spazeboy

A Vote For Joe Requires Dems to Have Double Standard

Harold Meyerson writes in the Washington Post today (emphasis mine):

On the op-ed pages of leading newspapers, we read that Lieberman is “the most kind-hearted and well-intentioned of men” (that’s from the New York Times’ David Brooks), a judgment that cannot credibly be disputed — though if ever a road to hell was paved with good intentions, it would start with the anti-Saddam Hussein interventionism of pro-democracy advocates and end in downtown Baghdad today.

I have no further comment about that, I just wanted to share it because I enjoyed reading it. Here’s the meat and potatoes (from the same column):

The issue here isn’t that Lieberman is not 100 percent. It’s that his positions — not just on foreign policy but on trade, Social Security and other key issues — are often out of sync with those of Democrats in his part of the country. To expect his region’s voters to dump the area’s moderate Republicans but back Lieberman is to expect that they will adopt a double standard in this year’s elections.

I’m not sure if I could call Connecticut Republicans like Chris Shays and Nancy Johnson “moderate” (especially because nobody has really pinned down what “moderate” means in this sense, since it’s been applied to so many people who disagree on so many points), but the point Meyerson seems to be making is one that I agree with: Lieberman and the Republican politicians up for re-election in Connecticut agree on the biggest issue of the day. Thankfully August 8th is just around the corner, and Democratic challengers Chris Murphy and Diane Farrell can come out from under the black cloud hanging over the Democratic party and align themselves with a true Democrat.