I know it's Thanksgiving and a time for thoughts of family, hearth, and home, but...this just pisses me off so much. A couple of lefty blogs have linked to Peter Beinart's piece of mind-reading and anonymous sourcing as though it were the perfect key to understanding the frustrating actions of Sen. Joe Lieberman. I think it's all kind of bunk and worse, the kind of bunk that if Glenn Beck or Maureen Dowd wrote about Obama or John Kerry, they would all dog-pile on top of it. Beinart's column is a seven-paragraph pile of steaming b.s. that ignores the simplest, most basic fact: Joe Lieberman is running for office again in 2 years.
I'm not the senior political reporter of anything except my kitchen, but I read tons and tons about it, think about it, talk about it pretty regularly. So I feel completely comfortable spouting off. In the internet age, that's about as much license as you need. And this is something I want to spout off about: stop with the mind-reading of our political officials. Or, at least, do better at it. This is one of the places where I think more dramatists doing political coverage would be helpful. Because we understand a basic thing: people do things for reasons.
Joe Lieberman, as far as anyone can tell, used to be a fairly conservative Democrat, maybe less so on social issues, but never really a liberal flamethrower like a Teddy Kennedy. He also does seem to enjoy the limelight, but then again, show me a politician who doesn't and I'll show you a political science teacher at a high school. Wanting the limelight, the power and influence comes with the job.
Sure, maybe his feelings were hurt by the primary of '06. That's legitimate. It might even be key. But I just don't see it as the driving factor behind his swing to the right. Not on issues he had held fairly liberal views on in the recent past. I mean, sure, he's a bit of a Youstabee, but it wasnt' that far a trip. I've said it before: it's about 2012 and about a re-election strategy. Especially if he goes all the way and filibusters health care reform, the way he's threatening to. He's trying to reach out to Connecticut Republicans and not leaving any room for a "real" Republican to enter the race to his right. If he does like he did in 2006 and peel off enough moderate to conservative Democrats, he can win a plurality and keep his job. Not everything is Dynasty, with people motivated by pure emotion. There are calculations to be made, strategies to put in place. Joe's gotta be thinking, "How do I position myself for maximum appeal?"
Now I know that's more mind-reading. And, hell, we could all be wrong. He might have made an actual, personal swing to the right. It happens. He might be bought off by insurance money. That happens, too. In way, none of it matters. What matters is how you (and by "you," I mean the Senate Democratic leadership) deal with it. And that's where the obsession with Joe Lieberman, Egomaniac gets us (and by "us," I mean progressives) in trouble.
If we're thinking that all Joe needs is more time in the spotlight, then you wait him out. He's angry, his feelings are hurt and he's acting out. Like a petulant child. So you ignore his outburst and wait for him to come to his senses. I don't think that will work. I think if the Senate Dems try to wait him out, they'll be standing there, gobsmacked, when he votes to filibuster.
I think Harry Reid has to treat Joe not like a child, but like a conservative Democrat or a moderate Republican: make a deal. Figure out what Joe needs and wants and give it to him. And if that won't work, threaten him. Seriously. Find a charismatic, slightly to his left Republican and convince him or her to run for the Senate. Hell, find a charismatic, moderate Democrat and threaten to run him or her as a Democrat. Make sure that Joe knows the Democrats are willing to lose the seat outright. If it's a choice between being a hypocrite and keeping his seat, I think Joe will try to keep his seat. That's what he's been doing.
But, also: stop with the mind-reading. Or get better at it.
