Disclosure: I worked for the Lamont campaign doing web design and production and some writing for the official blog (from 9/5/06 to 11/07/06).

Sunday, October 15, 2006


On Credibility

Paul Krugman in tomorrow's Times:

In a recent interview with The Hartford Courant, Senator Joseph Lieberman said something that wasn’t credible. When the newspaper asked him whether America would be better off if the Democrats took control of the House of Representatives next month, he replied, “Uh, I haven’t thought about that enough to give an answer.”

Why wasn’t this a credible answer? Because anyone with the slightest interest in American politics — a group that obviously includes Mr. Lieberman — is waiting with bated breath to see how this election goes, and thinking a lot about the implications. If the Democrats gain control of either house, no matter how narrowly, the American political landscape will be transformed. If they fail, no matter how narrowly, it will be seen, correctly, as a great victory for the hard right....

O.K., what about the Senate race in Connecticut, where Ned Lamont is the Democratic nominee, and Mr. Lieberman, who lost the Democratic primary, is running as an independent but promising to caucus with the Democrats if he wins? Is this a case where the man, not the party, is what matters? Only if you believe that Mr. Lieberman’s promise not to switch parties is 100 percent credible.

Other than this, Krugman forgets one overriding fact: Joe Lieberman is not just a political observer or pundit. He claims to be a part of the Democratic Congress. He promises to remain a Democrat if he wins. But he won't stand up and say a Democratic Congress would be better for America?

One of two explanations is logically possible (and they're not mutually exclusive): (1) Lieberman is feeding Connecticut voters a line of B.S. because he doesn't want to offend the Republican votes he desperately needs to win, or (2) He is planning on caucusing with Republicans, and is feeding voters B.S. when he tells them he isn't.

His credibility is shot, either way. He can't stand up and say "I'll always be a Democrat" and in the next breath say "I haven't thought enough about" whether Democrats in control of Congress would be better for America.

This is more than a slip of the tongue, it's a crack in the armor, revealing the inner machinations of a man whose only concern is holding onto power.

And the crack is growing larger every time he opens his mouth.
I'm sure Joe will have his foot in his mouth plenty at the debate.

Should be fun to catalogue all the new "crack(s) in the armor" after that.
Post a Comment

<< Home