December 10, 2005

Lieberman Out Of Lockstep

The Democratic leadership is making it clear that they will not sit idly by while a prominent member of their party commits the heresy of refusing to parrot their "Iraq is a failure" mantra. Voicing an agenda that takes into account the security of our country and the morale of our troops instead of a knee-jerk anti-Bush narrative will get a Senator taken to the woodshed by the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

Here's the editorial that got Lieberman in trouble. It contains much for Democratic leaders to find objectionable, like the title 'Our Troops Must Stay", for example. Then there's the thinly veiled suggestion that Bush's Iraq policy might be something other than an abject failure:

Progress is visible and practical. In the Kurdish North, there is continuing security and growing prosperity. The primarily Shiite South remains largely free of terrorism, receives much more electric power and other public services than it did under Saddam, and is experiencing greater economic activity. The Sunni triangle, geographically defined by Baghdad to the east, Tikrit to the north and Ramadi to the west, is where most of the terrorist enemy attacks occur. And yet here, too, there is progress.

It is with this kind of independent thought that Lieberman, who was the Democratic nominee for the Vice-Presidency of this country only five years ago, has been cast out to the margins of his party. Ed Morrissey has an excellent post on Lieberman being on the outs with his Democratic colleagues. Ed suggests that the Democrats "could have waltzed into the White House on a Lieberman-led ticket" in 2004, but they chose to abandon the one member of their party who could have convinced Americans of his credibility on national security. More from Ed:

One has to wonder why, under the circumstances, Lieberman hasn't left the party that so obviously has left him. His dogged loyalty probably explains that, and that makes his latest stand all the more remarkable. Lieberman is no babe in the political woods; he understands perfectly what his statements did to the Democrats. Instead of openly wondering what motivated Lieberman to take this kind of action, Reid and other Democrats in party leadership should ask themselves why they made it necessary for him to do so.

Posted by dan at December 10, 2005 8:56 PM