The American Spectator

Criticizing Democratic Party politics from a right-wing perspective can be a hard sell, mainly because it involves throwing stones in a glass house. Whereas the Republicans are worried about their prospects in the 2006 election as a result of a lack of fidelity to their base, the Democrats are finding out what their base feels — and it’s not pretty.

The three-term senator from Stamford faces accusations of being “too conservative” as he is reportedly losing ground to a relative unknown while seeking the Democratic nomination. He is frequently cited for criticizing Clinton’s affairs, supporting the war in Iraq, castigating Hollywood for exposing children to sex and violence, and calling for school vouchers. All this has earned him the reputation of being “further to the right than most Republicans in the Northeast.” So, clearly, the Democrats would be a little upset, wouldn’t they?

Actually, no, that’s a trick question. Lieberman’s criticism of Clinton resulted in a push for censure, not for impeachment. His religiosity doesn’t preclude his cozy pro-choice stance, most of his rhetoric favors big government, and during his candidacy in 2000 for the Vice Presidency, one could hardly say his was even a remotely conservative platform. On the issues, Lieberman is an establishment Democrat. So why are people treating Joe Lieberman like the next Zell Miller?

p>Maybe because it’s not what Lieberman believes, but how he makes those beliefs known. Los Angeles Times columnist Ron Brownstein summed up the problem on Meet the Press last Sunday (video here ): br>