Since the day after the primary, when he called up reporters in a tag-team attack with Joe Lieberman to impugn Ned Lamont's patriotism and attack Connecticut Democrats as supporting "Al Qaeda types" by voting for a change in course, Dick Cheney has been campaigning across the country attacking Ned Lamont.

Why won't Joe Lieberman disown these attacks? Perhaps it has something to do with why Karl Rove called him on primary day offering "help" from "the boss." Or why his campaign is currently using Fox News slurs against the Democratic party. Or why his record-breaking $15 million+ campaign is currently being supported by Swift Boat financiers and Social Security privatizers.

Because he will caucus with Republicans if he wins and it benefits him.

Here's a list of Cheney's pro-Lieberman attacks in speeches since the primary across the country:

Oct. 12, 2006: Vice President's Remarks at the Luncheon for Congressman Jim Ryun:

Perhaps it should come as no surprise that such a party would turn its back on a man like Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. Senator Lieberman was my opponent in 2000 -- Al Gore's running mate, a longtime senator, and one of the most loyal and distinguished Democrats of his generation. Joe is also an unapologetic supporter of the fight against terror. He voted to support military action in Iraq when most senators in both parties did the same -- and he's had the courage to stick by that vote even when things got tough. And now, for that reason alone, the Dean Democrats have purged Joe Lieberman from the Democratic Party.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Boo! (Laughter.)

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Their choice, instead, is a candidate whose explicit goal is to give up the fight against the terrorists in Iraq -- never mind that Iraq is a fellow democracy; never mind that the Iraqi people and their elected leaders are counting on us. What these Democrats are pushing now is the very kind of retreat that has been tried and has failed in the past. It would be reckless and inconsistent with our values. It would betray our friends, and only heighten the danger to the United States. And it would mean that all the sacrifices of our military have been in vain. So the choice before the American people is becoming more clear every day. For the sake of our own security, this nation must reject any strategy of resignation and defeatism in the face of determined enemies. (Applause.)

The case of Joe Lieberman is a perfect illustration of the basic philosophical difference between the two parties in the year 2006....

Oct. 6, 2006: Vice President's Remarks at a Luncheon for Vern Buchanan for Congress :

Perhaps it should come as no surprise that such a party would turn its back on a man like Senator Joe Lieberman. Senator Lieberman was my opponent in 2000 -- Al Gore's running mate, a longtime senator, and one of the most loyal and distinguished Democrats of his generation. Joe is also an unapologetic supporter of the fight against terror. He voted to support military action in Iraq when most other senators in both parties did the same -- and he's had the courage to stick by that vote even when things get tough. And now, for that reason alone, the Dean Democrats have purged Joe Lieberman from the Democratic Party.

Their choice, instead, is a candidate whose explicit goal is to give up the fight against the terrorists in Iraq -- never mind that Iraq is a fellow democracy; never mind that the Iraqi people and their elected leaders are counting on us. What these Democrats are pushing now is the very kind of retreat that has been tried and has failed in the past. It would be reckless and inconsistent with our values. It would betray our friends, and only heighten the danger to the United States. And it would mean that all the sacrifices of our military have been in vain. So the choice before the American people is becoming more clear every day. For the sake of our security, this nation must reject any strategy of resignation and defeatism in the face of determined enemies.

The case of Joe Lieberman is a perfect illustration of a basic philosophical differences between the two parties in the year 2006.

Oct. 4, 2006: Vice President's Remarks at a Luncheon for Congressional Candidate Shelley Sekula-Gibbs:

Perhaps it should come as no surprise that such a party would turn its back on a man like Senator Joe Lieberman. Senator Lieberman was my opponent in 2000 -- Al Gore's running mate -- a longtime Senator and one of the most loyal and distinguished Democrats of his generation. Joe also is an unapologetic supporter of the fight against terror. He voted to support military action in Iraq when most other senators in both parties did the same, and he's had the courage to stick by that even when things get tough. And now, for that reason alone, the Dean Democrats have purged Joe Lieberman from the Democratic Party.

Their choice instead is a candidate whose explicit goal is to give up the fight against the terrorists in Iraq - never mind that Iraq is a fellow democracy now; never mind that the Iraqi people and their elected leaders are counting on us. What these Democrats are pushing now is the very kind of retreat that has been tried and failed in the past. It would be reckless and inconsistent with our values. It would betray our friends and only heighten the danger to the United States. And it would mean that all the sacrifices of our military had been in vain.

So the choice before the American people is becoming more clear every day: For the sake of our security, the nation must reject any strategy of resignation and defeatism in the face of determined enemies.

The case of Joe Lieberman is a perfect illustration of the basic philosophical differences between the two parties in the year 2006.

