As a life-long Democrat, it’s really sad to see the Party of Presidents Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy turning to mush when it comes to confronting the Islamofascist threat. While the Party has for years endured a vociferous left wing minority going back to Henry Wallace in 1948, and continuing on with George McGovern (”Come Home America”) in 1972, and to Howard Dean in 2004, overall, it managed to maintain a more or less rational view when it came to national security. While inconsistent at times, and prone to emphasizing domestic over national security concerns, there were still enough “Scoop Jackson” centrist Democrats around to balance out the “peace at any price” fringe elements. But the centrist and moderate voices are gradually being shouted down as the war in Iraq has galvanized and energized the anti-war, anti-Bush forces who are bidding to take over the Party.
This extremist challenge is surely a recipe for disaster not only for Democrats, but for all Americans should their views prevail. With the Cindy Sheehans and Jack Murthas avidly seeking public audiences for their defeatists views, and with Bush hatred poisoning rational debate within the Party, radical left-wing elements exemplified by DailyKos.com and MoveOn.org are in the ascendancy. And even the more mainstream media such as the New York Times, Newsweek and CNN have been feeding this new frenzy.
But nowhere has the struggle for the direction and soul of the Party become more defined than in the primary challenge to Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. Lieberman, the Party’s vice-presidential standard-bearer in 2000 and former State Attorney General, is running for his fourth term. Normally, he would be a shoo-in both for the Democratic nomination – and given his popularity in the Nutmeg State – for re-election. But Lieberman’s reasoned opposition to a precipitous withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq and his assertion that Iraq has become “a war of necessity that we can’t afford to lose” has produced a firestorm of vilification from the extreme left in Connecticut. It has spawned a primary challenger in the person Ned Lamont, a self-funding millionaire and cable company executive, with no previous political experience. Surprisingly, Lamont garnered one third of the delegates at the Hartford nominating convention in May. Even more incredibly, one recent poll shows him within single digits of Lieberman for their August 8 face-off. Lamont, who has himself previously contributed to Lieberman, is basing his campaign on the single issue of Iraq. He has found his most receptive audience among those who describe themselves as “liberal”. Lieberman’s approval rating with these voters in an April poll was 46%, with 49% disapproving. Among Democrats as a whole, Joe, of course, did better, with 54%, approving and 41% disapproving. But as Lamont narrows the gap, and with the mid-summer August 8 primary date – when we know who is more liable to turn out – the alarm bells are ringing.
The real possibility of a Joe Lieberman primary defeat should be a wake-up call for those who admire and respect him for what he stands for, both as a politician and as a person. As opposed to too many of his current Senate colleagues, Joe’s non-partisan, problem solving approach to the issues of the day has been a welcome respite from the intense partisan bickering in Congress. His partnership with the GOP chair of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Susan Collins, could serve as a model for all chairmen and ranking members of Senate committees who want to get something done. Lieberman has cooperated with Senators on the other side of the aisle while maintaining his solid Democratic credentials. His voting record shows that he stuck with his Party 90% of the time. But most notably where he has departed from the party line has been in his reluctance to join those who rashly advocate either immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, or according to a fixed timetable. Last week he was one of only six Democratic Senators to vote along with all GOP Members, (except Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island) against a resolution calling for the President to begin the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Lieberman did this, knowing full well how it would intensify the wrath against him of vocal Administration critics in Connecticut seeking to defeat him. But for Lieberman, given his previous stances, it was a principled position to take.
Should the unthinkable happen, and Lieberman fail to get the nod of his party in August, a run for Joe as an independent should not be out of the question. This, despite the fact that the deadline for filing 7,500 signatures to get on the ballot, is only one day after the primary. The required number of names could be gathered by a group independent of Lieberman’s primary campaign. So far, polls demonstrate that Lieberman could win re-election running as an independent. If so, it is not likely he would switch his allegiance to the Republican side, but continue his fight to rescue the Democratic Party from a path of isolationism and defeatism. Should he and the dwindling number of “Scoop Jackson” Democrats left in the Party fail in this endeavor, it could well dampen the hopes of a revival of Democratic political fortunes nationally. A Lamont win over Lieberman will mark Democrats as weak sisters in the war against Islamist terrorism, and brand them as unsuited to protect our nation’s security. So the stakes on August 8 could not be higher – not only for the political fortunes of Joe Lieberman and the Democratic Party but for the future of our nation.
Morrie Amitay, a Washington attorney, is a former Executive Director of AIPAC and founder of the pro-Israel Washington PAC (www.washingtonpac.com).