Office of the Independent Blogger

The worst thing in politics is the distortion of message. It may just be that human nature is prone to mischaracterize and belittle opposing viewpoints because they’re opposing viewpoints, but politics bring out the worst of people’s comprehension skills. It’s inevitable in a field of opinion and ego, but that doesn’t make it any more right, and sometimes, it isn’t just wrong but utterly shameless. Take Ned Lamont’s latest attack on Joseph Lieberman. Lieberman called for Donald Rumsfeld to resign. He’s called for Rumsfeld’s resignation several times before, and now he’s reiterated it. Lamont’s stance is that Lieberman is flip-flopping, which isn’t even remotely true. Lieberman has been more consistent on the Iraq War than anyone who supports it. He isn’t John Kerry, who minced words and refused to speak out for eight months; he isn’t George Bush, who changed the focus of rationale every couple weeks depending on the latest whims in public opinion. He’s always always always said, Saddam had to go; we didn’t send enough troops; Rumsfeld should go; but we have to stay. That’s too complicated for Ned Lamont, though.

The Lamont campaign issued a statement Sunday criticizing Lieberman for trying to “paint himself as courageous for clinging to the failed ’stay the course’ policy in Iraq and not listening to the voters of Connecticut on the need to change course.” “His new found ‘criticism’ of the war won’t convince Connecticut voters after so many years of stubbornly rubber-stamping Bush’s failed policies,” the statement said.

The war in Iraq was the hallmark of Lamont’s primary campaign. He calls for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from what he often refers to as “a bloody civil war,” and says he believes that those who got America into the conflict should be held accountable. Lieberman accused Lamont of distorting his stance on Iraq. “He made me into a cheerleader for
George Bush and everything that’s happened,” Lieberman said. “And the record shows that, while I believe we did the right thing in overthrowing Saddam Hussein, I’ve been very critical over the years, particularly in 2003 and 2004, about the failure to send enough American troops to secure the country, about the absence of adequate plans and preparation to deal with post-Saddam Iraq.”

“As bad as things are now — and they’ve gotten worse in the last six months — it would be a disaster if America set a deadline and said we’re getting all of our troops out by a given date,” Lieberman said. “That’s a position Ned Lamont has taken.” Tom Swan, campaign manager for Lamont, said Sunday the campaign stands by its criticism of Lieberman as being too close to
President Bush.

Lamont’s a piece of garbage. “Too close to President Bush” is too close to bullshit for my taste. Lamont knows full well that aside from support for the general War, George Bush and Joseph Lieberman are too different to be close. Just because they share a position on an issue doesn’t make them close. Hell, Lamont’s personal background is similar to Bush’s. Maybe we should start to say they’re the same man because they’ll both go easy on taxes and be happy to tear into the Environment? The only difference between comparing Lieberman’s closeness on issues to Bush’s and Lamont’s to the King’s would be that Bush and Lamont do have more in common idelogically. Doesn’t matter, though, because Ned opposes the War!

The other famous Liberal who supported the War in Iraq and has since faced political opposition as a lapdog for the President is Prime Minister Tony Blair, and I equally find the criticism of Tony to be unfair. Blair is in the news again but not for criticism leveled against him. No, this time, it’s with a leak saying he feels betrayed by Bush over the Middle East.

A senior Downing Street source said that, privately, Mr Blair broadly agrees with John Prescott, who said Mr Bush’s record on the issue was ‘crap’. The source said: “We all feel badly let down by Bush. We thought we had persuaded him to take the Israel-Palestine situation seriously, but we were wrong. How can anyone have faith in a man of such low intellect?” The disclosure comes ahead of a mini recall of Parliament to allow MPs to vent their fury over Mr Blair’s handling of Israel’s war with Hezbollah and whether the recent terror plot in Britain was affected by his role in the Iraq war.

George is a disappointment on both sides of the Atlantic. If we’d listen to nuance and sense rather than attempt to Lyndon Johnson every Liberal who happens to support the War in Iraq, we’d understand this. Or maybe I’m wrong, and the truth is that Tony Blair and Joseph Lieberman love War, Conservatism and Bush.

This entry was posted on Sunday, August 20th, 2006 at 6:51 pm and is filed under Outside Retort (Current Affairs).