>Sen. Lieberman’s independence stance

>Sen. Joseph Lieberman, the Independent senator from Connecticut who caucuses with Democrats on The Hill, has taken sharp criticism from Democratic senators for his unwavering support of Sen. John McCain’s presidential run.

According to this NY Times article, his support has infuriated and alienated Democrats in the Senate.

What some Democrats have asked him to do:

At least two have asked Mr. Lieberman to tone down his rhetoric against Mr. Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, two colleagues said, and at least three have advised Mr. Lieberman against speaking at the Republican convention, a prospect he has said he would entertain.

According to the article, the strain Lieberman has with the Democrats is rooted in his support of the Bush administration’s Iraq War and his “hawkish” views on Iran. While he’s shunned by party hardliners, Lieberman said he hasn’t considered jumping ship to the Republican Party.

The article also alludes to Lieberman’s criticisms on Sen. Obama, calling him “naive” on Iran and questioned why Hamas would welcome an Obama presidency. He also criticized Obama’s changing stance on various issues:

“Senator Obama has really moved,” Mr. Lieberman said. “Since he clinched the nomination a month ago, in my opinion he has altered and nuanced more big positions more quickly than I can remember any other presidential nominees.”

The article finally poses the question to Lieberman as to whether he would speak at the Republican convention. His answer:

If he does speak, “I would not go to speak to attack Barack Obama,” he said. “I would go to say why I’m supporting John McCain.”

I can’t say that I’m surprised by Sen. Lieberman’s support of McCain’s presidential run. He’s always been more hawkish than most Democrats when it came to foreign policy. He’s also been more moderate when it comes to domestic policy.

As to his reasoning, I’m perplexed. He never gave a “real” reason why he’s supporting McCain over Obama. I can understand why his hawkish mind would make him believe Obama is naive on Iran. However, his “questioning” as to why Hamas would welcome an Obama presidency makes me wonder if he believes Obama would be “soft” on terrorists. Or, if he’s like other conspiracy theorists, maybe it’s because Obama is a Muslim and terrorists see him as an ally in their cause.

Or, Lieberman’s support of McCain could be a simple as Massachusettes Rep. Barney Frank’s assessment:

My own sense is that he was just bitterly disappointed by doing so poorly in 2004,” he said, referring to Lieberman’s failed 2004 presidential run.

Thoughts?