Tarring the majority

EVERYONE IN Washington supports democracy -- until they don't like the results. US Senator Joseph Lieberman's defeat by the antiwar challenger Ned Lamont in the Connecticut Democratic primary this week has provoked a dark response from prominent Republicans, who have gone so far as to say that it could encourage America's enemies.

Trying to change the subject from what was clearly a referendum on Bush administration policies in Iraq, Vice President Dick Cheney said of the Lieberman upset: ``. . . from the standpoint of our adversaries, if you will, in this conflict, and the Al Qaeda types, they clearly are betting on the proposition that ultimately they can break the will of the American people."

Lieberman also is refusing to accept the verdict of the majority, vowing to run again as an independent in November and telling Connecticut voters they made a big mistake. ``For the sake of our state, our country, and my party I cannot, I will not let this result stand," he said on Tuesday night.

The difference is that Lieberman's angry comments came at an emotional moment of personal defeat, while Cheney's are a cool political calculation to paint Democrats as soft on defense.

That theme was echoed Wednesday by other Republican operatives, including White House spokesman Tony Snow, who made the most overt -- if contrived -- connection between Lamont's nomination, the Iraq war, and the Sept. 11 attacks.

``One of the approaches [of Lamont supporters ] is to ignore the difficulties and walk away," Snow said. ``Now, when the United States walked away in the opinion of Osama bin Laden in 1991, bin Laden drew from that the conclusion that American s were weak and wouldn't stay the course, and that led to Sept. 11 ."

Never mind that the weakling-in-chief who failed to oust Saddam Hussein in 1991 was not a Democrat but the first President George Bush. And never mind that most Americans -- that pesky majority again -- believe the war in Iraq has made the world less safe. The White House just can't resist blurring the lines between Al Qaeda and Hussein.

Statements that demean the choice of 52 percent of the Democratic electorate -- along with Lieberman's insistence on a do-over -- only serve to discourage voters, reducing turnout in elections and further polarizing results. This may be what some Republicans are aiming for; a government paralyzed by partisanship reinforces the belief that government is the problem, not the solution. Still, the system works best when the vast middle participates, not just excitable fringes .

Democracy is messy. But it's still the best system yet devised. If it is good enough for Iraq, it's good enough for Connecticut.