Senator Joe Lieberman set the blogosphere ablaze on Tuesday with his announcement that he would not vote for the current Health Care reform bill if it included a “public option”. In fact, he said he would even join the fight against it, saying “We’re trying to do too much.”

While his Democratic Senate colleagues downplayed the comments, progressive bloggers have called for his head on a platter. Many claim that he should be kicked out of the Democratic caucus and should have his chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security Committee taken away from him.

The response was more visceral and brutal than the conservative responses to Senator Olympia Snowe, after she voted for the current bill, but just barely. 

Americans tend to like their politics and their politicians in completely different ways.  We like our politics to be team warfare, one side versus the other and if you’re wearing one jersey, by God, you better stay loyal to that one team.

But when we elect politicians, we like them to be free thinkers, independently minded, willingly to buck the status quo. We want them to be independent of party influences and to decide on issues for all of their constituents, not just the ones from the particular party they belong to.

What’s funny about this is that not only do we want this to be true here in Colorado, where as a state, we’re more independent minded anyway, but it’s the same for Progressives and Conservatives beyond our state borders. Both groups want politicians to be true to their point of view and buck the party if party leaders stray from the purified gospel. 

So, as an electorate, whether we’re independent or dyed in the wool loyalist, we put ourselves in these awkward situations where we call for the heads of the leaders that exhibit the qualities we voted for in the people that follow their parties like sheep.

Confused?  Me too.

It would seem to me that we should finally decide what we truly want. Do we want party automatons or independent thinkers that will, from time to time, throw a monkey wrench into the plans we may actually support? It seems that we cannot have both.

When it comes to Lieberman and Snowe, I’m not sure if they are displaying political savvy or thoughtful independence. But while I can find reason to disagree with both of them, I tend to support the idea of people at least looking like they are thinking for themselves. I’m not so doe-eyed to think that their moves are altruistic, but I’m also not about to help collect wood to burn either at the stake. 

How do you feel about this? Here’s how to find out. Say you’re about to cast your vote on Election Day. You’re faced with two candidates, but you don’t know their party affiliation, but you do know their voting record.

Do you vote for the person who voted with their party 99% of the time, or the candidate that disagreed with their party 50% of the time? Even if they are just pretending to think, I’m going with the thinker every time.