JOE LIEBERMAN: This is what plutocracy looks like (707 hits)
Category: PoliticsRating: -0.75 on 10 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by Steven Durel (View user info) at 2006-03-26 11:58:46 EST
On March 19 I found myself once again surrounded by hippies, queers, stoners and anarchists demanding an immediate conclusion to the criminal occupation of Babylon, this time outside the Old State House in Hartford. As snow fell, everyone from baby-boomers to babies gathered with droll signs, peace flags and thunderous drums to force elected officials to recognize the general will. Marching to Joe Lieberman's office, the crowd made their fearless voices louder. Unfortunately for them, Joe-Joe was a no-show.
What kept the senator from listening to the rabid yelps of enraged voters? Perhaps he was busy censoring some new video game or hunting wascally wabbits with Dick Cheney; in any case, it certainly benefited him to not be in that day. Had he been, the crowd of maniacs probably would have dragged Joe out into the street, hung him up by his ankles and beaten him with broom handles like the Italians did to Mussolini. What causes this sort of anger, the kind that makes a crowd want to lynch feeble senators?
Joseph "Izzy" Lieberman first rose to power in 1988 when a coalition of duopoly conservatives booted progressive Republican Lowell Weicker out of office. Joe was elected senator and Weicker got the consolation prize of governorship via the Connecticut Party. A decade later Weicker began working for World Wrestling Entertainment and Lieberman achieved national fame by winning the popular vote in 2000's vice-presidential election. Though that victory was surrendered, Lieberman also ran a campaign to keep his Senate seat that year—just in case—resulting the fact that he still can sit comfortably in an armchair on Capitol Hill, sip snifters of sparkling cider and hourly massage his lobes with smoked salmon cream cheese.
Though Connecticut's Left often tolerates limousine liberals, the Iraq War has brought hordes of angry commies to Joe-Joe's doorstep. In truth, Lieberman pushed for the invasion ever since 1991's Gulf War, helping Congress birth the Iraq Liberation Act in 1998 when Bill Clinton was bombing Baghdad to distract attention from the Lewinsky scandal. Add on top of that Joe's support for John Roberts' becoming a Supreme Court justice and Alberto Gonzales the Attorney General and you can see why there is a coordinated pinko mob screaming for his oversized head.
Still, ever since Lieberman's incredibly unsuccessful presidential bid in 2004, he has unceasingly tried using his "Joementum" to convince the electorate that colonialism really isn't that bad. Last November he wrote in the Wall Street Journal that, in today's Iraq "[t]here are many more cars on the streets," while ignoring that most of them are smoldering. GI Joe also explained that staying the course is "critically important to the security and freedom of America. If the terrorists win, they will be emboldened to strike us directly again." The following month he verbally reemphasized his stance, declaring, "It's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be the commander-in-chief for three more critical years and that, in matters of war, we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril." Bush quickly responded, "Senator Lieberman is right."
The Left has consequently become sick of Lieberman's whiny shenanigans and that is very bad news because this is an election year. Of Joe's senatorial challengers, one now making headlines is Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont, who is running in August's Democratic primary. Despite all the energy going into the Lamont campaign he probably will be beaten back by Joe's supporters, the same kind of wealthy Republocrat socialites who suppressed Howard Dean in 2004.
New Haven truck driver Ralph Ferrucci, who is running for the Green Party with Reform and Libertarian support, hopes to be the third-party antidote to Lieberman's canker come November. Speaking with me on the dusty steps of a church in Middletown, Ferrucci explained, "I believe political parties are the downfall of this country. Our forefathers never wanted them because, when you start having parties, you start having party lines. If you have a group of independent thinkers and honest people, the debate becomes about the merit of ideas and what constituents want. Our forefathers tried to set up a government of the people, for the people and by the people. They never intended for career politicians, political parties or candidates taking money from giant corporations."
Indeed, Lieberman's funds do come from the defense companies helping to vaporize Iraqis—United Technologies, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, etc—as well as from the oil industry, banks, pharmaceutical companies, lawyers, anti-Cuba and pro-Israel groups, and even our state's Republican Campaign Committee. Actually, most of Lieberman's funds do not come from inside Connecticut, but rather cities like New York, Washington, Chicago, Palm Beach and Beverly Hills (see OpenSecrets.org). With all that money from affluent out-of-state warmongers, is it any wonder that Joe ignores any frenzied New England deadheads screaming outside his window?
As this campaign heats up, Connecticut voters will have to ask themselves some very serious questions about contemporary politics. Within months our state will be forced to choose between a "safe" status quo of misery, repression and imperialism, or an unpredictable fringe of crazies high on hope, compassion and peace. Let's pray that they give some thought to that choice, for all peoples' sake.
User Reviews
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2006-03-27 17:23:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Who wrote this, Hunter S. Thompson?
Submitted by Berty (user info) at 2006-03-27 03:36:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-03-26 12:53:19 (#)
Ranking: 0
ets -- a third party wouldn't get anything more done than the other two. it's impossibly to please 300 million people, add to the fact that these 300 million people are americans, and you're pretty much fucked. a third party wouldn't change that...
-----------------
I bet you could you know. Give everyone nice warm duvets. Everybody loves duvets.
Submitted by Dead_0hi0_Sky (user info) at 2006-03-26 20:11:27 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-03-26 19:48:52 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-03-26 13:42:40 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Shit, I'd be happy with a first party.
I got the keg, anyone bringing the strippers?
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-03-26 13:20:32 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Plutocracy: A government run by Mickey Mouse's dog. . .
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-03-26 12:53:19 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
ets -- a third party wouldn't get anything more done than the other two. it's impossibly to please 300 million people, add to the fact that these 300 million people are americans, and you're pretty much fucked. a third party wouldn't change that...
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-03-26 12:19:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Um.
I stopped caring at "When"
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-03-26 12:14:58 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I WISH A THIRD PARTY WOULD GET ITS ACT TOGETHER!
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-03-26 12:09:37 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
when an idea crops up into your head, what keeps you from pulling out a gun and blowing your brains out to stop that?