The topic of this article is hardly surprising, inasmuch as it simply reinforces the extent to which Lieberman continues to be the same greasy, self-serving sack of shit he’s always been. On the other hand, the lack of insight and sheer bigotry reflected in these responses by Salon’s readers is truly a revelation. Lamont’s fault? The man spent a fortune of his own money, defeated the scumbag/three-term incumbent for his own party’s nomination, and lost the general election only with massive crossover support from Republicans. He did absolutely nothing wrong, and there likely wasn’t a single thing Lamont could have done to have changed the final result. And no, a scheming political whore like Lieberman wasn’t going anywhere, whether Lamont “looked him in the eye” or kicked him in the goddamn balls. Additionally, Lieberman isn’t preparing any run for the Presidency (that hideous prospect is mercifully behind us); moreover, whether or not the skunk bolts for the Republican Party is dependent on one factor, and one factor alone: the prospects of a Democratic retention of the Senate. Lieberman cares about nothing but keeping his reptilian claws on the levers of power, and neither “principle” nor any other factors of concern to flesh-and-blood human beings will ever stand in his way. Finally, the most consequential and revealing aspect of this article is the casual Jew-hatred promiscuously exhibited throughout these responses. While the positions of architects of the war like Cheney and Rumsfeld, apologists like Powell and Rice, and rabid supporters distributed throughout the Republican establishment are correctly described as a function of neo-conservative fanaticism or mind-numbing stupidity, it’s only the views of Lieberman that evidence the disloyalty of an “Israel-first” allegiance. There’s a perfectly apt label for such smears – anti-Semitism – and it’s tough to conceive of a more effective way to discredit the entire Left with the foul stench of ignorance and bigotry.

"he was going anyway and Bush has to find a replacement that can be vetted by the lame duck Senate he controls now."

I don't think that was the motivation, but it's damn true that hearings are something to look forward to with great enthusiasm. It's simply one more of any number of consequences of this week's election that are only becoming apparent as some time passes. Like every other governmental function in which Congress is involved, confirmation hearings will ne taking place in a very specific context, i.e., PAYBACK TIME. The arrogance, the contempt, the total disregard by this White House for the views and interests of the entire Democratic Party - not to mention the half of the Amercian electorate that voted for them - means that the Simpering Imbecile's self-proclaimed "political capital" is completely non-existent. In short, not only do the Democrats have no incentive to cooperate with the Republicans, but it is very much in their interests to oppose them with every resource at their disposal. Accordingly, we can expect - at the very least - LOTS AND LOTS of, shall we say, challenging questions for every single nominee that has the balls to sit in front of the Senate.

Of course, one might argue that the Democrats should approach their "advise and consent" role in in a spirit of non-partisan cooperation with the Executive branch, for the greater good of the country as a whole. In precisely that spirit, they should conduct themselves with every ounce of the courtesy and good will to which they've been treated by Bush over the past 6 years. Maybe to start things off, the Democrats can subpoena Cheney and Patrick Leahy can tell him to go fuck himself on the floor of the Senate.