DNC Chair Howard Dean welcomed the decision to keep Senator Joseph Lieberman as head of the Homeland Security Committee and, consequently, in the Democratic Caucus, saying the move was pragmatic, magnanimous and politically shrewd.Note to Howard: It's not, and never has been, about revenge. The whole point is, the Bush foreign policy that Dean is bashing is the one that Lieberman has been vigorously defending. America voted for a new approach and Lieberman hardly represents that approach - in fact he has railed against it and labeled it "dangerous". His betrayal of the Party aside, he has been a shitty chairman with the wrong priorities and the wrong views.
"You know, the desire of revenge is great, of course. But the truth is public policy doesn't run on revenge very well," he said. "And when you see the trouble this country has gotten into in terms of foreign policy, where Bush basically ran a foreign policy based on petulance because he was mad at, for example, Mexico, for abstaining on the Security Council when the Iraq War came up, if you have to actually run the country, it is best not to do it based on feeling of anger towards your enemies."
Mr. Dean, how wrongheaded exactly does a caucus member have to be to lose a chairmanship? Do seniority and collegiality trump all other substantive considerations? Because the backroom, boy's club mentality is most certainly not what the American people voted for in this election, even if it is in this case cloaked in self-aggrandizing magnanimity.
It is also completely insulting, irresponsible, and obnoxiously presumptuous to characterize thoughtful, reasoned opposition to Sen. Lieberman's committee chairmanship - of which I have heard much - as being motivated by "revenge". Speak for yourself, dickhole.
Dickhole? Was that necessary? I'm clearly not as magnanimous and collegial as the Democratic caucus.
