The New Yorker has a horrifying Jeffrey Goldberg profile on Joe Lieberman that could be summed up as follows: it's worse than you think. (Yes, I know; it usually is.) And when I say worse, I mean Joe Lieberman is completely batshit crazy. If you don't believe me, go read Digby's excellent post about the article, and about Lieberman's pathological worldview.
One bit struck me that Digby didn't highlight. Goldberg describes the Petraeus hearing, where Lieberman said an anti-surge resolution would encourage our enemies...and Senator Clinton responded with a certain amount of (perfectly understandable) anger. Goldberg says that later, when he
asked him if he understood why Hillary Clinton might have reacted the way she did, he said, “I can’t explain why she did that.” Then he shook his head, apparently in sorrow.Not a fucking clue.
Of course, the irony of Lieberman's accusation is that this is exactly what he's been doing all along with his incessant digs at Democrats and praise of Bush: encouraging the enemy.
The difference is that one situation is a war, and the other is politics. Wars are won or lost based on things like weaponry, troop levels and training, logistical support, strategic and tactical planning, and so on. Political battles are won or lost based on public opinion. None of our criticism of the Iraq war makes even the tiniest bit of practical difference to what happens on the ground; Lieberman's attacks on what is ostensibly his own party have time and again caused real and practical damage.
[That's all, folks]
|