Forget the funding cuts, congressional resolutions, etc. Joe Liberman may control fate of U.S. in Iraq

There's been much buzz among the political chattering classes over a comment that now Independent Sen. Joe Liberman made recently.

Ever since Republican voters in Connecticut ensured his victory (and gave tons of campaign cash) and returned him to a congress where the Democratic majority is held by only 1 solitary vote, focus has been on Lieberman and the speculation that he'd continue his practice of throwing the Democratic party under the bus and possibly switch parties.

His recent statement that has everyone in a frenzy is this from a phone interview by The Politico.com:

"I have no desire to change parties," Lieberman said in a telephone interview. "If that ever happens, it is because I feel the majority of Democrats have gone in a direction that I don't feel comfortable with."

Asked whether that hasn't already happened with Iraq, Lieberman said: "We will see how that plays out in the coming months," specifically how the party approaches the issue of continued funding for the war.

He suggested, however, that the forthcoming showdown over new funding could be a deciding factor that would lure him to the Republican Party.

"I hope we don't get to that point," Lieberman said. "That's about all I will say on it today. That would hurt."

There's no reason to trust Lieberman's word when he says he has no desire to switch parties anymore than the word he gave top Dems and the voters of Connecticut in the past.

The 298,000,000 people of the United States don't have a say. The congress, for all their maneuvering and posturing and scramble to find ways to block Bush's bull-headed desire to mount a surge in Iraq, none of it matters.

It's all down to one man, and that guy is Joe Lieberman.

His veiled threat already has tongues wagging all over D.C. that it's meant as a means to warn Democrats that any effort to cut funding for the surge will cause Lieberman to switch parties, effectively handing control of congress over to the Republicans and creating the nightmare scenario where any tie votes are decided by Dick "Dick" Cheney.

Way to go Joe. I tried to warn about this, but everyone said he was a nice guy, a welcome moderate voice. B.S. The guy is nothing but trouble and is now poised to single-handedly scuttle the desires of millions of voters who sent a clear and unambiguous message in the mid-term elections that they want to find a way out of the quagmire in Iraq, NOT escalate things.

Will he switch parties? I doubt it. But he doesn't have to. Just the coy threat is enough to get Dems to back off on proposing honest means to change course in Iraq.

Is this speculation largely a lot of overly dramatic hype in the media and among pundits? Quite possibly, but there's no denying that Joe Lieberman is the Dems worst nightmare. And Dems who supported him and voted for him are rightfully feeling betrayed.

There's even talk of impeachment if Joe tries to switch. That, I'd love to see.