In the wake of recent revelations that Lieberman's plan to run as an independant democrat are, in fact, not so much legal, William F. Buckley offers this positively surreal piece on the Kiss heard 'round Penn Ave:

But in looking into Lieberman's vulnerabilities, I discovered in Wikipedia this item: "Following his 2005 State of the Union address, President Bush, after shaking lawmakers' hands, abruptly grasped Lieberman's head in both hands and kissed him on the cheek. At first, Lieberman's staff humorously referred to the embrace as 'some kind of Yale thing.'

"However, as political backlash against the peck arose, Lamont's supporters have appropriated the incident into a campaign button: 'The Kiss: Too Close for Comfort.' Lieberman has since denied the kiss ever took place. 'I don't think he kissed me. He learned over and gave me a hug and said, 'Thank you for being a patriotic American,' Lieberman told Time magazine."

So I said to myself, thinking back on our celebration in October, "Thank God I didn't kiss Joe!"

Yes, because that's why you two shouldn't be smooching. Not that I thought there was any real debate surrounding whether or not the two actually shared an intimate moment. They did:

However, as always, the right is missing the point entirely. The netroots aren't inflamed by whether or not there was actual lip contact or exchange of fluids between the two. They are displeased with Lieberman calling himself a democrat while betraying every. single. core value the party stands for.

The kiss is incidental and symbolic at best, though I would expect no less of the right to remain obsessed with whether or not two consenting male adults shared a tender touch. I can't wait to see how they react when this comes out: