Three

Is there a left wing attitude against success for the Iraqi elections? Certainly they won't be celebrating the outcome, regardless of what it may be. Their emotional investment in failure in Iraq is too deep for them to overcome. The problem isn't that they're opposed to peace for Iraq, it's just an aversion to George Bush that overwhelms every aspect of their thinking. Here's a perfect example, from Alternet, of the early (pre-invasion) shaping of leftist thought on Iraq. The title alone, "Bush Wins: The Left's Nightmare Scenario" reveals much. The discussion is of possible outcomes of the invasion:

The first is an optimistic "We Win" scenario, which would result from massive protests and diplomatic pressure forcing President Bush to postpone an invasion indefinitely. (What has yet to be addressed is what exactly we win if Hussein remains indefinitely in power and the sanctions go on killing Iraqis.) With war seemingly imminent, the movement is being forced to fall back on a second scenario, "Everyone Loses," in which the warnings of a protracted and bloody war that destabilizes the Middle East and increases terrorism bear their bitter fruit.

However unpalatable in terms of destroyed lives and infrastructure, this latter scenario would at least quash the Administration's imperial dreams and force the kind of soul searching of United States' policies that is a major goal of the movement. But this outcome is less likely than many assume, and the antiwar movement would be well advised to plan for a third scenario: "Bush Wins."

In this third scenario, the war is over quickly with relatively low U.S. casualties, some sort of mechanism for transitional rule is put in place, and President Bush and his policies gain unprecedented power and prestige. From my recent conversations with organizers and their latest pronouncements, it is clear that this possibility has yet to be addressed. Waiting much longer could spell disaster for the antiwar movement.

The reality is that we're much closer to that third scenario than we are to the second. A simple left wing response would be "sure, Iraq's turning out better than we thought - but look at the domestic situation in the US!" This response would likely have led to John Kerry taking the oath of office last week. But on the left the Bush Hate overwhelms all, and an insistence that the "everyone loses" scenario described above is what's actually happening is the result. At the very least, a willingness to believe everything that conforms to this mode of thought is an undeniable affliction of the left today.

How low can they go? Want to see an example? Here's a left-wing blogger discussing watching a dying child graduate from his son's elementary school:

When it was Lilly's turn, her teacher held the microphone up to her mouth, and she tried to speak her name -- tried desperately. But she couldn't do it. The motor skills just aren't there any more. So her teacher turned to the audience and said it for her:

"This is Lilly, and she's spunky."

Spunky. Goddamn right. Spunkier than I'll ever be -- and I dare say most of you as well.

Spunkier than most of our official war "heros," who go into battle with the full weight of the world's most awesome military machine behind them.

Spunkier than our president, for all his macho posturing and flight desk photo ops.

And certainly spunkier than our neoconservative Beltway warriors -- always eager to send others to fight and die in wars their own children will watch on television.

When your response to a child with cancer is to think how much you hate the president, you have a problem.

Joe Lieberman offers a glimmer of hope for the future of the Democrats and a continuation of a two-party system in America:

Joseph Lieberman, a Connecticut Democrat who strongly backed the war, urged a "resounding vote" for Rice to show "that we're together for what we're pursuing which is a successful conclusion to our involvement in Iraq and to the spread of freedom and democracy throughout the world."

Daily Kos, the most visited left wing blog in the world, responds:

We could look the other way if Lieberman represented, say, Utah. But does Connecticut truly deserve this neocon? I have a policy of neutrality for primary elections, but would make an exception in this case. I don't doubt that a legitimate primary challenger to Lieberman would garner serious netroot support. And if what I hear is true, there are serious efforts underway to draft such a person.

Eschaton, left wing blog #2, agrees. (And don't miss the comments at Atrios site. The first one says it all.)

Kos and Atrios represent Left Wing Information Toilets - information depositories where the "sewer base" of the Democratic Party feeds - and if the Party doesn't come to it's senses soon and flush that's all the support they'll have.

To return to the Alternet piece above, credit the author for this line: the antiwar movement would be well advised to plan for a third scenario: "Bush Wins." indeed, but he's out of step with the modern left, whose current motto is as follows: There's no need to plan anything, it's our world and we'll define it as we please. Further, there's really no need for a plan, as there's no one on the left who'd take any action on said plan anyway. If anyone can provide a reasonable version of a left wing plan for anything (something more substantial than Kerry's secret plan to win the war in Iraq) I'd certainly be willing to hear it.