to hand a defeat to President Bush."

Those two sentences alone reveal the eeriest of mental disconnects and verbal drool. For starters, I didn't even know the Democratic Party had a "top foreign policy priority," nor could one prove it by voters -- and if it does, the president hasn't needed to bother noticing.

Has there been anything -- anything at all? -- that Mr. Bush has had to do without because of Democratic intractability? And have Democrats not indeed "expand[ed] the size of our military"? And why, after all these years, is Joe still confusing tactics with enemy forces?

And how does Joe expect the United States to "strengthen our democracy promotion efforts" in a region we've so foolishly and undemocratically put to the sword? And have not Democrats consistently advocated the transference of quagmired troops in Iraq to the more central front of Afghanistan? And has there been one serious Democratic effort to "pull our troops out of Iraq"?

And what Iraqi "government" is Joe addressing? The one the U.S. military and diplomats can't locate? And as for the imagined goal of "hand[ing] a defeat to President Bush," or anything even resembling a defeat ... well, Joe clearly hasn't been reading the papers, or any history books, either, that just as clearly delineate sustained Democratic horror at risking another hit on national security issues.

Joe then went on to diagnose what he characterized as the underlying problem, and he did it with that typical straw-man silliness of his truly clinically certifiable hero, the president: "For many Democrats, the guiding conviction in foreign policy isn’t pacifism or isolationism -- it is distrust and disdain of Republicans in general, and President Bush in particular."

Of course the guiding Democratic conviction isn't pacifism or isolationism. Never has been. But nor has it been the well-earned distrust and disdain of Republicans and Mr. Bush, as the nation's non-ideological unity in the immediate post-9/11 period so prodigiously revealed. If one can be identified at all, however, the guiding conviction among Democrats, independents and a growing number of thoughtful Republicans is, simply, global responsibility: the mature acceptance that we cannot afford, nor can we accomplish, the imposition of our way of thinking on the world.

Call it anti-imperialism, or anti-militarism, or simply the recognition that Bush's neocon fantasies have taken the United States to the very edge of self-destruction and insanity, and we just don't want it no more. Period.

Joe also trailed off on the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, denouncing the "politically paranoid, hyper-partisan sentiment in the Democratic base" for "offering wild conspiracy theories about how it could be used to authorize the use of military force against Iran" -- which he labeled "absurd," a label any realist would empirically re-label as merely "out to lunch."

He offered other gems of delusional insight, which only the most politically paranoid among us could conjure. They're well worth reading, especially if you're in pre-med and looking to specialize in the workings of the deranged, disconnected mind.

But finally, after pouring out all the evidence of his most troubled condition, he concluded, "That is why I call myself an Independent Democrat today."

Joe, how 'bout we just call you nuts.

****

... of $10, $25, or $50 in financial support of p m carpenter's commentary -- and thank you!

Comments

[peacenik]

Funny how just a few short years ago JL was on the ticket with Al Gore and they just happened to have the election puled right out from underneath them. I've said this from the beginning: Joe Lieberman is a mole who was placed at the Dem's feet in 1999 as a viable VP candidate and then worked for the GOP. He's quite obviously a strong neo-conservative who has a very close relationship with this administration...

[Jay Diamond]

Joe Lieberman will soon cease to be a worry for Democrats. He will soon be the GOP's property.

[Clemsy]

What's he loyal to, the Republican's or Israel?

Lieberman a mole? Duh! But for who?

[The Architect of Desire]

Joe Lieberman was returned to the Senate as a result of a scheme by the Republican party in which, the Republicans would nominate a place-holder/ringer who had no possibility of getting elected. Most of the Republicans would then vote for the stealth Republican, Joe Lieberman and he could then be returned to the Senate where he could most of his time kissing george w bushes' ass and stabbing Democrats in the back. His only two discernable talents. This corrupt little weasel of a politician is a prime example of what is wrong with our broken political system.

[Marty]

There are only two Independent Senators in the US, and look at the extreme contrast between them.

[The Architect of Desire]

Joe Lieberman was returned to the Senate as a result of a scheme by the Republican party in which, the Republicans would nominate a place-holder/ringer who had no possibility of getting elected. Most Connecticut Republicans would then vote for the stealth Republican, Joe Lieberman and he could then be returned to the Senate where he could spend most of his time kissing george w bushes' ass and stabbing Democrats in the back. His only two discernable talents. This corrupt little weasel of a politician is a prime example of what is wrong with our broken political system.

