Lieberman sucks! (Plus a poll)

Again today we're reminded of why Sen. Joe Lieberman (Idiot-CT) should be reviled by everyone for being a lying traitor committed to an unending war and the destruction of the progressive movement.  In a column he penned for Time Magazine's fifth annual list of the world's most influential people to be featured in its upcoming issue, Lieberman worships at the alter of Senator Walnuts McShame:

His personal values, strength and experience in war and peace prepare him well to protect us from the Islamist terrorists who are today's greatest threat to our freedom and to build bridges to the rest of the world that will secure and improve our future.

Besides all that, John likes to laugh—often at himself—which is another kind of courage not found in all politicians. John McCain's life has earned him a place on the TIME 100 list and has prepared him to be America's next great President.

This latest offense follows Lieberman's having told reporters in mid-April that he'd be happy to make a prime time speech endorsing McCain at the Republican National Convention.

"I want to do everything I can to help him succeed," Lieberman, I-Conn., said in a conference call with reporters Friday. "When and if he thinks that me delivering a speech at the convention in Minneapolis would help him, I would do it."

On Monday, the University of Connecticut's daily newspaper, The Daily Campus, blasted Lieberman in an editorial titled Just Say It Ain't So, Joe, calling him out for his duplicitousness in offering the "...guise of transcendent bi-partisanship when what he really is doing is stiffing both his former party and once loyal supporters..."

Feeling spurned by the party he was once a member of, it seems as though for Lieberman, politics is about personal advantage. When he announced his run for president in 2003, he was quick to decry the slow and meager George Bush administration anti-terrorism response. Now that he is supporting the Republican nominee, Lieberman unsurprisingly finds that same terrorism response to be comprehensive and appropriate. His trip to Iraq with McCain is a gratuitous beefing-up of his Republican credentials signaling perhaps the inevitability of an eventual party change.

Of course, there are Lieberman lovers out there, such as Stuart Rothenburg, who believes Lieberman could ensure a McCain victory in November.  In a column published on RealClearPolitics.com, Rothenburg observed:

Lieberman's selection to McCain's ticket would send a clear message about bipartisanship and about McCain's desire to change the way things are done. While the Democratic nominee surely will talk about bringing people together and "change," a truly bipartisan McCain-Lieberman ticket would trump any and all Democratic rhetoric.

Should we, as progressives, encourage McCain to select Lieberman? Would the traitor from Connecticut really strengthen McCain's chances in November? What are your thoughts?