[I wrote a draft of the following in the comments section for this previous Lieberman post, but I thought I'd graduate it up to its own thing.]
Irrespective of Lieberman's awfulness, he still votes with the Democratic caucus, and obviously that'll be crucial when it comes to breaking Republican filibusters -- and there will be many Republican filibusters. I just can't seem to square the fighting/hoping/praying for a 60 vote filibuster-proof majority while also calling for Lieberman's head on a plate. For better or worse, we need him around until we can kick his ass in 2012. And we will kick his ass in 2012.
Other than political retribution, though, I don't see what the Democrats would've gained from taking away his chairmanship(s). They could've been smarter about it, sure. But what's the political upside? I'd certainly hate be one vote down from breaking a Republican filibuster on, say, healthcare or the climate crisis just because we wanted to punish him. Clearly this is a hypothetical, but I don't think it's an unrealistic possibility. We need the vote.
And I can't help but to think that this had to have crossed the president-elect's mind when he recommended détente with Lieberman.
But let me be clear about this thing: I'm trying to make the best of an impossible situation. Don't take this as a sign that I support Lieberman or today's vote. I'm just trying to see the upside.