[Hotrod54235]

Joe has proven he is not a Repug or Dimmo-he is a NEOCON through and through. And to think the Dimmos nominated him for VP. How corrupt is the political process in this country?

[The Conservative Deflator]

The Senator from Israel is just mad that Democrats want to thwart his War on Arabs, I mean, Terror. Anyone with an IQ above room temperature knows that fighting terrorism is not done using the U.S. military - it is done through international cooperation, police work and good old fashioned human intel (i.e. talking to people who look different than us).

The only good thing about the 2000 election being stolen from Al Gore is that this worm didn't end up as Veep.

[RJ Crane]

Well said. Let us all remember how the Dems welcomed Joe back to the Senate with applause and a big warm welcome - as if they were relieved that he won. Were they all so stupid as to not know that Joe would have to pay Bush and the GOP back for his reelection and would do so?

The Dems are getting what they deserve for not working harder to elect Ned Lamont. The Dems gambled that Joe would caucus with them if they didn't do too much to help the Lamont campaign. Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer were behind this strategy with Reid not even supporting Lamont and having made a deal with Joe that would allow Joe to campaign claiming he wouldn't lose seniority.

But to me what's worse than Joe being "nuts" is Joe being a bald-faced liar who told voters in CT that he would work hard to bring the troops home soon. If anything Joe is at work helping to promote yet another war with Iran. Apparently in his speech he forgot to mention that language relating to military use of force against Iran was stripped out of Kyl-Lieberman before it even got a vote.

RJ Crane, editor
topplebush.com

[Ernest T Spoon]

Holy Joe always was a Republican, Jay Diamond, albeit in a very cleverly tailored Democratic-donkey suit. Recall that Joe was to the right of Lowell Weicker, the Republican he defeated, with the aid of arch-conservative William F. Buckely, in 1988 for his senate seat.

And the DLC-wing of the Democratic Party doomed itself last year by giving only tepid support to Connecticut Democratic primany winner, anti-Iraq war candidate Ned Lamont, then welcoming Joe back into the Democratic Senate caucus.

[Audrey]

Joe Lieberman is not a Democrat or a Republican or an Independent. He is a card-carrying member of the Likud Party.

[BushisLiar]

Joe "Israel First" Lieberman is a vile quisling and a Bush kiss-up, literally. He is a "man" cut from the same shit-stained swath of cloth as Bush. Neither of them gives a tinker's damn about "the will of the people" or democracy, they serve only their own egos and their sense of entitlement. These "men" are a cancer on American politics.

[Wink]

Lieberman makes me sick. What a two faced piece of dung he is. If our leadership had any rocks they'd strip him of every position of seniority and yank every priviledge he currently holds with the Dems. Let him sit with his buddies on the wrong side of the aisle.

[fgtaylor]

Joe Lieberman is not crazy. He is an agent of a foreign government, which is Israel. Lieberman will be instrumental in forcing the US into a war with Iran on behalf of Israel. His role with the Bush Administration is to promote the cover story that its really the US need to protect Israel that compels us into this war, not another neo-con dream of empire. He played the same role in the war with Iraq. How many times do we have to seen this show to know how it ends?

[Gorgewashington]

I DISAGREE. He is not mad. Just treacherous. Everything Joe says is designed to further the Israeli lobby agenda. He wants a hardcore zionist foreign policy in the middle east, and its easiest if Americans are made to live in fear.

[Lars]

It's a joke to accuse the Democratic Party of not trying to expand the military to save democracy from terror and the fiction of "Islamofascism."

How so? More deceitful recruitment campaigns? A draft? The fact is that is is harder and harder to find young Americans desperate or crazy enough to enlist, or re-enlist. These days it is far more prudent for those who largely comprise our military and fight wars on our behalf -- poor Southerners and minorities -- to "do the jobs Americans refuse to do" than fight Imperial Wars for other countries, only to be abandoned by the government when they return maimed and homeless.

Daily, the deep well of stagnant stupidity of the American people is drained....

And how shall Democrats expand the military? More jets? More aircraft carriers? More military bases in hostile countries? Bush was stupid enough to sink us in a hopeless quagmire, democtrating once again how the richest and most powerful nation on earth can be made vulnerable and bled to death by small groups of lightly armed insurgents. Curiously, George Bush's and Osama bin Laden's ambitions are interwoven.

Every American, apart from the 1% rubber-room psychos who still support the war -- has caught on that President Bush's foreign policy is 15% Armageddon and 85% Kilkenney Cats. It is just to keep killing and killing, and dying and dying until no one is left, while crossing their fingers, praying that its true that Jesus is going to intervene soon and end the war by rapturing them to Heaven -- THAT is Bush's exit strategy.

