If it's a "principle", you can't object!

Atrios makes a great point about Joe Lieberman and his "principles":

One thing that's been bugging me about Lieberman is that his knee-jerk retort to criticism on the Iraq war has been that he should be applauded because he's taken that stand on principle. At this point I'm not even sure what his stand is, or what principle motivates it, but nonetheless it's really quite bizarre. It's as if all he has to do is play the "principle" card and he's immune from criticism. I picture Joe as Dr. Evil trying to shut up his son, but instead of saying "shhh" he's saying "principle!"

This reminds me of the whole "we must respect other people's religious beliefs" canard that I've been doing my best to demolish. We should respect other people's right to believe and worship as they see fit. But that doesn't mean what they believe and how they worship should not be subject to criticism and ridicule. Similary, I respect the right of Lieberman to believe what he thinks he should about the Iraq occupation and the Bush administration. But that doesn't mean I don't think he should be voted out of office for having those beliefs.

People are always saying they want campaigns to be more about issues, and less about personality. But now we have Lieberman saying that he should be a Democratic senator from CT because he's a nice, principled guy, even though he disagrees with Dem CT voters on a huge issue: Iraq (not to mention Supreme Court nominations, emergency contraception, and a history undercutting Democrats and providing political cover for Republicans).