Lieberman an unseen force in Democrats' clash

Meanwhile back in the ex-presidential contenders club, also known as the United States Senate, Lieberman noted Tuesday that “if this administration wants to take military action against Iran, it doesn’t need this Kyl-Lieberman amendment; it can use the general powers of the commander-in-chief.”

Lieberman contended that his amendment “is one of the last, best ways to avoid military action, because it puts economic pressure on the Iranians and tells them we mean business.”

“I’m not gunning for military conflict with Iran,” he said. “But if they keep killing our soldiers, you can’t just sit back and let it happen.”

At his campaign stop last Friday in Iowa, since no one in the audience brought up the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, Edwards himself brought it up.

'Rattling their sabers'
“Have all of you seen Bush and Cheney rattling their sabers about Iran? It makes you nervous, doesn’t it?” he told the crowd of about 200.

Many voices in the crowd said, “Yeah.”

“We’ve heard this before, right? We heard it in the lead up to (the invasion of) Iraq,” he said. “We have to stand up to this president; we can not give him an inch. Not when it comes to an issue of war.”

When informed of Edwards’s remarks, Lieberman said, “It’s exactly the opposite. I think Sen. Edwards totally misreads it. It’s unfair to criticize Sen. Clinton for this vote. It was a sensible vote, a vote to try to use all the economic power we have so that we don’t have to contemplate military action against Iran.”

Lieberman and Kyl both said Tuesday that they had responded to the concerns of some of their colleagues by removing a couple of clauses from the amendment which might be interpreted as belligerent.

Ask the candidates To vote on videos, go to 10questions.com

They deleted a clause which said “it should be the policy of the United States to combat, contain, and roll back” the activities and influence of the Iranian regime inside Iraq.

“We removed that language, but it still wasn’t good enough,” fumed Kyl.

As for Edwards and those who voted ‘no’ on the Kyl-Lieberman measure, he said, “They mistrust George Bush more than they mistrust the Iranians. Isn’t that a sorry state of affairs?”

He wondered, “Do they not trust Joe Lieberman? Do they not trust me?”

Lieberman, who won re-election to the Senate last year as an independent Democrat after losing the Democratic primary to Ned Lamont, isn’t merely a spectator in the presidential fray.

As a Democratic senator and former Democratic vice presidential candidate, he meets the qualifications to be an ex officio “super-delegate” to the Democratic convention, with a guaranteed vote on the nominee.

Asked Tuesday whether he’ll endorse any candidate prior to the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, Lieberman said no and repeated his previous statement that he’ll wait until both parties have settled on their presumptive nominees before he makes his endorsement.

“This is the new-found independence I was given by Connecticut Democrats,” Lieberman said with a smile.

MORE FROM POLITICS

Politics Section Front

Senate set for health care debate Levin: Afghan forces key to success Newsweek: Why Cheney should run in 2012 NYT: White House intruders want to sell tale Oprah to visit White House for TV special NYT: S.C. rift highlights debate in GOP Life isn’t all glamor for Obama crashers Marines to renew focus on Taliban haven Can Obama retain Hispanic support? Senate report: Bin Laden was 'within grasp' Politics Section Front   Add Politics headlines to your news reader: