This week, it was revealed in court filings that President Bush authorized leaking classified information to the press for political purporses. The Courant asks why Sen. Lieberman had nothing to say about it:

Analysts and operatives in both parties said Friday they were puzzled that Lieberman, whose perceived coziness with the Republican president is fueling a primary challenge by Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont, found nothing to say about Bush for 28 hours.

"Say anything. Even something mildly critical would have no doubt helped in his primary," said Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia political scientist....

But the focus by analysts and operatives was on Lieberman, the three-term senator facing his first fight for re-nomination, not the political newcomer challenging him. In Washington and in Hartford, the question was the same:

Where was Lieberman?

Good question. And one I swear I've heard before.

My opinion? Lieberman isn't long for the Democratic party. And may possibly soon be in the cabinet (there are certainly more changes coming before November), betting on a McCain victory in 2008 to keep him relevant in the medium-term future. Why else would he pass on such an obvious chance to get right with the very voters he needs in the primary?

It's not a good idea to insult your potential future boss.

Colin McEnroe has similar thoughts, if a bit more... colorful:

Lieberman's tin ear continues with his failure to denounce, thunderingly, the hypocrisy and untrustworthiness of the Bush White House and of the president himself....

It should be an easy call to denounce Bush. Unless one has too much invested in him to be able to quit him.

George Bush's Favorite Democrat has refused to rule out running as an Independent or Republican, refused to quash repeated speculation about joining Bush's cabinet, and is now refusing to criticize Bush even half as harshly as he did in the 2004 race.

Something's up.