I was interested to see that Ed Koch did a sudden about-face recently and endorsed President Obama’s reelection. It was a rather dramatic transformation, as Koch had just led the charge to beat the Democrat running to replace Rep. Anthony Weiner because he wanted to send a message to the president about his policies toward Israel. However, the president asked for a meeting with Koch, and Koch came away from the meeting feeling that he had misunderstood the president’s words and actions. Koch hasn’t been an elected official for a very long time, but he’s probably the best example of an American official who transparently puts the interests of Israel (as he sees them) above any domestic considerations. He’s fairly open about it, probably because he’s not actually an office-holder.
This is obviously one of the most sensitive subjects in American politics. There have been so many lies and libels against Jews, and with such tragic results, that one must tread lightly around subjects of dual-loyalty. Yet, that doesn’t mean that we can’t question to actions of Jewish politicians when their behavior seems to indicate that they’re putting the interests of Israel (as they see them) ahead of the interests of their own constituents and their own political ideology.
How do we explain the recent actions of Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut? He’s not supporting the president on the jobs bill. He even opposes the bill coming up next week to hire back teachers, police officers, and firefighters. This is not consistent with Lieberman’s record over 22 years in the Senate. He’s always been a friend of public service workers, and even though he’s clashed with teachers over vouchers, he’s been supportive of teachers and education spending.
There are some senators who oppose the president’s plan because they’re up for reelection and they’re worried about more stimulus spending, even if it’s paid for. That’s certainly the case with Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Jon Tester of Montana. But Joe Lieberman isn’t running for reelection, so he’s liberated to vote his conscience. Does his conscience tell him that we need more unemployed teachers, police officers, and firefighters? Has he suddenly decided that the Republicans are right about how to stimulate the economy? I kind of doubt it.
Joe Lieberman endorsed John McCain in 2008, arguing that he was better prepared to take on Islamic extremism. If Lieberman was worried about Obama on that score, his fears should have been alleviated by Obama’s relentless pursuit of bin-Laden and his super-agressive drone campaign. It’s hard to see why Lieberman would still want the president to lose his reelection bid, but that is how he is behaving.
Remember that this man was the Democratic Party’s nominee for vice-president in 2000. He hasn’t changed that much. Certainly, he has a more hawkish attitude than he used to, which is somewhat understandable in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. But he was a leader in repealing the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy, he’s tried to lead on climate change, he’s pro-choice, and he’s generally on the left’s side of most political disputes. If he’s trying to sabotage President Obama’s presidency, there must be some powerful motivating force. Is it spite? Or he suffering from the same malady that Ed Koch so recently recovered from?
It’s an uncomfortable question. But when a man inexplicably votes against his entire history, against the preferences of his own constituents, against his own caucus, and when he doesn’t have any good excuses for his actions, you have to wonder what’s going on. Why is Lieberman jettisoning everything he believes in to try to destroy Obama’s presidency? Is it because he cares first and foremost about Israel?
It’s not a subject matter that I raise lightly because I know the history and danger of such accusations. The one thing I know for sure is that Lieberman’s opposition to the president’s job proposals in inexplicable unless we realize that he wants Obama to fail.
