Holy Joe and the Bloggers of Doom

Majikthise, Atrios, Bullmoose, Kos, and Drum are in a war over Jon Chait's column. The column recommends that the Democrats in Connecticut vote for Lieberman even though he's a terrible senator with whom most of them disagree. Apparently Chait feels this is a way to beat back the angry lefties in the world of blogs who want Holy Joe to sleep with the fishes and to drag the party back to 1972. Not that anyone's asking me, but I don't see how one has anything to do with the other.

What's sinking Joe Lieberman among Democrats isn't his voting record (which looks pretty good, though it seems so out of sync with his public image that I wonder whether the people keeping the tally included votes that don't really mean anything--like voting for a law raising the minimum wage but refusing to vote to end the filibuster on it), or even his bucking the party on the Iraq War (as such). It's that every time the Dems summon up some momentum against a President that pretty much every Democrat, leftist or centrist, dislikes, Lieberman throws himself between the Dems and the President and scolds the Dems for being so mean. It's very deflating to see Lieberman defend Bush on Abu Ghraib, or imply that dissent against the war in Iraq helps the terrorists because it brings down "the only President we've got." It's almost as deflating as Lieberman's chumming it up with Dick Cheney during the Vice-Presidential debate, or (even worse) kissing Bush on the floor of the House before the State of the Union. He makes nice with the other side so often that a lot of us wonder: shit, Joe, why don't you marry them?

Other centrists don't have Lieberman's problems (at least, not to his degree). Maria Cantwell, one of my senators, is up for re-election this year. She's taking some flak over Iraq, and is almost as unbending on the subject as Lieberman is; but Cantwell will get my vote anyway because she picked fights with Bush and Alaska Senator Ted Stevens over oil tankers and ANWAR, fought dirty, and won. There are some on the left who remain pissed and won't volunteer for Cantwell, but they'll come home by the election. (Fear of Ted Stevens's clone, Mike McGavick, will see to that.) I'm to the left of, well, just about everyone really; but Cantwell's my senator for as long as there isn't a more attractive alternative who can win the general election. I can figure that in a fight she'll mostly belt the Republicans, not her own voters.

What's not at stake in the Lieberman election is the question of taking the party back to 1972. I expect that Kos and Atrios, their ostensible liberalism aside, would back just about any Democrat over Holy Joe. Left, right, or mainstream, any Dem who could restrict himself to a firm, cold handshake when meeting the President would be enough. Any Dem who could keep his face off Fox News for a few consecutive days would be enough. Any Dem whose first instinct isn't to attack other Dems would be enough. Ideology isn't the issue here. Joe Lieberman's continued self-aggrandizement at the expense of his supposed friends is.

Senator Lieberman, maybe this experience will teach you something. The next time you feel an impulse to kiss President Bush, make sure it looks like the kiss that Michael gave Fredo.