Remembering Joe Lieberman

The shloshim (thirty-day) mourning period for Senator Joseph Lieberman was completed on April 27, but I miss him more than ever.

I became an adoring fan of Joe Lieberman before he became “famous.” A friend living in Connecticut told me of a Shabbat-observant Jewish politician trying to win the nomination for Attorney General of Connecticut. The nomination convention was held over Shabbat. He attended the convention out of respect for the process but would not campaign as this would violate his principled Shabbat observance. (He won the nomination nevertheless.) Thus I learned that the person — Joe Lieberman — was deeply principled, that his religious observance was a strong expression of his character.

When I came to know him in person, I realized that he combined a fundamental religious orientation of life with liberal social views and a non-judgmental acceptance of all people in his orbit. Deeply religious — not based on superiority claims or looking down on others who differed — that was my fantasy of an ideal religious person. But Joe Lieberman was a real person, not a product of my imagination.

That year, 1982, he met Hadassah Freilich Tucker, fell in love and married her. Hadassah’s parents were survivors, members of my community and dear friends. Thus I got to know him in person. Up close, one experienced his lovability which grew out of his embrace of life, his natural friendliness and enjoyment of people. In conversations, one got to see his intelligence and powers of persuasion, his American patriotism and his commitment to Israel.

In 1988, he decided to run for the United States Senate. Some friends and I organized a Jewish support committee. I was in close touch with AIPAC then. In our communal leadership education program, the National Jewish Center for Learning And Leadership (CLAL) spread the importance of Jewish political activism (including building AIPAC) and the need to influence America politically. Joe was running against a popular incumbent, Lowell Weicker (R), who was supportive of Israel. AIPAC’s policy was to back any incumbent who supported Israel-America relations and not help any candidate who ran against such an incumbent. Weicker complained to AIPAC about Lieberman’s campaign and a number of friends at AIPAC contacted me, urging us to step back and not undermine AIPAC’s policy on incumbents.

We pushed back. We promised to make clear that we were operating independently of AIPAC. Still, we were convinced that Lieberman would be more valuable to Israel and AIPAC than Weicker was. He would be a leader. Joe would persuade and rally others to this cause. Lieberman would represent more than one vote in the Senate because he would offer wisdom and good policy advice as well. Joe won the election narrowly and went on to deliver beyond ourpredictions because people looked up to him and followed him.

As Senator, he showed some of his greatest qualities: integrity and sticking to his principles independently, pushing not the party line but what was best for the country. Joe was a natural centrist, as well as open-minded and a good listener. As a result, he was able to reach across the aisle and garner bipartisan support for needed causes. American society benefitted from his leadership but Israel, too, was a major beneficiary of his special talents. Because of his religious values, he was able to connect with the rising stream of evangelicals. He appreciated and worked with them at a time when most secular liberals and Democrats feared them and refused to deal with them. Again, Israel greatly benefitted from this one-man political force in American life.

Joe continued to observe Shabbat and his model reverberated throughout the capital. More than once, he stayed overnight on a cot in his Senate office to be present and vote rather than violate Shabbat with travel. Finally, Al Gore invited him to rest at his apartment in D.C. rather than walk many miles more to return to Lieberman’s home in Georgetown. Gore then began to escort Joe on these walks. Their conversations cemented their friendship and undoubtedly played an important role in Gore inviting Lieberman to run as his vice president—the first Jew in American history to run on the national presidential ticket.

One might say that Lieberman was a walking Kiddush Hashem: a sanctification of God’s name and of the Jewish religion. The Talmud offers one definition of Kiddush Hashem as being someone who offers a model so noble that others say, “This is the kind of God and tradition that I would like to be part of.” His honesty, bipartisanship, patriotism and statesman-like approach to issues were attributed to his wholesome religious outlook on life.

Then there was the contested outcome of the election of 2000. I always felt that the United States Supreme Court intervened in a partisan and politically improper way in stopping the recount of ballots in Florida. But Gore and Lieberman were gentlemen who put the welfare of the country ahead of their personal cause. They believed that further conflict would harm the main institutions of American democracy by undermining public trust in them — so they accepted this unjust result. I never heard a bitter word or attempt to demean the electoral process from Joe — an amazing testimony to his love of country and embrace of life without self-seeking pettiness.

Many times I have reflected on how the quality of American life has been harmed by the defeat of Gore-Lieberman. The extreme polarization in American life would have been prevented by Lieberman’s active outreach across political lines and ability to find compromises that met the needs of both sides. After 9/11, America would have entered the war in Iraq — because Lieberman and Gore voted for the war. But the outcome was more disastrous because of the failure to invest in a functional Iraqi government and a secure, post-war civil society. This reflected the weakness and vainglory of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld. Gore — and certainly Joe Lieberman — would have been much more attuned to the need to secure Iraqi society, lest the corruption and violence undermine the American war effort.This is what happened and it soured the American people on the war and against interventions to save democracy, because it made the sacrifice of American soldiers’ lives (and trillions of dollars) as being in vain.

I believe that had Gore-Lieberman won, then Lieberman, as a highly effective V.P., would have been the (winning) Democratic nominee in 2008. Joe’s 2004 Presidential campaign was undermined by frustration with the war and with the radicalization of the left wing of the Democratic party in response to the war’s failure.

I often reflect what if, in 2008, the winner was the barrier-busting first Jew to serve as President, rather than the first African-American President. In the end, Obama was not able to advance the improvement of African-Americans and the end of systemic racism all that much. And his foreign policy — especially in appeasing Iran — was bad for America, for the world and especially for Israel. After retiring from the Senate, Joe was a key leader in the non-governmental opposition to the treaty with Iran that gave it leeway to pursue nuclear arms.

To this day, I regret that in 2008, McCain did not go with his instincts and ask Joe to run as his vice-presidential mate. Palin was a disaster. Joe would have given a powerful lift to bipartisanship, win or lose. And the Republican Party would not have fallen into the hands of the extremists, conspiracy theorists and Trump, et al.

To this day, I regret that in 2008, McCain did not go with his instincts and ask Joe to run as his vice-presidential mate. Palin was a disaster. Joe would have given a powerful lift to bipartisanship, win or lose. And the Republican Party would not have fallen into the hands of the extremists, conspiracy theorists and Trump, et al.

We miss Joe Lieberman as a human being even more than as a role model. We feel orphaned especially now, when we need his judgment and leadership in facing a great upsurge in anti-Semitism and a shocking anti-Israel, anti-Zionist outburst that glorifies terrorism and cruelty. Even more disturbing, the Hamas enthusiasts support would-be genocide and defend it by falsely labeling the victims of Hamas (i.e., the State of Israel) as genocidal.

Sadly, we cannot call him back. The Talmud says: “Woe to us. We have lost that which we cannot regain.” (Sanhedrin 111A) However, we can let his memory inspire us. Going forward, we need to ask ourselves: What would Joe do? Then, giving our all — as he always did — we need to fight through to another golden age for American Jewry (and Israel-Diaspora relations). The first golden age which was so brutally upended was the age which he incarnated and in which he led us to great heights. May his memory always be a blessing.

Rabbi Yitz Greenberg serves as the President of the J.J. Greenberg Institute for the Advancement of Jewish Life (JJGI) and as Senior Scholar in Residence at Hadar.