Akismet has started eating valid comments. I saved those I was able, but I suspect quite a few have been lost forever. Apologies, and I will check askismet daily to ensure no comments are lost.

HT: Andrew Sullivan.

I’ve got a lot of mixed feelings about Joe Lieberman. I voted for him for Vice President in 2000, but I think he’s been overly to the right on the Iraq War. I respect him for running as an independent — I would really like to see a viable third party in the U.S., and every elected official without an R or a D behind their name is a symbol of what can be accomplished — but I sometimes wonder why he bothered, since he pretty much votes as a Democrat. But I respect his clear willingness to work with Republicans — it’s moderate politicians, like Lieberman, who will make post-election healing easier.

So, I think a move by Reid to punish Lieberman for his speaking role at the Republican National Convention is motivated by political payback, and could have lasting repercussions:

After the meeting, the Connecticut senator did not discuss what he and Reid talked about, but said, “The election is over, and I completely agree with President-elect [Barack] Obama that we must now unite to get our economy going again and to keep the American people safe.

“That is exactly what I intend to do with my colleagues here in the Senate in support of our new president,” he said. “And those are the standards I will use in considering the options that I have before me.”

Reid said in a statement that no decisions had been made during their meeting.

“While I understand that Sen. Lieberman has voted with Democrats a majority of the time, his comments and actions have raised serious concerns among many in our caucus,” said Reid, D-Nevada.

Reid was especially irked by Lieberman’s prime-time speech at the Republican National Convention this summer.

During the speech in St. Paul, Minnesota, Lieberman said, “Sen. Barack Obama is a gifted and eloquent young man who I think can do great things for our country in the years ahead, but, my friends, eloquence is no substitute for a record, not in these tough times for America.”

Winston Churchill once said, “In War: Resolution. In Defeat: Defiance. In Victory: Magnanimity. In Peace: Goodwill.” Now, what matters most here is that third: “In Victory: Magnanimity.”

Wikipedia says this: “Magnanimity (derived from the Latin roots magn- great, and anima, soul) is the virtue of being great of mind and heart. It encompasses, usually, a refusal to be petty, a willingness to face danger, and actions for noble purposes.”

So let’s encourage our Democratic congress to be above petty, and to demonstrate that the Democratic Party does not punish those within, or who align with, for dissenting from the party line. We saw what happened to a Republican Congress which refused to stir the pot with George W. Bush, and I’d rather have a Democratic Congress that doesn’t blindly rubber stamp everything.

UPDATE:

Look, there’s been a talk over the last few days of, did Obama get a mandate? If so, what was his mandate for? I think he got a mandate, and I don’t think it was to push a far-left agenda, actually, I think it was for something a lot of people in this country would like: a mandate to elevate the tone of politics in this country. And that’s a mandate I would hope that Democratic leaders like Harry Reid would consider. Is punishing Lieberman really elevating the tone in DC? I remember hearing stories of how Republicans who stepped away from the Bush party line were threatened, and I’d hope that the Democratic Party is smart enough not to punish their colleagues for standing up for their principles. I don’t agree with Lieberman’s, obviously, I think he backed the wrong candidate, which is why I did not vote for John McCain, but I don’t think he should be punished for it. Let’s elevate the tone. Heck, let’s CHANGE the tone. And now that language and slogans necessitated by the election are over, I hope the Democrats can prove they mean it.