Susan Collins weighs in on Lieberman's precariousness in a New York Times article amusingly headlined "Enter, Pariah."

"It’s clear that the Democrats need him at this point more than he needs them," said Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, whom Mr. Lieberman genuinely does consider a close friend. "How sweet is this?"

On a scale of one to ten? Like a two and a half. Maybe a three.

Wake-Up Call roundup:

• Feingold's not running, making life a bit easier for the Obamas and Edwardseses of the world.
• [Presumptive Speaker] Nancy Pelosi endorsed Murtha for Majority Leader, but Steny Hoyer still thinks he has the votes to win.
• Newly unemployed ex-Rep. John Hostettler is jobless and broke. (Though somehow I like his chances.)
• And finally, Lieberman, on the likelihood of his switching parties: "I'm not ruling it out, but I hope I don't get to that point." Despite my initial reaction ("Are you fucking kidding me?"), I'm not too worried, because I think he's just twisting the knife a bit. But come on, Joe: don't be such a jerk.

P.S. - For what it's worth, I know I've been over-using the bullets lately. I'm not sure what's to be done about it, but I've recognized the problem, and that's an important first step.

So, as you may have heard, George Allen conceded (snivellingly) at about 3:00 this afternoon, giving the Democrats both houses of Congress for the first time since November 8, 1994. Lieberman will caucus with the Democrats, thank the Jesus -- and in honesty, I never really thought he wouldn't. But to cut and paste from an email I sent this afternoon:

[In] choosing not to step aside and let Lamont take the seat, Lieberman put himself before the party (with, to read it most charitably, "the people of Connecticut’s" interests at heart). And while there’s not necessarily anything wrong with that, it had the potential to become worrisome when he became the swing vote. Given his willingness to put self (and maybe Connecticut) before party, it was not a 100%-sure-thing that’d he’d say to the Republicans knocking on his door, "No, I don’t want [nearly any committee chairmanship]. I’d rather remain a Democrat." That's what he'd probably say, mind, but there there was at least a chance that instead he’d say, "If I remain a Democrat, I’m just a conservative, loyal member of the caucus [he’ll be chairman of the Homeland Security committee]. But if I become a Republican, I’m a superstar with any chairmanship I want, which will enable me to do more good for myself the people of Connecticut."

He swears he’ll caucus with the Democrats, and I now believe him. And honestly, even at my lowest point, I would have put the odds that he’d caucus with the Democrats at around 2:1. But with, say, Ned Lamont, those odds would have been 2:0.

The third Lieberman/Lamont [and Schlesinger!] Senate debate took place last night, and it was as fireworky as ever. From the Hartford Courant:

Lieberman ignored the format and gave a three-minute opening statement in response to the opening question on Iraq.

"So much for no opening statement," said the moderator, ABC newsman George Stephanopoulos.

And it pretty much went downhill from there. After Lamont refused to back down from claims made in his commercials, Lieberman said: "If I were still attorney general of Connecticut, I would have sued you for unfair trade practices." Which prompted Lamont to "[get] to his feet and [take] a few quick steps to Lieberman." The Rumble in New London!

And in Republican highlights, also-ran Alan Schlesinger scolded the crowd - following a bizarre LaRouche-related incident that was actually one of the more predictable parts of the evening - by saying, "Show some respect to Sen. Lieberman and the audience. Now!" Having not seen the video, I can't really say for sure how funny that was. But in my experience, it's hard to say something that a reporter can transcribe as "Now!" without sounding like a jackass. So that was probably pretty good.

Makes you wish you lived in a state with a competitive Senate race, doesn't it?