January 5, 2009 -
January 12, 2009 • Vol. 14, No. 16
Download Now! (pdf)

Contributors
Editor (on leave):
Michael Goldfarb

Deputy Editors:
John McCormack
Samantha Sault

Contributors:
Jennifer Chou
Brian Faughnan
Ulf Gartzke
Mary Katharine Ham
Reuben F. Johnson
Thomas Joscelyn
Stuart Koehl
John Noonan
Bill Roggio
Search
Archives
Contact
wws@weeklystandard.com
Categories
Feeds: Atom | RSS
[What is this?]




« Stay Tuned for Sarah? (Update: First 'Draft Sarah' Site Up and Running) | The Blog home page | Michelle Obama's Gluteal Golpe (Or, the Tale of the Transcendental Tuchis) »

Won't Take Yes for an Answer

What is best in life? To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.

This is precisely what the Democratic party achieved with Barack Obama’s historic victory on November 4. The Democrats increased their majorities in both the House and Senate while eliminating anything even resembling a functioning opposition. Those Republicans that survived the massacre are exhausted, scattered and foraging for scraps. It was a bloodbath, and one that should have satiated the blood lust of even the most committed Democratic partisans. Yet some Democrats can’t seem to accept a complete and total victory -- they want to round up the wounded and execute them. Joe Lieberman’s name is at the top of their list.

To his most rabid detractors on the left, Lieberman’s perceived offenses are too many to count. The grievances are tedious and petty and small in comparison to what compelled him to offend in the first place: loyalty to a friend and a commitment to victory in Iraq (a war that many of his opponents once supported but have since abandoned and absolved themselves of any responsibility). Lieberman knew the potential consequences of his political disobedience, but in the end President-elect Obama, Majority Leader Harry Reid, and incoming White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel were magnanimous and merciful -- and why wouldn’t they be? None of Lieberman's statements was beyond the pale.

Of course, to the Jake Tappers, Keith Olbermanns and Joe Kleins in the “press corps,” any statement from the McCain campaign was considered beyond the pale, but Michael Scherer catalogues the ‘worst of the worst’ and there’s nothing there that wasn’t echoed by a hundred other decent and honorable supporters. Perhaps Lieberman was more committed to the fight than his counterpart on the Obama campaign, Chuck Hagel, but any sense of proportion has been lost by the hysterics leading the anti-Joe lynch mob. And there are no pitchfork wielding Republicans intent on burning Chuck Hagel at the stake. There was hardly a peep from the right over his heresy because nobody cared.

The Democratic party and the left won a stunning victory in this election, and while they should be savoring it (and most are) a few are busy trying to settle old scores. It’s pathetic, but it’s also cause for some optimism: these people are a cancer on the Democratic party that even a landslide victory couldn't cure.

Email the article Won't Take Yes for an Answer to a friend:

Send this article to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):