The money maintains the status quo and the classist influence of those that have the money.

"Senator Lieberman is currently Ranking Member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which oversees much of the Department of Homeland Security, relations among various government agencies and departments, and a wide range of vital functions. He is also a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee; the Armed Services Committee, where he is Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Airland Forces and sites on the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities; and the Small Business Committee."

http://www.joe2006.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12&Itemid=26

Joe's goals in office:

"Lieberman is a respected leader on strengthening and modernizing our nation's defenses, a prominent voice on foreign policy issues, and a champion of international human rights."

"Lieberman is an advocate for investing in our public schools, improving healthcare, safeguarding our environment, and making our government more effective, responsible and accountable to voters."

"Lieberman is dedicated to strengthening America's families and renewing our common values."

Of course bloggers have been accused of stirring the soup about Lieberman. MSNBC had quite a diatribe about how bloggers are attempting to pull the Democrats leftward.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14025016/

He's been endorsed by the AFL-CIO. He seldom votes with conservative business groups, with lower than a 10% average rating on supporting their interests.

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?
can_id=S0141103

His record on abortion varies from year to year. The National Chamber of Commerce only gives the Senator a 25-61% rating on his voting record from year to year. Civil rights to civil liberties issues bring Joe a 40-100% rating over the years. An even more telling rating is that given Joe by conservative interests. The highest rating he has attained is 40%. Most conservative groups give him a 0% to low single digit rating.

It is on Iraq where Joe has parted ways with the Democratic mainstream. Overall, Joe has a strong liberal, educational, and environmental record. Labor backs Joe. Farmers back Joe. But his stand on Iraq has blown him out of the Party mainstream, and the fury this has generated may cost him his seat.

That raises the question of what losing Lieberman might do in the Senate. The seniority he holds in many seats will be lost. His grasp of foreign affairs and his support of family issues would have to be replaced by Lamont with a learning and seniority curve that would have to begin from ground zero.

Is this in the interests of most Americans? I just don't know. I know that personally I am thoroughly dismayed by the warmongering of this government, and further dismayed by Lieberman's support of it. Whether or not this is an adequate basis for disrupting his Congressional service doesn't appear clear to me.

I don't really think Joe is Republican-lite. There are too many Democrats further to the right than he is. If the Left wants to flex its collective muscle and unseat him, the loss of his leadership role on committees and his ability to talk to this administration may weaken the Democrats' overall position in the Senate, which is not expected to go Democrat in November.

This is a situation calling for some less partial reflection. The impact of losing Lieberman in the Senate might be to weaken, rather than strengthen, the overall position of Democrats in Congress.

Contemplating lesser evilism is something we have come to accept in politics. Politics has been described as the art of the possible. If the Democrats want to optimize the best of all possible outcomes for the majority of Americans in this country, rather than focussing on one race with a high-ranking Senator who has offended us mightily with his pro-administration stance on Iraq, the Left may do well to back off on Joe.

I have contributed to the Lamont campaign. I was very enthusiastic to see this challenge to an imperial presidency and its running dogs. But there are so many destabilizing factors in America today such as the burgeoning deficit and the increasingly belligerent foreign policy, that I think we need experienced leaders with known records.

The job of a US Senator should not be that of a stooge, even an effective stooge for hometown pork or party influence.

I would be so much more grateful to my home state Senators if they simply used their positions of power to speak out passionately and relentlessly against the madness of the Bush regime.  They could be nothing more than co-vice-chairs of the sub-committee on paperclip sorting.  All I ask is that they speak the truth out loud every day.