Sen. Joe Lieberman is a limited man, for all the reasons adduced here. So was Sen. Andrew Johnson (D., Tenn.). But he was pro-Union in the winter of 1860-61, and that’s what counted then, as the Middle East is what counts now. ~Richard Brookhiser

I don’t know which is worse: the outlandish (some might even say disproportionate) comparison between the secession crisis in 1860, which unfortunately led to the bloodiest war in American history, and “the Middle East” (by which I assume he means Iraq, and maybe Iran?), when the gravity of the two cannot begin to be compared.  But maybe Brookhiser has a point.  Without disloyal men like Andrew Johnson to betray the Constitution’s fundamental principles, we could never have had that massively bloody war and political revolution that destroyed the Union, so well done, Andy.  As for “the Middle East,” well, that certainly has been bloody for the last three years…because of the appalling decision of men like Joe Lieberman to support a war of aggression.  So, yes, I suppose there are similarities.  Oh, but this was supposed to make me want to support Lieberman?