The Political Football: Cynical Collapses and Redemptive Comebacks
Joe Lieberman endorsed John McCain for President almost exactly three years ago, at a time when McCain’s shots at the GOP nomination were widely dismissed as DOA because of his reputation as a “moderate,” and as a “maverick” willing to stand up to his party’s right-wing base. McCain’s popular reputation was that he was a man who was a profound supporter of the military, and who, unlike other Republicans, vehemently opposed attempts to impose inhumane policies on the military. Lieberman, meanwhile, was just a year removed from winning re-election to the Senate by running as an independent candidate to the Right of his party’s nominee. In unrelated news, Mike Vick had just been sentenced to 23 months in federal prison for brutally ensuring the deaths of dozens of dogs, and Brett Favre was on the verge of playing his last game for the Green Bay Packers. Just as McCain would soon abandon any pretense of being a “maverick,’ Favre would soon abandon any pretense of caring about the Green Bay Packers. As Vick walked into federal prison, Lieberman was finding himself more isolated from his own party.
Who would have thought at that moment that just three years later, McCain would be proudly and vehemently leading the opposition to the elimination of an inhumane policy imposed on the military, whilst defying both his wife and daughter to become the George Wallace of the gay rights movement, and also whilst becoming a major opponent of a treaty that the military believes to be vital to our national security? Who would have thought then, when one of the major conservative criticisms of McCain was that his “maverick” reputation was based on McCain’s willingness to turn on conservatives whenever the political tides were against them, that he would not only be doing all of the above, but that he would be doing so on two issues where 2/3 to 3/4 of Americans were on the side of liberals, and where the tide of history was abjectly in liberals’ favor? And who would have thought that all of this would occur in the same week, a month after McCain had won re-election and just a few months after he had successfully turned back a primary challenge from the right?
Meanwhile, who would have thought three years ago that it would be Joe Lieberman who would passionately and consistently lead the way on one of the more significant civil rights questions of our time, whilst his endorsee McCain fought tooth and nail to block those civil rights? Who would have thought that Joe Lieberman would time and again turn out to be the hero of the hour, bringing that fight back to life every time it appeared hopeless? Who would have thought that, when the battle finally appeared won but the monster of DADT came back to life, horror-movie-style, it would be Lieberman’s constant vigilance and apparently genuine concern for a liberal cause that would immediately make sure it was dead once and for all, without any further damage being done, and in a way that will never, ever appear on his voting record (so he won’t even be able to brag about it come primary time)?
I expect Lieberman will still go down to defeat in his 2012 primary, and even despite this, he probably deserves to. But he deserves that history remember what he has done these last several weeks, just as McCain, who will get to keep his seat as long as he wishes, will deserve that history remembers him as the bitter man standing in the way of justice, progress, and a safer world, while, along with his cynical opposition to START, refusing to stand up for the servicemembers he once claimed to love.
In unrelated news, this week Mike Vick is being openly discussed as an MVP candidate who has by all appearances emerged a changed man. As with Lieberman, many will quite understandably never forgive Vick for what he has done in the past; but also as with Lieberman, few fail to see power of what he is doing now. This past Sunday, Vick engineered the most awe-inspiring comeback in the NFL since Frank Reich brought the Buffalo Bills back from 32 down at halftime in a 1994 playoff game, bringing the Eagles back from 21 down with 8 minutes left to win in regulation. What Joe Lieberman did in making sure that DADT repeal was brought back to life was not only infinitely more important, it was also more difficult by orders of magnitude – where Vick had Andy Reid calling the shots, Lieberman had Harry Reid calling the shots; and while Vick was up against a team with Manning the Lesser at QB, an awful rookie punter, and a depleted receiving corps, Lieberman was up against a Republican team filled with crotchety and unbending old men coming off a major victory in which they said “No” approximately 8 million times, and “Yes” approximately zero times.
Brett Favre, meanwhile, has just played the final game of his career – for the hated Packers rival, the Minnesota Vikings – in a season in which he appears to have literally exposed himself as a poor excuse for a husband and a teammate. As with McCain, few in the media will view Favre’s cynical actions these last several months as more than a footnote to his career; but as with McCain, Favre’s cynical actions have largely destroyed his legacy with the people whose opinions matter most.
It was all to common during the HCR debate for disgruntled liberals to want Obama and the Dems to rain punishment down on Lieberman for various truly irritating and obnoxious moves. What they seemed to forget is that they would want and need Lieberman’s support and energy on other issues like this.
We can only hope Farve is gone.Report
I think the conversation went something like this:
Rahm: Lieberman $*@&ing endorsed McCain, for $*@&’s sake. He’s a $*@&ing traitor! He deserves to $*@&ing die!
Obama: Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. For even the very wise cannot see all ends.Report
I’ll admit, I was favorably inclined towards those who wanted Lieberman out in the cold for being such a loose cannon. A little party discipline for the famously discipline less party might do some good yadda yadda. Happily I wasn’t a passionate anti-Lieberman fulminator.
