Opinari.net
Opinari - Latin term for Opinion. Opinari.net is just what it seems: a cornucopia of rants, raves and poignant soliloquy. |
Monday, October 27, 2003
The Dems Debate:
More and more, I respect Joe Lieberman, much more so than any of the other Democratic candidates. If you look at his financial backing, he is in the middle of the pack. If you listen to many of the dovish Democrats, you will hear the sentiment that Lieberman would be "too cozy" with Israel, thus miring us in a Middle East "quagmire" (an aside: Quagmire is such an overused word. I would encourage the candidates to come up with something else.) Given the mood of the Democratic establishment, it appears that an "anti-Bush" candidate (read: Dean) is much more likely than Lieberman to gain the nomination.
To me, that is unfortunate for the Democrats. Lieberman, if anything else, has been more consistent on his positions than the others (save the fringe candidates Braun, Sharpton, Kucinich, et. al.) In last night's debate, Lieberman questioned the positions of Clark, Kerry, and Edwards. The triumverate of presidential wannabes have vacillated on many of their policies, depending on the crowd to which they have been catering. Lieberman called them on this, to their consternation. Said Lieberman:
“I don’t know how John Kerry and John Edwards can they say supported the war, but then oppose the funding of the troops who went to fight the war...” Lieberman also accused (General Wesley) Clark of adopting “six different positions” on war with Iraq, and complained about Clark that “it took him four days to decide whether voting on the $87 billion was a good idea.”
All of this is true. Now, it can be said that Lieberman himself has compromised some of his own positions in the past when he has entered presidential politics. However, on the Iraq position, he has not wavered, nor is he likely to do so. Clark, Edwards, and Kerry, in their thirst for the nomination, have changed their mind, and are free to do so again and again. This might play well to the fragmented constituents to whom they play, but, if one of those candidates secure the nomination, the Democrats will likely fare poorly in the general election. (It is my belief that the Democratic party underestimates the public perception of the war on terrorism, but I digress). Lieberman is probably the most electable candidate of the Dems, yet for his steadfastness in position (given the party's venomous hatred of Dubya and any policy to which he may be attached), he will surely pay. If so, I think the Democrats will regret it.Labels: Archives_2003
.: posted by
Dave
11:56 AM
| |
Recommended Reading
|
