@#%* Joe Lieberman And The Horse He Rode In On

I can't stand Joe Lieberman. I mean, I really can't stand him. This vain, wishy-washy, in the insurance company's pockets Senator from the state of Connecticut makes me seethe. I can live with someone who disagrees with me or their party on principle, but I can't stand anyone who talks out of his ass like this guy.

It's difficult to think of a Senator who has given his party more headaches in recent years than Lieberman. The fact that he was the party's Vice Presidential nominee and running mate of Al Gore in 2000 boggles the mind. Let's go ahead and start with the year 2000 shall we? Next to Dan Quayle, has anyone brought less to a presidential ticket than Lieberman? In a campaign plagued with second guessing and bad decisions, Gore's choice of Lieberman may have been the worst. While it's possible that Gore thought that Lieberman was the best choice available, I think his decision was a cynical one. I'm willing to bet that Gore thought Lieberman would help him with moderates and help pull the Jewish vote in Florida and therefore take the presidency. Now Lieberman might have helped marginally in Florida, but clearly not enough to overcome the debacle of the 2000 "hanging chad" election. I really can't see any other state that Lieberman helped Gore with at all. It's not like the liberal state of Connecticut was in doubt. And how about his milquetoast performance in the VP debate with Dick Cheney? He came off about as tough as Mr. Rogers after he slipped on his sweater.

After 9/11, Lieberman quickly fell out of favor with his party. His full throated support of the misguided Iraq conflict all but sunk him with the liberal base. When Lieberman ran for the 2004 Presidential nomination of the Democratic Party, he was soundly defeated in every state primary or caucus that he campaigned in. When Lieberman ended his candidacy on February 4, 2004 he admitted that his support of the Iraq War was likely his undoing. Yeah Joe, that was it.

Things got even worse for Joe in Connecticut during his senatorial re-election campaign in 2006. Despite much greater name recognition and a distinct financial advantage, Joe lost in the democratic primary against antiwar candidate Ned Lamont by a 52-48 margin. After losing the primary, Joe then decided he would run as an independent vs. Lamont and the Republican challenger Alan Schlesinger. While Lieberman stated that he would continue to caucus with the democrats in the senate if he won, this is where the rift with his party began to open. By not accepting the results of his party's primary, Joe forced many of his democratic colleagues to choose sides. Would they stand by Joe or would they go with the voters in the Connecticut primary? The response had to be painful for Lieberman. High profile Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Howard Dean declared their support for Lamont, and most others followed suit. In fact, most of the support for Lieberman came from Republicans who were probably hoping for a defection if Joe won. Well, Joe did win the three-way election. Despite receiving only 49% of the vote, Lieberman was helped by pulling most of the moderate Republicans in his state. In the end, Lamont came in with 40% and Schlesinger with 10%. And even though Joe didn't defect and continued to caucus with the democrats in the Senate, he would prove to be a serious pain in the ass for his party going forward.

This pain manifested itself fully in the Presidential election of 2008. Lieberman incensed his fellow democrats by throwing his full support behind John McCain over Barack Obama, stating the "war on terror" as his primary reason. Now, it's one thing to support a candidate outside of your party, but it's another thing to actively campaign for the Republican nominee, pull a "Zell Miller" at the Republican Convention, and internally campaign for the VP position of the opposition party. After McCain lost to Obama, many in the party wanted to strip Lieberman of his chairmanship positions in the Homeland Security and Environmental Services committees. None other than the new President---who Lieberman campaigned against so diligently---intervened on his behalf. In a certain light, Lieberman's position could be seen as honorable. Can we honestly say that Lieberman didn't think that McCain was the best choice? Maybe not, but after viewing his behavior during the health care debate, I have serious questions.

It's important to supply a little background on Joe's history with the health care industry. Since becoming a Senator in 1989, Lieberman's fourth largest campaign contributor has been the health care industry. His wife Hadassah, currently works for a lobbying company called APCO Associates, that represents a number of pharmaceutical and health care industries as well as major drug companies like Pfizer. Of course, none of this is illegal, but considering the flip-flops that Joe has made in favor of the for-profit health industry over consumers in recent months, it makes me want to ask "Who's side are you on?"

The first inconsistency is on the subject of the "public option." Many democrats (and most citizens) are in favor of a government ran option that would allow those who could not afford insurance to receive assistance from a national program. During that 2004 Presidential election, Lieberman campaigned for a public option. He stated that he thought it was the best way to reduce costs and provide assistance to those who could not help themselves. So you would think that when the issue of the public option was raised in the health care debate that Joe would be all for it, right? Wrong. Joe stated that a public option would add to the national debt and that he had to do the "right" thing by the country and his constituents in Connecticut. There are two problems with Joe's points. First, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office produced a report that stated that a public option would actually reduce the national debt. Secondly, in recent polling in his state, the citizens of Connecticut were in favor of a public option by a 69-21 majority. Did that give Joe pause? No. In fact, he even went as far to say that he would filibuster along side the Republican minority in effort to disallow a vote on any health care legislation that included a public option.

Due to parliamentary rules in the Senate, the Democrats need 60 out of 100 Senators to produce an up or down vote on health care legislation. Since they currently have exactly 60 Senators and no Republicans are willing to defect to the side of the Democrats, that means they need every single Democrat to stay home. With that in mind, Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid of Nevada crafted a compromise. One that would allow people between the ages of 55-64 to buy into Medicare if they were without employer provided insurance. In the past, Lieberman had always supported the expansion of Medicare. Only three months ago, Lieberman went on record stating that allowing people to buy into medicare at the age of 55 would be a quality alternative to the public option. He even walked out of the compromise meeting with Reid stating that he liked the "direction" they were going in. So far, so good, right? Wrong again. Joe again reversed course and said that he would filibuster any expansion of Medicare in the final health care bill.

I take this last bit very personally. Over a year ago, my dad lost his job at the age of 62. Months before that his company dropped their health care coverage. Thankfully, my dad, being a military veteran, could at least go to the Veteran's Administration Hospital in Ann Arbor, Michigan. But after his company went under, that meant a very expensive (gas, ya know) six hour round trip every time he needed care. Even worse than that, my mom was declared disabled by her doctor. And after fighting with social security for over a year in an effort to receive disability benefits, at the age of 56 has only now qualified for Medicare. While I am grateful that neither of them had a catastrophic health issue in the lag time between the loss of insurance to receiving coverage now, I can only think of how many other people weren't as fortunate.

So here's the thing, when you're Joe Lieberman, you are in the position to help people. In some cases, save their lives. Now, I don't expect every politician to be in favor of a public option or Medicare expansion. I do, however, expect those that say they are in favor of such things to back up their talk with action. Unfortunately, Joe Lieberman is not one of those people. I was watching a commentator on the news the other day describe Lieberman as the equivalent of a girl at a beauty pageant who isn't getting enough attention and therefore tears off her top and runs around screaming until everyone has to take notice of her. Well Joe, I've taken notice. And what I have seen is a vain man who has decided to put his own personal issues of revenge against his party and fealty to special interests over the needs of the people whom he was elected to represent. I'm not naive, I know Joe isn't the first or the last. Hell, he may not even be the worst. But he is a rat bastard, lying sack of shit. May he slip and fall, and right soon.

Sumo-Pop
December 20, 2009