[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
I think what he means is that disagreement should be done in private, and that a consensus view should be presented to the public. Say, the way a Japanese company is run.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what Lieberman meant. But that is a very illiberal perspective! What happened to the marketplace of ideas? Again, I don't see what evidence there is that presenting this unified front helps us at all. Rather, stressing the need for public unanimity concerning such an important issue just seems to undermine the principles of our democracy.

[ QUOTE ]
Of course, one could say Dems don't want to have a voice, but rather want to bring it to the public for political gain. After all, what is thier alternative plan for Iraq, if they have one they need to bring it to the table and let people see it. What is their alternative plan for Iran and terrorism in general?

[/ QUOTE ]

Personally, I'm not sure they have a plan right now. But of course, it is not uncommon for the opposition party to hold its cards close to the vest in these situations and only lay out a plan once election time rolls around. That's how it nearly always works. They don't want to give the Republicans over a year to counter their plan and formulate a response for next fall's elections. I don't know if I would go as far to claim that they want Iraq to go badly at this point. But I agree with you that the most important priority for most politicians is ultimately their own reelection, and so they may have mixed motivations.