Joe Lieberman and Max Cleland

Here's an... interesting perspective:

In a conference call with reporters this morning, Joe Lieberman's campaign announced that former Georgia Senator Max Cleland would be appearing with Lieberman today. This may well be too little too late for Lieberman, but Cleland was a big star during the 2004 campaign and is a hero to anti-war activists (even though he actually voted for the war himself). If nothing else, this is sure to cause some amusing cognitive dissonance for Lamont supporters; it's not exactly easy to write off Cleland as part of the Republican lite Washington Democratic establishment.

I'm no expert, but I don't think that Cleland is "a hero to anti-war activists;" his claim to fame among the netroots is that he was toppled by bogus rhetoric about his softness in the war on terror despite being a triple-amputee and a Vietnam war hero. From what I can tell, the netroots don't care one way or the other about anything Cleland ever did; if he supports them, then he's a war hero that supports them. If he doesn't, then he's just another dude. Nobody, as far as I can tell, sets their priorities according to What Cleland Would Do.

It's possible that Cleland's presence will swing a few votes, but I suspect that the netroots will be so turned off by the following statement from Lieberman about Cleland that his involvement in the campaign will be a wash at best:

Sadly, my opponent has done his best to distort my record, spending at least $4 million of his own money to mislead people into thinking that I am someone I am not. Not unlike what happened to Max Cleland four years ago.

This just reinforces everything the netroots hates about Lieberman. Remember, Cleland lost four years ago because his opponent made hawkish noises and claimed Cleland would let terrorists strike the homeland because only Bush-style hawkishness could work. That comment resulted in Lieberman being called "Wanker of the day" by Atrios, and C&L called it Lieberman's "new low." Commenters thought the whole thing was ridiculous (all typos, etc. original):

• and yet joe kisses up to the same kind of people that claimed Cleland supported saddam.
• Wow, Joe is missing limbs and has been attacked as a terrorsimp?
• yeah, Cleland was destroyed by ReThugs over his opposition to the Department f Homeland SEcurity Bill - the Bill that was championed by JOE LIEBERMAN, who blithely said that he was sure Republicans wouldn't use it to play politics.
• WTF? In what way does pointing out, accurately, Joe's enthusiastic and unwavering support for an unnecessary and disastrous war equate to calling someone who left three limbs on the battlefield in the last unnecessary and disastrous war a clone of Osama?
• Wow. So tarring Lamot with the ROVE brush. Interesting strategy.
• Did Lieberman speak out publicly against the sandbagging of Cleland then??? I think not.
• One more reason to vote for Ned Lamont: disgracing the memory of what the Rovians did to Max Cleland.

Good job, Joe. So much for your move that's "sure to cause some amusing cognitive dissonance for Lamont supporters."

Tags: tnr, dems