(Thumbnail image: Official Website, Sen. Joe Lieberman)

"I think this Medicare buy-in is, frankly, another way to get to a single-payer, government-controlled healthcare system, and I and Senator Nelson think that would be bad for our country and the people of our country.  So, I hope that our colleagues will be willing to drop that provision.” (CNN)

Independent Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut came out swinging against a Democratic plan allowing Americans aged 55 to 64 to buy into Medicare.  The problem?  Lieberman is one of the 60 votes needed to pass healthcare reform.  The media and political insiders have been roundly critical of his opposition.  

We’re taking a look at Lieberman’s latest move with perspectives from CNN, MSNBC, Fox news, The Wall Street Journal, True-Slant, and The Washington Post.

First up, E.D. Kain writes on the blog True/Slant that Lieberman’s opposition is curious, given his past politics.

“For all his hawkishness, Lieberman was always fairly liberal on domestic issues.  He supported healthcare reform as a running mate to Al Gore, which included measures similar to those now being proposed.’”

In fact, The Wall Street Journal points out that Lieberman supported the Medicare buy-in less than one week ago.  

“Mr. Lieberman had voiced interest in the Medicare idea publicly after the compromise was unveiled last week, and congressional aides said he had signaled privately to Democratic leaders that he would not stand in the way of the idea.”

On FOX News, political consultant Bob Beckel says Lieberman is a well-known whiner who risks losing his perch as chair of the Homeland Security Committee.

“I’ve known Joe a long time and there’s nothing that Joe can’t find wrong in the course of a day.  I have a model ‘There’s no such thing as a bad day.’  Joe has a model ‘There’s no such thing as a good day.’  Here’s what Joe ought to be thinking about.  If he aligns with the Republicans, fine.  If he aligns with the Republicans, that means he has a chairmanship to consider, his own chairmanship."

In The Washington Post, Ezra Klein writes that Lieberman’s opposition looks to be more personal than political, getting back at Democrats who didn’t support his last Senate bid.

“At this point, Lieberman seems primarily motivated by torturing liberals. That is to say, he seems willing to cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in order to settle an old electoral score.”

CNN’s Dana Bash explains why dropping the Medicare buy-in would agitate Senate Democrats who already compromised on the public option.

“The way they were able to get liberals on board is by including this idea of expanding Medicare.  Well, that’s something, as you just heard, that Lieberman simply doesn’t like.  But, you really basically need it to get liberals on board.  Because Senator Lieberman is right, they really do see this on the liberal side of the Democratic spectrum as another version of the public option.”

On MSNBC, Luke Russert says if Democrats end up losing their one-time ally, their next best hope might be across the aisle.

“Senator Lieberman won’t support a trigger option, and he won’t support this compromise.  Then most likely you’re going to have to try and get Olympia Snowe, the Republican senator who did support the trigger option to come on board.  She will definitely not do that by the end of this month.  So this probably means that healthcare reform could be delayed until January.”

So do you think Lieberman is objecting on principle—or is this a simple power grab?

Writer: Chance Seales

Producer: David Wolfgang