With the end of the year and the decade upon us, it’s time for all those “best of” lists to start assaulting us. But have you ever noticed that there’s not much in the way of “Best Politician” lists? Well, we’re going to do our bit to remedy this. For a “Best Politician of 2009″ award, we have two nominations right off the bat. Joe Lieberman and Barack Obama. First, lets talk about Joe Lieberman. He’s been getting a lot of flak recently, but frankly, I don’t understand the fuss. Joe is what any logical-minded person would consider a consummate politician. If, by “consummate politician”, you mean a smug, lying, self-serving, turncoat bastard who will do anything including raping babies to maintain a position of influence. Joe’s interpretation of “bipartisan” is that you have to be in whichever party it takes to keep you in office, regardless of where that party’s values lie. The only thing I don’t understand about Senator Lieberman is why his parents didn’t name him Richard. Not to worry about this too much though, being named Joe didn’t stop him from earning his place in Dickipedia. And Barack Obama? As I’ve said before (in the interest of disclosure): I voted for the guy. For a while I maintained a fantasy that he’s genuinely a good man, but that as soon as he was sworn in, a gang of shadow government thugs dragged him into a dark room and waterboarded him while they told him about all the ways they would torture his loving family if he didn’t dance to the whims of the secret power elite of the military industrial complex. This delusion gasped its last breath recently, when he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize while increasing troop levels to escalate two massive military conflicts abroad. Any decent normal human being would graciously decline a peace prize under such circumstances; only a politician would accept it. We understand he’s planning to invade Iran in the hopes of winning another. We’ll be pondering the “Best Politician of the Decade” list for a bit, but who would you nominate?
↧