November 18, 2009

Rabbis call out insufferable shmegegge

Douchebag and quisling Joe Lieberman (I – Me!) in deep doodoo with erstwhile supporters --

Quietly holding candles, hundreds of clergymen, congregants and reform advocates lined the sidewalks outside Joe Lieberman's Stamford home Sunday night in a show of support for universal health care.

Rabbi Fish of Beth El, in Norwalk, calls on Lieberman's conscience to do the right thing. His invocation of the Torah commandment (Lo taamod al dam reakha, "Do not stand idly by the blood of your neighbors") was especially poignant.

"The moral imperative for our time is clear. Anyone whose guide in public policy is conscience, anyone who argues that faith and religious traditions should direct our actions, such a person must stand for universal health care in America," Fish concluded. "It happens we are all also citizens of Connecticut. That fact leads us to ask you Senator Lieberman, what is it that you stand for?"
Besides rethug cock, that is.


CAFKIA said...

Rabbi Fish of Beth El, in Norwalk, calls on Lieberman's conscience to do the right thing.

I'm gonna need some proof if I am to believe that Joe LIEberman has a conscience. I guess my faith isn't strong.

Lisa G. said...

The man is a first class douche and should be stripped of his Homeland Security Chairmanship. The Repubs would have done that in a second if the tide were turned.

Lex said...

I actually have one tiny objection to this, developed when I was a kid and people picketed the home of a local doctor who ran an abortion clinic, and that is that I don't think people who are being protested for their professional behavior should be picketed at their private homes. (Possible exceptions might include state university chancellors living in state-owned residences, but in general ... ) Lieberman no doubt has an office or three in Connecticut; picket there.

big em said...

I for one think that 'tactically' speaking you're right Lex - - the people that protestors (a general group of which I have been an occasional member of) are usually trying to reach/change are those that are 'uncommitted' on the issue, and these uncommitted individuals will often feel that protesting at a person's home is inappropriate and vaguely intimidating or threatening, and may turn them off to your point of view. Also, there's usually NOT as many people around nor media coverage as you'd find in a busy downtown office or political center, so you often don't reach the larger audience.
However, legally speaking, I do believe that people should have the legal right to express their views / opinions on most public streets/sidewalks, with normal restrictions against blocking passage, excess noise, customary hours, etc., because every once in awhile there IS an appropriate 'home protest', such as Cindy Sheehan's Camp Casey near W's Faux Ranch.

Lex said...

big em: I'm with you on the rights issue -- I wasn't suggesting banning it. I just think it's somehow more ... well, polite, and therefore potentially more effective, to avoid the home. (Target's kids, particularly, ought not be subjected to that, to my way of thinking.)

That said, I agree with you on the Sheehan Exception, but I need to ponder on it a bit to figure out why, inasmuch as "because I'm hypocritical," although the first possible explanation to come to mind, seems somehow unsatisfactory.

Anonymous said...

you are insane