Oct. 2, 2006: Vice President's Remarks at Luncheon for Congresswoman Barbara Cubin:

Senator Jay Rockefeller, who would be chairman of the Intelligence Committee if his party took power, believes the world would be better off if Saddam Hussein still ruled Iraq. And the chairman of the Democratic Party is Howard Dean, who said the capture of Saddam Hussein didn't make America any safer. Perhaps it should come as no surprise that such a party would turn its back on a man like Senator Joe Lieberman.

Senator Lieberman was my opponent in 2000 -- Al Gore's running mate -- a longtime senator, and one of the most loyal and distinguished Democrats of his generation. Joe is also an unapologetic supporter of the fight against terror. He voted to support military action in Iraq when most other senators in both parties did the same, and he's had the courage to stick by that vote even when things get tough. And now, for that reason alone, the Howard Dean Democrats have purged Joe Lieberman from the Democratic Party.

Their choice, instead, is a candidate whose explicit goal is to give up the fight against the terrorists in Iraq, never mind that Iraq is a now democracy; never mind that the Iraq and the people and their elected leaders are counting on us. What these Democrats are pushing now is the very kind of retreat that has been tried and has failed in the past. It would be reckless and inconsistent with our values. It would betray our friends, and only heighten the danger to the United States, and it would mean that all the sacrifices our military have been involved in would have been in vain.

So the choice before the American people is becoming more clear every day. For the sake of our security, this nation must reject any strategy of resignation and defeatism in the face of determined enemies. (Applause.)

The case of Joe Lieberman is a perfect illustration of the basic philosophical differences between the two parties in the year 2006...

Sept. 22, 2006: Vice President's Remarks at the Reception for Congressman Randy Kuhl:

...Now Mr. Dean's party has turned its back on Senator Joe Lieberman.

Senator Lieberman was my opponent in 2000 -- Al Gore's running mate, a longtime senator, and one of the most loyal and distinguished Democrats of the generation. Joe is also an unapologetic supporter of the global war on terror. He voted to support military action in Iraq when most other senators in both parties did the same -- and he's had the courage to stick by that vote even when the going gets tough. And now, for that reason alone, because he supported the President in the global war on terror, the Dean Democrats have purged Joe Lieberman from the ranks of the Democratic Party in Connecticut. Their choice, instead, is a candidate whose explicit goal is to give up the fight against the terrorists in Iraq -- never mind that Iraq is a fellow democracy; never mind that the Iraqi people and their elected leaders are counting on us. What the Democrats are pushing now is the very kind of retreat that has been tried and failed in the past. We should have learned with 9/11 that it's no longer possible for us to retreat behind our oceans and feel safe and secure here at home.

Aug. 15, 2006: Vice President's Remarks at a Luncheon for Arizona Victory 2006:

And now Mr. Dean's party has turned its back on Senator Joe Lieberman.

Senator Lieberman was my opponent in 2000 -- Al Gore's running mate, a longtime senator, and one of the most loyal and distinguished Democrats of his generation. Joe is also an unapologetic supporter of the fight against terror. He voted to support military action in Iraq when most other senators in both parties did the same -- and he's had the courage to stick by that vote even when things get tough. And now, for that reason alone, the Dean Democrats have defeated Joe Lieberman. Their choice, instead, is a candidate whose explicit goal is to give up the fight against the terrorists in Iraq -- never mind that Iraq is a fellow democracy; never mind that the Iraqi people and their elected leaders are counting on us. What these Democrats are pushing now is the very kind of retreat that has been tried in the past. It is contrary to our values, it would betray our friends, and it would only heighten the danger to the United States. So the choice before the American people is becoming clearer every day. For the sake of our security, this nation must reject any strategy of resignation and defeatism in the face of determined enemies. (Applause.)

Aug. 9, 2006: Interview of the Vice President by Wire Service Reporters:

I was -- obviously, we're all interested in this year's election campaign. I know Joe Lieberman and have a good deal of respect for him given that we were opponents in the 2000 campaign; and of course, spent a fair amount of time watching the man and studying him over the years, especially in connection with our debate in 2000. And as I look at what happened yesterday, it strikes me that it's a perhaps unfortunate and significant development from the standpoint of the Democratic Party, that what it says about the direction the party appears to be heading in when they, in effect, purge a man like Joe Lieberman, who was just six years ago their nominee for Vice President, is of concern, especially over the issue of Joe's support with respect to national efforts in the global war on terror.

The thing that's partly disturbing about it is the fact that, the standpoint of our adversaries, if you will, in this conflict, and the al Qaeda types, they clearly are betting on the proposition that ultimately they can break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task. And when we see the Democratic Party reject one of its own, a man they selected to be their vice presidential nominee just a few short years ago, it would seem to say a lot about the state the party is in today if that's becoming the dominant view of the Democratic Party, the basic, fundamental notion that somehow we can retreat behind our oceans and not be actively engaged in this conflict and be safe here at home, which clearly we know we won't -- we can't be.