Lieberman’s down in the polls, so what does he do? Takes Dionne’s advice and throws away his principles. As we have seen before, Lieberman has said in the past that criticizing the President undermines his credibility:

“It’s time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be the commander in chief for three more critical years,” Lieberman said, “and that in matters of war, we undermine presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.”

And yet now, that’s exactly what he’s doing:

Campaigning with renewed intensity 48 hours before the balloting, Lieberman described himself as a proud and loyal Democrat who not only has opposed nearly all of Bush’s domestic agenda but also has repeatedly criticized the administration’s handling of the Iraq conflict.
Saying he still believes his vote to authorize the war was correct, Lieberman added: “What I don’t think is right, as I’ve said over and over again, are many of the Bush administration’s decisions regarding the conduct of the war. The fact is I have openly and clearly disagreed with and criticized the president.”
Lieberman cited what he called Bush’s failure to develop more allied support before the war, to have a plan to win the peace and to put more troops into the conflict. He recalled that, as far back as October 2003, he said he would have asked for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld if he were president. His staff handed out a five-page memo of past statements to buttress the claims.

And then there’s this:

Lieberman also sought to clarify a December comment in which he appeared to upbraid Democrats for criticizing Bush, saying that “in matters of war, we undermine presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.” On Sunday he said the words were meant not to stifle criticism but to warn against the kind of partisan exploitation that he said Republicans had used against Cleland.

So, what do we learn from this statement? When you are backpedaling make sure to throw out some red meat as a distraction.