More Politics: To All of You Party-Line Liberals and Conservatives: Listen up!

Okay, more politics to talk about here, but now I am getting a little bit upset about some of the stuff I'm hearing. Man, what crazy times these are. First of all, before I mention this morning's foiled terrorist plot, more about Liberman:

I am so sick of all the comments from the Left and Right peanut galleries about the signifigance of Lieberman's loss - namely the comments that oversimplify the current political situation into the broadest possible terms. Okay, according to many, it seems like there are only two foreign policy positions one can take - you can be either a Hawk, or a Dove.

By this VERY FLAWED simplification, you can be:

a.) A Hawk - You support all instances of Bush-approved military action against the perceived Islamo-fascist terrorists. This means you fully approve of the war in Iraq, root for the Israelis to kick Hezbollah's ass, and are fully convinced that the Iraq war was fought because doing so was a direct response to the threat of global terrorism.

b) A Dove - You are basically a peacenik hippie who not only opposses the war in Iraq, but wants immediate withdrawel no matter the consequences. You denounce all politicians who voted for the resolution to go to war. You are more concerned for the oppression of the Palestinans and the civilian casualties of the Lebonese than for Israel's right to defend itself from terrorists hellbent on its destruction.

So yeah, this simplification is RIDICULOUS.

But right now it seems like the real, actual Hawks and Doves are by far the most vocal groups, and each end of the spectrum is looking to pull in the average voter, most of who are probably in the middle. Most people, like you and I, actually think things through rather than go on oversimplified, dogmatic beliefs.

Someone like Michael Moore, who states that Lieberman's ousting was a message that Americans won't stand for anyone who supported the war, is a gross oversimplification, and also a foolish condemnation. Moore is falling into the same trap I described in my post yesterday - his views come off as simply reactionary rather than well thought-out. The oppossite is someone like Ann Coulter, who demonizes liberals by always speaking in broad strokes about what liberals believe versus what conservatives believe. Ann takes the same approach of oversimplifying things in the name of neatly fitting things into a very general worldview that conforms to the Conservative norm.

Also, praising one guy just because you don't like his opponent rarely leads to good things. See: the election of George W Bush following public weariness with the Clinton administration.

Basically, I'm sick of people on the far left and right oversimplifying everything just so that events fit neatly into their own narrow world views. Every foreign policy decision has to be looked at as unique - there's no logic in saying "well, I'm against the war in Iraq, therefore I oppose Israel's actions against Hezbollah." That thinking doesn't add up.

Finally, about Lieberman, again I have to say that he should not run as an independent. It goes a long way towards further screwing with the already-critical Democratic party, and really, is pretty pointless other than that it sets a terrible precedent. If Lieberman truly wanted to run as an independent, then fine - he should have done that from the START, not after losing a primary. It just shows that Lieberman was resting on his laurels and not really paying attention to the political climate of Connecticut.

I think what Lieberman really suffered from was his inabilty to communicate his platform. John Kerry suffered the exact same problem in the presidential election. Lieberman is a smart guy - he should have been able to explain himself and his platform in a few simple sentances. instead he got caught up trying to refute his opponents allegations against him, meaning he was always on the defensive rather than the offensive.

Again, I don't think Lieberman's loss REALLY has to do with his foreign policy positions - that is the easy and simplified way of looking at things. His loss stems from the same problems that plagued Kerry - we are at a time when we need leaders who can articulate, can sweep us up in their message, who seem to relate to the common man with a vision for the future. It's why Clinton succeeded, it's why people like me are already wondering when Obama is going to run for president - he's one of the few politicians out there who doesn't come off like a crusty old lifer on Capitol Hill. I think Lieberman's loss, ultimately, is just the result of a huge national frustration with the political establishment.

Which brings me to ... the thwarted terrorist plot today.

All I really have to say right now is that:

a.) thank God for British Intelligence- MI6, baby.
b.) Ugh - once again the world is in turmoil and Bush is on vacation, seemingly reciting half-assed rhetoric fed to him over a wire - at least that's what it seemed like as he stammered something this morning from Crawford about Islamic fascists.
c.) the continued terror threats are a good reminder to those whose anti-war position has somehow morphed into a "Dove" position as described above. There are A LOT of terrorists out there who want to kill Americans, Jews, and basically are crazy murderous bastards. These guys need to be rooted out, aka exactly what Israel is doing now. Where Iraq fits into this equation is something apparently determined by big oil companies, but the fact remains: there is ample, legit terrorist ass that needs to be kicked - we just have to find it.