Lots of bloggers have weighed in on Jon Chait's inane LA Times column this weekend excoriating Lieberman for being a "self-righteous suck up," wrong on the war and countless other policies, but warning that letting "the left" (or "the sorts of fanatics who tore the party apart in the late 1960s and early 1970s") beat him would do far greater damage to America than, say, thousands more coffins coming home from Iraq.

The links above do a good job taking apart various elements of his flawed argument like a tinkertoy - I'd like to merely focus on his conclusion:

Moreover, since their anti-Lieberman jihad is seen as stemming from his pro-war stance, the practical effect of toppling Lieberman would be to intimidate other hawkish Democrats and encourage more primary challengers against them.

If Lieberman loses, he'll play the same role as before, only this time with the power of martyrdom behind him: the virtuous anti-Democrat, too good and honest for his party. If you think Lieberman is sanctimonious now, wait until you see him in defeat.

Yeah, but you know, a key part of this campaign is the hope that, if Joe loses, he won't be a senator anymore. He could go on Hannity and Fox News as much as he wants... and who will care? (Besides Sean, of course, who I'm sure will be happy to see more of his "pal.") He won't be our party's problem aymore. And that's the whole point.