I could see where Obama for political purposes could make hay out Hillary's vote on for Kyl-Lieberman by saying he thinks it gives Georgie another reason to strike Iran, like he needs a non-binding resolution to do so, but to then say that he objects to the provision which deals with Iran's influence in Iraq doesn't make sense.  As long as the American military is in Iraq, it's mission is to deal with any and all obstacles to its goal of stability in Iraq.  Separate from the question of whether a military solution is viable, is the question of what Iran is doing to impede, destabilize, fund, arm, or support the Shia Militia's.  The American military commanders absolutely have to take all parties who are contributing to the mess in Iraq into consideration, when they plan their missions.  Does this mean fricking bombing Iran, no, but it means dealing with them in Iraq.