In an article release in this week's Time Magazine, reporter Massimo Calabresi writes in a semi-puff piece that Joe Lieberman made a statement that leaving the Democratic Party is a "very remote possibility".
In terms of such language parsing, is sanctimonious Holy Joe continuing to play mind games in a sordid attempt to undermine the his Democratic colleagues or is he setting the stage to actually cross the aisle. This follows Lieberman's recent comments that he may vote for a Republican in the 2008 Presidential elections.
Take a quick read on the flip (entire article can be accessed here.):
Lieberman says leaving the Democratic Party is a "very remote possibility." But even that slight ambiguity — and all his cross-aisle flirtation — has proved more than enough to position Lieberman as the Senate's one-man tipping point. If he were to jump ship, the ensuing shift of power to Republicans would scramble the politics of the war in Iraq, undercut the Democrats' national agenda and potentially weaken their hopes for the White House in 2008. Those stakes are high enough to give Lieberman leverage with both parties no matter how slim the chance of his crossing the aisle. Which means Senate leaders aren't worrying only about whether Joe Lieberman will switch parties. They're wondering what, if anything, he plans to do with the power that comes from keeping that possibility alive.
Is this about ideology or principle? It's all about neither...it's about revenge and power, pure and simple. Lieberman appears to be continuing to taunt his colleagues with these carefully lobbed comments to the press. He's almost like an angry high school kid whose friends wouldn't support him for Class President.
Lieberman's bitterness, exemplified by his very public threatening hints and his juvenile behavior, as shown by his recent boycotting of Democratic caucus luncheons, is so blatant that it's led him to become a symbol of hypocrisy, uncivility and lack of integrity for most Democrats.
Would Lieberman actually have the balls to make the switch? Not likely IMO, but Calabresi really misses the point in this closing paragraph:
Lieberman's G.O.P. flirtation has its risks — and a time limit. By this time next year, the 2008 election cycle will overshadow anything that happens in the Senate. The longer he waits to capitalize on his moment, the greater the danger that he'll be tagged as one of those politicians for whom having power is more important than using it.
Does Calabresi not realize the point has passed in terms of Lieberman being "tagged" as someone "for whom power is more important than using it"? Lieberman has long ago established his reputation as a political pariah among most Democrats and many Independents.
By the way Joe, you don't have a right to be bitter. Those that should be bitter are the thousands of Connecticut voters who are now realizing you lied to them.