This is why I dislike Joe Lieberman

By Michael J.W. Stickings

You know, I was never one of Lieberman's more vehement critics. Even after he cozied up to Bush after 9/11 (and then on Iraq), I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. And I didn't take sides in the Lamont-Lieberman primary race. But then he lost, badly, ran as an independent, and turned on his fellow Democrats. And I turned on him, for good.

But, of course, he won last week, and, like it or not, it was necessary to welcome him back as a Democrat. And it seemed that he wanted to be a Democrat again. Perhaps he learned something from his defeat in the Democratic primary, I thought. Perhaps he finally understood why the overwhelming majority of Americans had voted against Bush and the Republicans. He's not stupid, after all. Surely he understood what last week was all about.

Apparently not. The Hartford Courant is reporting this:

Four days after calling his party affiliation a "closed issue," U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman said Sunday he was "not ruling it out" that he could turn Republican.

He told NBC's "Meet the Press" he will return to Washington as an "Independent Democrat" - "capital I, capital D."

"I'm not ruling it out," he said, "but I hope I don't get to that point. And, I must say, and with all respect to the Republicans who supported me in Connecticut, nobody ever said, 'We're doing this because we want you to switch over.'"

So what is he, then? Is he just a Democrat so that he can be the decisive figure in the 51-49 Democratic majority? He won in Connecticut largely because he was able to win so many Republican votes. And also because he said he would continue to caucus as a Democrat. But it seems that party affiliation is nothing but a matter of personal convenience to him. He can hold the Democrats hostage even as he courts Republicans.

In the end, it's all about Joe Lieberman. He masquerades as a man of principle, as an independent who hovers above the partisan fray. But no. His principle is self-interest and his independence has a price.

**********

And if that weren't enough, consider this:

Lieberman also left open another controversial door -- supporting more U.S. troops in Iraq.

"I think we have to be open to that as a way to succeed to achieve a free and independent Iraq, which would be an extraordinary accomplishment, but it's got to be tied to a new strategy," he said.

A new strategy is fine, as is the goal of "a free and independent Iraq," but a troop increase insn't the way to go. (For more on this, see here.) It seems that Lieberman hasn't learned anything at all.