July 24, 2006
A Letter to Joe Lieberman
Here are some excerpts from Joe Lieberman's September 3, 1998 speech
in the U.S. Senate about Bill Clinton's personal failings. I make no
attempt to defend Clinton--what he did was wrong and not acknowleging
such for so long was wrong. I'll follow with my concern and part of the
crux of the argument against the retention of Joe Lieberman as U.S.
Senator--that Lieberman has failed to address, let alone condemn, the
moral failings of George Bush.
"But the truth is, after much reflection, my
feelings of disappointment and anger have not dissipated. Except now
these feelings have gone beyond my personal dismay to a larger, graver
sense of loss for our country, a reckoning of the damage that the
President's conduct has done to the proud legacy of his presidency, and
ultimately an accounting of the impact of his actions on our democracy
and its moral foundations.
The implications for our country are so serious that I feel a
responsibility to my constituents in Connecticut, as well as to my
conscience, to voice my concerns forthrightly and publicly, and I can
think of no more appropriate place to do so than the floor of this
great body...
...I
have come to this floor many times in the past to speak with my
colleagues about my concerns, which are widely-held in this chamber and
throughout the nation, that our society's standards are sinking, that
our common moral code is deteriorating, and that our public life is
coarsening. In doing so, I have specifically criticized leaders of the
entertainment industry for the way they have used the enormous
influence they wield to weaken our common values. And now because the
President commands at least as much attention and exerts at least as
much influence on our collective consciousness as any Hollywood
celebrity or television show, it is hard to ignore the impact of the
misconduct the President has admitted to on our children, our culture
and our national character...
...The President is not just the elected leader of our country, he is,
as presidential scholar Clinton Rossiter observed, "the one-man
distillation of the American people," and "the personal embodiment and
representative of their dignity and majesty," as President Taft once
said. So when his personal conduct is embarrassing, it is so not just
for him and his family. It is embarrassing for us all as Americans.
The President is also a role model, who, because of his prominence and
the moral authority that emanates from his office, sets standards of
behavior for the people he serves. His duty, as the Rev. Nathan Baxter
of the National Cathedral here in Washington said in a recent sermon,
is nothing less than the stewardship of our values...
...In choosing this path, I fear that the President has undercut the
efforts of millions of American parents who are naturally trying to
instill in our children the value of honesty. As most any mother or
father knows, kids have a singular ability to detect double standards.
So we can safely assume that it will be that much more difficult to
convince our sons and daughters of the importance of telling the truth
when the most powerful man in the nation evades it. Many parents I have
spoken with in Connecticut confirm this unfortunate consequence.
The President's intentional and consistent misstatements may also
undercut the trust that the American people have in his word, which
would have substantial ramifications for his presidency. Under the
Constitution, as presidential scholar Richard Neustadt has noted, the
President's ultimate source of authority, particularly his moral
authority, is the power to persuade, to mobilize public opinion and
build consensus behind a common agenda, and at this the President has
been extraordinarily effective...
...But the President, by virtue of the office he sought and was elected
to, has traditionally been held to a higher standard. This is as it
should be, because the American president is not, as I quoted earlier,
just the one-man distillation of the American people but the most
powerful person in the world, and as such the consequences of
misbehavior by a President, even private misbehavior, are much greater
than that of a an average citizen, a CEO, or even a Senator. That is
what I believe presidential scholar James Barber, in his book, The
Presidential Character, was getting at when he wrote that the public
demands "a sense of legitimacy from, and in, the Presidency. . . There
is more to this than dignity, more than propriety. The President is
expected to personify our betterness in an inspiring way, to express in
what he does and is (not just what he says) a moral idealism which, in
much of the public mind, is the very opposite of politics."
Joe, whether it be George Bush's continued monarchal over-reaching of
presidential authority, the long term immorality and double-talk that
led our country into Iraq, the lies surrounding 'fixing' the problems
with Social Security, the vulgarity of the Bush-endorsed attacks
against the patriotism of Johns Murtha and Kerry, the callous veniality
towards the inhabitants of New Orleans, the delinquency towards aiding
those in greatest need, the gaping dichotomy between Bush's words and
his scandalous action/inactions--where is your outraged speech on the Senate floor?
Plus, regarding your railings against the entertainment industry, while
sometimes deserved, where is YOUR leadership in rallying against the
standards of misbehavior so visible by your fellow member role models
in the House and the Senate? Does such transgressions and improprieties
by national figures have no moral consequences for this nation Joe? Where is your outraged speech on the Senate floor?
If you feel such a personal and professional warmth towards George Bush
that you'll gladly engage in kissy-poo with him, then one can only
discern that you accept that our current president's actions:
"...personify our betterness in an inspiring way, to express in what he
does and is (not just what he says) a moral idealism which, in much of
the public mind, is the very opposite of politics." -- remember Joe, these are
your words on presidential inspiration and moral idealism. Otherwise, where is your outraged speech on the Senate floor?
No,
Joe, I'll take my chances with Ned Lamont if I'm in a
battle with the Tom DeLay-ites. I want Ned covering
my back--he can better discern who is trustworthy and who is a scammer
and he isn't back living in the Senate of some decades ago where trust
was appropriate and agreement actually meant something.
Joe, in today's political climate, you have to earn the respect of your Republican opponents, make them fear you
to at least some degree before rapprochement can even be a
possibility. If you are willing to play the avuncular patsy then don't expect us
to fall in lemming-like as you anchor yourself and the Democratic Party into longterm minority
political status.
Joe, what is wrong can be summed up in five words: Karl Rove wants you re-elected. 'Nuff said.
top
RSS feed
|