As at least one of you mentioned below, the NYT’s Gail Collins wrote a terrific column on Joe Lieberman.

Referring to his 2006 campaign, Collins says:

Lieberman, a big supporter of the war in Iraq, expected the party’s base to nominate a candidate who disagreed with them about the critical issue of the day, had failed at the most crucial task delegated to him during the previous presidential election and was one of the most sluggish and cliché-ridden public speakers in the history of oratory.

He was shocked when they decided not to.

It’s not just those things, however, that so alienated the voters of my home state. It was that Lieberman not only wanted you to vote for him despite him sticking it to you; he wanted you to think more of him for it. Because he so clearly thought that his own flaws were in fact a great virtue, and talked about them in such a fashion ad nauseam. (Or should I say, ad Lieberman?)

And after the voters said, Joe, this war stuff is pretty important to us, Lieberman took his ball and went home, doing his best to ruin the party whose voters had, reasonably enough, voted against someone who no longer reflected their opinions and values.

As Collins puts it,

Lieberman has reached a point in his public career when every single thing he does, including talking about his grandparents, is irritating.

It is! He is!

I can’t wait for him to leave. How much you wanna bet that Fox News, which already thinks Lieberman should be our next secretary of defense (good luck with that), puts him on retainer?

(I mean, even more than he already is….)