Yeah! All Right!

« February 2007 »


Serioiusly, what the fuck? Have you woken up yet and taken a long, hard look at what you got in bed with in November? Any pangs of regret down there in my old Nutmeggian stomping grounds? You could have had a perfectly respectable freshman Democratic senator, like so many other states did. They're the trendy new accessory. But you had to keep your ratty old Lieberman, thinking he'd keep bringing you that sweet sweet submarine base lovin'.

But you must realize by now he's completely fucking insane. Even by Lieberman standards, he's been pulling back the skin mask and showing his lizard face a LOT lately. And you're stuck with him for five more fucking years. I'm sorry, what was the problem with Ned Lamont again? Was it that he wouldn't take strong, insane pro-Bush stands such as... ACTUAL QUOTE TIME!

"A Senate-passed resolution of disapproval for this new strategy in Iraq would give the enemy some encouragement, some feeling that—well, some clear expression that the American people were divided." - Lieberman, during a hearing on new Iraq commander David Petraeus.

I mean, the guy admits to the New Yorker that he's read, and quotes from, "America Alone" by Mark Steyn. Specifically, Lieberman says he often quotes the bits about "the power of demographics, in Europe particularly. That’s what struck me the most."

Which sounds innocent enough. Politicians are concerned with demographics. But Steyn's book is about Islamic expansionism. So the "demographics" Lieberman were so struck by are the ones that predict doom if white people don't get on the ball and start making white babies, lest the world be overrun by rapidly-breeding radical Muslims. Now to be fair, Connecticut voters had no way of knowing that Lieberman was running on a "fewer Muslim babies" ticket back in November, but there was plenty of evidence that Lieberman was FUCKING NUTS. The demographics thing is just gratuitous confirmation.

For example, for the better part of the last DECADE, I've known Lieberman as "Joystick Joe" because of his ridiculous fear that violent video games would create entire generations of slack-jawed, amoral, violent youths. Now, sane people realize that while media can be influential, their impact is tiny compared to core values instilled by parents and society. So where, exactly, did Lieberman get the idea that violent media could drastically affect someone's worldview?

Well, there's a charming anecdote in that New Yorker profile that may give us all some clues.

"A few years ago, I was in a movie theatre in Washington when I noticed Lieberman and his wife, Hadassah, a few seats down. The film was “Behind Enemy Lines,” in which Owen Wilson plays a U.S. pilot shot down in Bosnia. Whenever the American military scored an onscreen hit, Lieberman pumped his fist and said, 'Yeah!' and 'All right!' - Jeffrey Goldberg.

Ho. Ly. Shit. First of all, the guy enjoyed "Behind Enemy Lines". That should be grounds to question his judgment right there. But getting all worked up every time the Americans shot a dirty celluloid foreigner? I mean, even accounting for the fact that it was only a few months after September 11, anyone getting shot by Americans in this movie were EASTERN EUROPEANS.

At the risk of getting into pop psychoanalysts, the reason Lieberman thinks we're all puppet-slaves who dance to the emotional strings pulled by the entertainment industry is because Joe Fucking Lieberman, elder statesman, can get a Levitra-sized jingo-stiffy from a crappy Owen Wilson movie! And if that can happen to him, what chance does a twelve-year-old have resisting the demonic pull of Scorpion's grappling hook special?

Feeling buyer's remorse yet, Connecticut? I hope so. Because Lieberman's entering serious Joseph Heller Character territory here. If he grabs a cowboy hat and rides the first nuke into Iran, I will be the least surprised person in this country.

Syndicate content