But there’s no doubt that Obama and the party leadership made the right call by keeping Lieberman in the tent pissing out rather than outside the tent pissing in. I’m not sure about his re-election chances but I know for sure that I’ll personally be grateful to him and Pelosi for this as long as I live.
And who knows? It’s a big win that’d be most appreciated by the lefter portions of the party that out primaried him before. Maybe Joe can win the primary for himself next election. If he does he’d be a shoe in for re-election and maybe the Dems would be fortunate to have him.Report
On a fair many issues, all the Dems managed to do was keep Lieberman inside the tent pissing in it. I don’t know if this one issue where he’s been any use outweighs the damage he’s done to much more major initiatives like health care reform and ending the Bush abuses of power.Report
Yeah it’s true Katherine, intellectually I know it but emotionally I’m just feelin grateful to Joe this week.Report
Okay, I’m reeeeaaaaallly in the dark about football, but isn’t there a difference between Joe Lieberman and Michael Vick in that Joe Lieberman was hated for some political stances he’s taken and is now forgiven because of other political stances he’s taken, while Michael Vick was hated for something totally unrelated to football and is now forgiven for being really good at playing football? Am I wrong? Were there people who hated him for how he used to play football, while being happy with him killing dogs?Report
There is, perhaps, a bit of shoehorning going on in this analogy. But the time lines fit too well, and the opportunity to intermingle the two biggest stories of the moment in politics with the two biggest stories of the moment in football – and become the first person in history to compare a politician favorably to Michael Vick (I doubt I’m the first to compare a politician unfavorably to Brett Favre) – was just too much to pass up.Report
Yeah, I thought so. Just really hoping you were going to say, “Wait, Rufus- you didn’t hear about Joe Lieberman’s underground dog fighting ring?!”Report
Wait. You mean you haven’t heard about Joe Lieberman’s underground dog fighting ring?Report
There is a difference between ostensible disloyalty to an organization (and a very legitimate question whether in this case the organization actually had the desire that loyalty be paid, as opposed to simply the desire to dictate both when a long-serving team member’s career with the organization would come to and end and what opportunities that member would then pursue apart from the organization), and being a bad teammate. When you listen to Brett Favre’s teammates past and present, you hear players who almost without exception view their time playing with him as a positive experience. As to the man’s personal failings, are we really now embracing the idea that in the case of athletes and celebrities (as opposed to political leaders, where I am indeed interested in personal character), people’s personal flaws and mistakes are relevant to the part of their lives that we take public interest in and evaluate?
I am actually entirely on board with the idea that Michael Vick can pursue redemption in part on the football field, but at the same time, if we take that view, given what he did, is there any reason to view another player in such a harsh light by comparison whose sins are basically switching teams, struggling with the desire to keep playing after perhaps he should hang it up (and being indecisive in public about that struggle), and sending some unfaithful text messages based on a misunderstanding? Are we under the impression that NFL players are saints (well, some are Saints, but…)? And how can we compare this litany of grievous misdeeds so unfavorably to those of Michael Vick (whose nascent redemption I am, again, at this point quite invested in)?Report
But we’re not talking about mere disloyalty to an organization vs. whether he’s a good teammate – we’re talking about whether he’s disloyal to the most important part of the equation, which is Packers fans. If the organization didn’t want him anymore and he wanted to try to play somewhere else, there’s nothing wrong with finding a new team to play for. But he went about this in a way that was uniquely disrespectful to the fans who were so loyal to him for almost two decades, engineering the token move to the Jets for a year specifically so that he could stab Packers fans in the back by donning the purple and white.
I did say that I was just trying to shoehorn this in, right? For my analogy to work, I need to make Favre’s fall from grace as big as possible, since McCain’s fall from grace has been monumental indeed, or at least it has been in the eyes of anyone outside of the Sunday talk show circuit. So I have to throw everything in, including the kitchen sink.
A few things here: First, to me, the redemptive value for Vick isn’t so much that it makes his crimes easier to forgive as it is that it means something actually good came of his time in prison such that he’s taking football seriously in a way he had not previously done. Basically, he is now what everyone hoped he would be and knew he could be 10 years ago (back when the phrase du jour was “I have seen the future, and its name is Michael Vick”), but which he refused to be. Which, I guess, is where the Lieberman comparison makes more sense – the result of Lieberman’s exile is that he’s taking his responsibilities in a uniquely serious way. Second, on Favre: I already discussed the issue of switching teams and the text messages above, but I think the whole question of his flip-flopping shouldn’t be too easily dismissed, either – that flip-flopping, especially this year, had very real effects on the ability of his team to get ready for the season. The other thing of course is that he so often seemed to put “the Streak” ahead of winning.