"Democracy promotion" and "supporting democracy in the region" are but code words for unconditional support, even unconditional active military support for Israel.

To what is Senator Lieberman loyal to -- our nation, the United States, or Israel? The Constitution of the United States, or the goof gas pipe dreams of the NeoCons, who haven't gotten a single thing right since they gained control of our government?

In the Age of Irony that is the Bush Era, we are then told that increasing violence and instability in the Middle East and hatred of America requires even more of the actions that have ignited this violence and hatred.

The further irony is that NeoCon policies have made Israel less secure, and that Bush's "promotion of democracy" has led to a police state and suspension of the Constitution in favor of an Imperial Presidency here at home.

Senator Liberman: Bush handed himself a defeat the moment he assumed office and executed the strategy of the NeoCons -- to alter the balance of power by bombing Muslims, lynching their leaders, and forcing them to accept American and Israeli hegemony in the region. This is madness.

Nothing, nothing can redeem this tragic error.

Blaming the Democrats, or the puppet government of Iraq, or the fiction of Islamofascism for this disaster is a lie.

All blame, all blood, is on George Bush's hands, and those who assist him, like Joe Lieberman.

[quousque]

I can't imagine what it must feel like to be a Connecticut Democrat who voted for Lieberman, other than possibly being somewhat akin to a Floridian who voted for Nader in 2000. Other than the recent impeachment vote in the House, Democrats in control are only slightly less disappointing than the phalanx of GOPhascists were, and with Hillary now almost the defacto 2008 standard bearer ........ there's not much for us to be optimistic about, eh?

[Christie]

Why don't we do a survey of all American citizens between the ages of 18 and 60. One question: Do you support the war in Iraq? Yes or no? If the answer is yes, instant draft into the military, no exceptions, no exemptions, six weeks combat training, then off to Iraq immediately. Hey, you support the war, then you should put your body where your mouth is.

Sigh. So, okay I know this isn't realistic, but damn, I'd love to see all these blowhards put on the spot.

[Geri]

Joe should just retire down in Georgia with Zell Miller. Apparently, they would get along just fine talking about what "good Democrats" they were.

[Krashkopf]

Lieberman is not crazy. He is in denial. Like Sen. Larry Craig, who denies that he is gay after getting caught trolling for sex in a men's room stall, Sen. Joe Lieberman denies being a Republican after voting, and speaking, like a true believing neo-con.

Come out of the GOP closet, Joe. Its who, and what, you are.

[Rob]

I think that this essay completely misses the point of Joe's ramblings, and it has nothing to do with him losing his marbles. Lieberman is merely deploying his version of the "stab in the back" explanation for the debacle that is unfolding in Iraq and Afgahnistan. America's military efforts are failing, so the story goes, because they have been undermined by opponents of the war on the home front, not because our brave and virtuous troops are being defeated by an enemy in the field. The German right used this same defense following their catastrophic loss in World War I, and the American right employed it in similar fashion following the Vietnam War.

Lieberman probably knows that what he is saying is false, but he has never been fastidious about facts. More importantly, he is fashioning for himself an alibi for having advocated a war that has gone about as badly as it possibly could.

[Dieter Heymann, Houston, USA]

Why is Lieberman still on any Senate Committee? Because the Senatorial Democrats are collectively a frightened masochist.

[vietnam era vet]

RJ Craine of Topple Bush... I could not agree more. Democrats stood on the sidelines during the election because as always they are lacking in backbone and so afraid of being painted as extremist by the Right Wing slime machine. Smilin' Joe is back.
The way they refused to stand up to him even after Sean Hannity had endorsed him shows them for the gutless,jellyfish they are.

[John Bakalik]

I knew the 2000 election was lost when Gore picked this mouthy SOB. But theres no amount of abuse or calling Joe a treasonus bastard that will get his gourd, he has the Jewish lobby from here and Israel behind him, much less Bush and Cheney's war with Iran support.

[Pat W]

If Joe Lieberman would decide to officially become a Republican, the Senate would shift control to the Republicans. Now that's power. I wonder what it is like for the Democratic senators to Caucus with the opposition. How many neo-con moles are there in Congress anyway?

[Dave the Locust]

To put it quite simply, Joe Lieberman is the most vivid example of "Stockholm Syndrome" since Patty Hearst.

[GOPHater]

I've met Joe Lieberman, and he is one little creep, let me tell ya.