If the greatest issue of our time is the war against terrorism, and if the issue is so important that it ought to transcend partisan politics -- as conservative talk show hosts keep insisting -- then now is the time for the Republican Party to withdraw its candidate from Connecticut's race for United States Senate.

Tuesday's primary pitting Joe Lieberman, the Democratic senator and former vice presidential candidate, against multimillionaire businessman and left-wing-blog darling Ned Lamont has been repeatedly touted as a referendum on the war in Iraq.

It need not be, but that's how it will enter the history books if the Republican Party fights the leftist spin with nothing other than counter-spin.

In service of the principle that national interest trumps party politics, conservatives should goad their party to action, just as anti-war activists have mobilized the Democrats, and force party leaders to cede the immediate battle for the Connecticut seat. They've got little to lose, and the country has a lot to win.

Leftists claimed a big victory in denying Mr. Lieberman his party's nomination. Opposition to the incumbent was based solely, and viciously, on his support for the Bush administration's war in Iraq.

How nasty was the race? Mr. Lamont's campaign manager agreed Friday to apologize for having described the town of Waterbury, which heavily supported the incumbent, as a place "where the forces of slime meet the forces of evil."

Through blogs and fund-raising machines such as moveon.org, anti-war leftists had galvanized support for Mr. Lamont, heir to a banking fortune whose "elitist" credentials rival those of George Bush. (Question: Aren't rich WASP businessmen anathema in the Democrats' class-war politics? Answer: Yes, right up to the moment they run for office as Democrats. Proof: The U.S. Senate.)

The Lieberman-Lamont contest prompted 14,000 unaffiliated Connecticut voters to reregister as Democrats and 14,000 new voters to register as Democrats as well. The Republicans' gain was a mere trickle.

So far, so good for the left, but a broader look at the numbers puts the "referendum on Iraq" claim in a different light.

As more and more voters registered, Mr. Lamont's lead in the polls narrowed.

On primary day, with about 282,000 -- or 40 percent -- of the state's 697,000 registered Democrats voting, Mr. Lamont garnered 146,061 votes to Mr. Lieberman's 136,042.

In November, however, all 2,037,620 registered voters will be able to cast their ballots for whomever they wish. Even after the pre-primary realignment, unaffiliated voters still account for 44 percent of the state's registered voters, with Democrats claiming 34 percent and Republicans 21 percent.

Here's where the Republican Party should put national interest above partisan practice by asking their endorsed candidate to bow out of the race. He has a name -- it's Alan Schlesinger -- but you won't have heard it on either talk radio or network news broadcasts for the simple reason, stated over and over again, that he has absolutely no chance of winning.

In a tight race, however, Mr. Schlesinger could be a spoiler. If bipartisan support for a war that must be won truly matters, the Republican leadership should remove any question on the matter by removing their candidate.

More than one left-leaning pundit has suggested that Mr. Lieberman 'fess up, make his predilection official and join the Republican Party.

This is both wishful thinking and, given Mr. Lieberman's solid liberal voting record, a defiance of the facts.

Perhaps those pundits don't like what this primary proves their party of preference is: a place where dissenters are purged. Pro-lifers who would support more liberal economic policies than Republican administrations pursue, were chased from the Democrats' tiny tent a long time ago.

Though bipartisan dissatisfaction with the Bush administration is at an all-time high, scarcely half of the Democratic voters in Connecticut thought support for "the Bush war" was reason enough to force from office a good and decent man.

Several GOP leaders have publicly said they hope Republicans will cross party lines to support Mr. Lieberman. Why not make it inevitable?

Not putting forward any candidate in a national election might make them hold their noses, but plenty of rank-and-file Republicans are doing that every day as they endure an administration whose conservative record on domestic issues is far from ideal and whose prosecution of the war on terror has been inept.

This decision could also serve as an apology for demonizing liberals when, in truth, liberty's greater enemies are leftists and their pay-no-price-bear-no-burden fellow-travelers.

The unfortunate fate of a good liberal in the Connecticut primary made that perfectly clear.