Tomorrow, Democrats will vote on whether Joe Lieberman should remain chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs - the Senate's major good-government investigative body.

The case for removing Joe is sober and obvious. But keeping Joe as chair requires resorting to the type of political game-playing Americans are ready to move past.

But given his record, playing politics is Joe's only hope.

Lieberman's actually been a lousy chairman. Booted from the Democratic party during the 2006 Connecticut primary, Lieberman ran and won re-election in as an independent - in part on a promise to investigate Bush Administration conduct, such as the horrific response to Hurricane Katrina. But he didn't, abdicating his committee's investigative responsibility.

Then, this election cycle, Lieberman viciously attacked Democrats and Democratic policy.

Stump with McCain in competitive states throughout the country? Yes. Lie about Obama's record in his RNC speech? Yes. Defend Republican Senator Norm Coleman against challenger Al Franken? Yes. "Fear" for his country if Democrats reach 60 Senate seats? Yes. Is Obama a socialist Marxist? It's a "good question," answered Lieberman.

Taking Joe's gavel is a no-brainer. He's certainly free to caucus with Democrats, but there's just no substantive reason he should remain chair of such a powerful committee. Remember, Lieberman is chair of this committee solely because of the seniority he enjoys from the party he smeared.

So Lieberman is desperately playing politics in an attempt to maintain his position of power. He's framing the debate as party retribution, cravenly accusing his fellow Democrats of holding a grudge against him for doing, ostensibly, what he thought was right. Lieberman calculates that if he can turn the tables and dishonestly accuse everyone else of playing politics, he might just save himself.

It's garbage. It's Lieberman who exploited partisanship. His actions blew past the line of what's acceptable after he lied to his colleagues about how he'd behave during the election. Senators Leahy, Dorgan, and Sanders have all said what we know is true - Joe's conduct was unacceptable, and he knew what he was getting himself into.

As Greg Sargent noted last week on Talking Points Memo:

On some of the most pressing issues we face, Lieberman simply doesn't share the ideas or values of the Democratic Party. And given his performance as Homeland Security chair, Lieberman foes think stripping Lieberman of his post is, you know, better for the country. Some seem incapable of imagining that the push to oust Lieberman could be about anything other than revenge or that anyone could possibly oppose Lieberman simply because of his ideas, values, and governmental failures.

Senators shouldn't bow to Lieberman's threats - how Democrats govern going forward it too important. Relieving Lieberman of his Homeland Security gavel is a logical, responsible remedy; letting him remain chair only perpetuates the kind of fictitious political game-playing the American people voted to end on November fourth.