One thing to keep in mind, here: I’m not comparing Favre’s misdeeds to Vick’s dogfighting operation so much as I am comparing the tracks of their last several years to McCain and Lieberman, respectively. There do seem to be quite a few fans (though not many in the media) who have lost most or all of the respect they once had for Favre for the way in which he’s acted these last few years, much as there are quite a few people (though not many in the media) who have lost most or all of the respect they once had for McCain for the way in which he’s acted these last few years. Meanwhile, there are a lot of people for whom Vick’s performance this year is far from completely redemptive (not only of the dogfighting but also of his failure to reach his potential between 2000 and 2006), but who find it a legitimate thing of beauty and revelation to watch what he’s doing this year; similarly, Lieberman’s actions on DADT won’t redeem him in the eyes of most liberals/civil libertarians/Democrats for his actions between 2000 and 2008, but most such people cannot possibly help but find it a legitimate thing of beauty and revelation to watch what he has done to ensure DADT’s passage.Report
Josh McDaniels should have killed more dogs, I tell you what.Report
It couldn’t have helped any less than his ham-fisted attempts to spy on other teams did, that’s for sure.Report
If the organization didn’t want him anymore and he wanted to try to play somewhere else, there’s nothing wrong with finding a new team to play for. But he went about this in a way that was uniquely disrespectful to the fans who were so loyal to him for almost two decades, engineering the token move to the Jets for a year specifically so that he could stab Packers fans in the back by donning the purple and white.
I am precisely one such fan, but I have never seen why I should feel disrespected or stabbed in the back. If we wanted him not to be out there in the league trying to beat us, we should have kept him around. He had willing suitors and good relationships in Minnesota that wanted him to come to play there. I don’t see why we should begrudge him wanting to play somewhere he is (or was) wanted. I also don;t see why we should feel stabbed in the back by his wanting to beat us. This is a sporting competition – that’s the point. Should Donovan McNabb not want to beat the Eagles? Or the Redskins? Or the ________? It doesn’t make him a bad guy, it just makes him a competitor. This was the path the Packers chose; who are we to say Brett shouldn;t play for the Vikings if we wanted to get Aaron Rodgers going as a starter?
Obviously, many of my comrades feel differently, but at the same time that sentiment it is far from the consensus one among us, though it may be a majority one. Basically, opinion on the question is mixed, though probably slanted the way you describe it. But the point is it is far from cut and dried that the fans feel as you describe, nor that they should (in my view).
I did say that I was just trying to shoehorn this in, right? For my analogy to work, I need to make Favre’s fall from grace as big as possible
Right, that’s all I’m saying. As long as you acknowledge you had to do some stretching on Favre as well. I certainly acknowledge the trajectories are in the opposite direction lately for Favre and Vick (But that’s just the way of things as with aging, isn’t it? The flesh weakens and not everyone adjusts with equal grace. I don’t see where it ought to completely destroy our esteem for people.), and the analogy to McCain & Lieberman is nice; I like it. I just don’t think it was totally fair to Favre as you had calibrated. But that’s me; others obviously will disagree.Report
Unfair to Favre? Moi? Perish the thought! (I have mentioned that the sole accomplishment to which my Bills will be able to point this year is ending Favre’s streak, right? So I may have an ulterior motive for inflating the importance of that event by making Favre out to be Satan himself.)Report
I have considered suggesting before that it’s possible you were being just ever so slightly ungenerous in your comments, but in all honesty I by no means have any strong brief for the guy, and don’t want to appear as a hopeless, enthusiastic defender of his (whatever my actually feelings, which I hope I am making clear are conflicted – how could they not be after what he’s put me through?), so I chose to remain mum. I happily recognize your right to your opnion of the guy. 😉Report
Another way to put this, I guess, would just be as an appeal to keep in mind where we would rank these figures in terms of our overall esteem for them as public figures based on character, success in their profession, effect on society, seriousness of bad actions, etc, at this point. And for me, though things are changing fast, from lowest to highest esteem at this point these four would still rank like this (again, least to most esteem): 1. McCain (and falling fast); 2. Lieberman (and rising fast); 3. Vick (and rising moderately quickly); 4. Favre (and falling steadily, albeit with an expected acceleration in that deterioration pending the announcement of the results of the NFL’s investigation into his conduct with the Jets).Report
The thing about Vick is that he was never that good a quarterback. Spectacular, sure, but not noticeably effective. His best quarterback rating for a full season bad been 81.6 (the only time he’d broken 80); so far this year it’s 103.6. It makes no sense that he could lose two years of playing football and in the process improve from mediocre to great. The only logical conclusion is that, while in prison, he sold his soul to the devil.Report
What assumes Lieberman will run as a Democrat. He might just go the independent route again. He did it the last time he lost the primary. So why bother with the party if its just a drag. With the Alaskan result the value of party on the state level has been reduced a bit, and if you have the name recognition you can win without it.Report
You underestimate how unpopular Lieberman has made himself in Connecticut over the last 4 years. His approval rating is 25%, and he gets completely creamed in head-to-head polling against both Democrats and Republicans. It’s not that parties aren’t important enough to stop him; it’s that parties aren’t important enough to elect him any more.Report
As a Nutmegger, allow me to point out that Lieberman is a Senator from Connecticut not from Mississippi. Had Lieberman lost in 2006, we would have a senator every bit as good on DADT and miles better on a host of other consequential issues. The same will be undoubtedly be true when 2012 rolls around.Report