Leadfoot wrote:
One, it's a little late and the timing is a little suspicious.

Two, Joe might need a new job and he would be a leading candidate to replace
Rumsfeld

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060821/...nate_lieberman

Sen. Joe Lieberman, attacked by fellow Democrats as being too close to the
White House on the Iraq War, on Sunday called on Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld to resign but said the United States cannot "walk away" from the
Iraqis.

Lieberman, the one-time Democratic vice presidential candidate, is running
as an independent in his bid for a fourth term since losing the Democratic
nomination to newcomer Ned Lamont, who harnessed voters' anger against the
war in Iraq.

Lieberman, an early supporter of the Iraq war, said he had called for
Rumsfeld to step down in 2003.

"With all respect to Don Rumsfeld, who has done a grueling job for six
years, we would benefit from new leadership to work with our military in
Iraq," he said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

Lieberman said the Bush administration should have sent more troops into
Iraq "to secure the country."

"We had a naive vision that the Iraqis were going to embrace us and then go
on and live happily ever after," he said.

Lieberman said the administration must "put severe pressure on the Iraqis to
contain sectarian violence."

"There is still hope in Iraq and as long as there is we cannot just pick up
and walk away and leave them to the sure disaster that would follow and
would compromise our security in the war on terrorism," he said.

The Lamont campaign issued a statement Sunday criticizing Lieberman for
trying to "paint himself as courageous for clinging to the failed 'stay the
course' policy in Iraq and not listening to the voters of Connecticut on the
need to change course."

"His new found 'criticism' of the war won't convince Connecticut voters
after so many years of stubbornly rubber-stamping Bush's failed policies,"
the statement said.

The war in Iraq was the hallmark of Lamont's primary campaign. He calls for
the withdrawal of U.S. troops from what he often refers to as "a bloody
civil war," and says he believes that those who got America into the
conflict should be held accountable.

Lieberman accused Lamont of distorting his stance on Iraq.

"He made me into a cheerleader for George Bush and everything that's
happened," Lieberman said. "And the record shows that, while I believe we
did the right thing in overthrowing Saddam Hussein, I've been very critical
over the years, particularly in 2003 and 2004, about the failure to send
enough American troops to secure the country, about the absence of adequate
plans and preparation to deal with post-Saddam Iraq."

"As bad as things are now - and they've gotten worse in the last six
months - it would be a disaster if America set a deadline and said we're
getting all of our troops out by a given date," Lieberman said. "That's a
position Ned Lamont has taken."

Tom Swan, campaign manager for Lamont, said Sunday the campaign stands by
its criticism of Lieberman as being too close to President Bush.

Asked about Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who was quoted as saying that
Lieberman echoes Republicans, Lieberman said it was "just plain politics by
somebody who has ambitions of his own."

"I voted 90 percent of the time with a majority of Democrats in the U.S.
Senate," he said.

"I'm worried that my party may become what we've accused the Republicans of,
a kind of litmus-test party," he said. "If you don't agree with us 100
percent of the time, you don't agree with us. I'm devoted to the Democratic
Party."

A new Quinnipiac University poll shows Lamont is trailing Lieberman by 12
percentage points among likely voters. It said much of Lieberman's advantage
comes from his popularity among Republicans and unaffiliated voters, the
largest voting block in Connecticut.

One of the reasons why Joe Lieberman is having so much trouble
convincing Connecticut voters that he should remain their Senator is
his ability to seem more Republican that the Republicans at unfortunate
times. On a very conservative, for non-Fox TV, talk show he gives the
World War III, no civil war in Iraq and the war in Iraq is necessary to
fight terrorism at home. In 15 minutes. There aren't many Republicans
running for office this year that could come close to that litany.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/23/ny...gewanted=print
August 23, 2006
Lieberman Warns of Danger of the U.S. Pulling Out of Iraq
By JENNIFER MEDINA

HARTFORD, Aug 22 - Suggesting that he sees parallels between the war
in Iraq and the early struggle against fascism, Senator Joseph I.
Lieberman said on Tuesday that the United States would create a
dangerous world if it left Iraq too soon.

"Iraq has now become what everyone thinks it was before, another
battlefield in this war with Islamic terrorists, and we've got to end
it with a victory," Mr. Lieberman said during an interview with the
nationally syndicated conservative radio talk show host Glenn Beck on
Tuesday.

In the 15-minute interview, Mr. Lieberman warned against the United
States becoming isolationist, and he seemed to agree with Mr. Beck's
repeated statements suggesting that the war against Islamic terrorists
represented the brink of an international war.

When Mr. Beck compared the current situation to the eve of World War
II, saying that that world was in denial then as it is now, Mr.
Lieberman said there were "very, very severe echoes of all that."

"You know somebody said to me that Iraq, if you look back at it, is
going to be like the Spanish Civil War, which was the harbinger of what
was to come," Mr. Lieberman said. "Also, as the Nazis began to move
in Europe, we tried to convince ourselves we contained them - and we
obviously didn't, and then we paid the price."

At one point in the interview, Mr. Beck asked pointedly, "Why is it
there aren't more politicians saying, 'Guys, this is World War III.
We are in deep trouble?' "

Mr. Lieberman responded by saying that he thought that both Republicans
and Democrats treat "politics as if it was a sport in which you are
on one team," and that "the aim is for that team to win."

"And when you do that, you forget that there are larger interests,
which is the interests of the United States of America," he said.
"The other thing going on here is that you know people don't like
to face the reality of danger, and maybe some politicians don't like
to be the ones to talk about it. But everything you've just said is
right."

Ned Lamont, who defeated Mr. Lieberman in the Democratic primary in
part by stoking antiwar sentiment, said that Mr. Lieberman's comments
put him "way outside the mainstream, not just of Democrats, but of
the public at large."

Mr. Lamont has said he would back a plan for a firm timeline of troop
withdrawal from Iraq, a position supported by several other Democrats
in the Senate.

"Nobody is talking about isolationism," Mr. Lamont said, responding
in a telephone interview to Mr. Lieberman's remarks. "The problem
is that the Bush administration and Senator Lieberman think that you
can fight this like a conventional war, and that's where they are
wrong. We have to deal with homeland security, port security, to really
protect ourselves."

Mr. Lieberman also reiterated his belief that the war against
terrorists could drag on for several years, and that pulling troops out
of Iraq would allow the Iranian government to move in and would
increase the price of oil.

"If we walk away, then the Iranians will - as sure as I am talking
to you - surge into Iraq, certainly take over the south and the oil
that's there," he said. "We'll be paying six or seven bucks a
gallon. And that'll just be the tip of it. I mean, there'll be
instability and war throughout the Middle East. We've got to wake up
to this. It is the test, unfortunately, of not just this generation of
American leaders, but of the next generation as well, because this
enemy ain't going away."

Mr. Lamont said that Mr. Lieberman was using overcharged rhetoric and
said that he "fundamentally disagreed" with the senator.

"The invasion of Iraq has had one big winner and that's Iran,"
Mr. Lamont said. "It's an enemy that is not going away, but that
has nothing to do with the war in Iraq. The war in Iraq has been a
distraction and made us weaker."

Later, in appearance with Wolf Blitzer on CNN, Mr. Lieberman said that
the war in Iraq had not undermined the credibility of efforts to deal
with terror threats. Mr. Lieberman also said that he did not believe
Iraq was already in a civil war, a term Mr. Lamont uses regularly.