Friday, February 23, 2007

Lieberman Calls for a Cease Fire

Senator Joe Lieberman wants Democrats to stop trying to sabotage the reinforcements in Iraq before they even get started.

Well, he called it a "cease fire," but it is essentially the same thing. I've not understood the determination of Democrats to undermine the reinforcements in Iraq before we've had any time to see if the strategy works. General Patreaus says we should know in six months if it will work or not. Can't they wait that long before cutting and running?

Evidently not, given the number of strategies to sabotage the effort floated by various Democrats. They know that Congress has the power of the purse. If they really want to end the war, they can defund it. But doing that would put them in the uncomfortable position of being responsible for ending the war, and that's a responsibility they do not want. They want to end the war but make President Bush (and by extension, Republicans) be the ones responsible for it.

Now Lieberman is saying to stop the foolishness and give the plan a chance.

U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman called for a “political cease-fire” for the next six-months to give the new military leadership a chance to show the public the new strategy is working.

Lieberman who met with state officials in Hartford Friday said “I’ve taken a position on the war in Iraq that’s very different from the Senate Democratic caucus, true,” but when it comes to domestic policy “I agree much more with the Democrats.”

He said the chances of him switching parties from Democrat to Republican is “very remote," but the man who was elected as an independent in a three-way race this November knows better than to rule anything out.

I said just the other day that Lieberman would make a lousy Republican, and any Democrat who thinks he has suddenly become a conservative is stupid (ok, not in precisely those words). Now even Lieberman is backing off the "if you don't stop X, I'm divorcin' ya!" rhetoric. It just wouldn't make sense for a guy who votes with the party 80% of the time to leave it over one issue, even an important one like the war. It's better to fight for the soul of the party from within it.

It seems like the Kos Kids were at the press conference, though.
As the press was called off by Lieberman’s handlers, a Wesleyan student who had attended the "No Child Left Behind" discussion that brought Lieberman to Hartford Friday, asked him why he changed his stance on the war after the election.

Mike Pernick said during his campaign Lieberman promised to bring the troops home as soon as possible and now he supports a plan to increase troop levels. "It doesn’t make sense," Pernick said.

It makes me wonder if Pernick voted for John "I voted for the war before I voted against it" Kerry. Can he honestly say he didn't know that Lieberman supported the war effort before the election? There's nothing dishonest about promising to bring the troops home as soon as possible. Everybody agrees with that sentiment. The disagreement comes about over when that will be.