Monday, January 14, 2013

Post No. 186a: BREAKING NEWS: President Seen Cavorting with Someone Other than First Lady!



Today, we received an e-mail from the New York Times indicating that the House of Representatives had rejected an effort to increase the federal debt limit. The article was entitled, “Pressing Obama, House Bars Rise in Debt Ceiling.”

Many welcomed the event, and argued that it was a repudiation of the President’s efforts to transform our nation into a socialist state during a period of global economic stagnation, brought on solely by his Administration’s economic policies.

Apparently the President didn’t take the message very well, since he was seen cruising various D.C. bars.

According to Tim Teetotaler, at The Speakeasy in DuPont Circle, this was not the first time that the President visited his bar late at night. Confirming rumors, he said the President is typically accompanied by a female ostrich. The bartender went on to relate his first encounter with Obama.

On that occasion, the President said, "I'll have a beer; in fact the same brand of beer that was sent to the White House for the Harvard Professor – Cambridge Cop Beer Summit last year.” The bartender then turned to the ostrich, and asked, "What about you?"

"I'll have a beer too," said the ostrich, while the Secret Service detail surveyed the room, concerned about what observers might think about the President hanging out with a bird not native to America, and other than the American Bald Eagle.

The bartender claims that he served the pair and the tab was $6.40. The President turned to his trusted military aide carrying the “Nuclear Football,” and said, “Willy, reach into the side pocket of the satchel and pull out whatever money is there.”

Pursuant to the President’s instructions, the aide retrieved all of the money, which amounted to exactly $6.40.

The bartender claims that he next saw the President and the ostrich on the night when US forces successfully located and eliminated Osama bin Laden. The President ordered Champagne this time - a glass of 2010 Armand de Brignac.

The ostrich said she would have the same. After they completed their drinks, the bill amounted to $47.83. The President once again turned to Willy, asked to him to reach into the side pocket of the satchel, and pull out all the money. Willy, according to the bartender, pulled out exactly $47.83.

After the bin Laden mission, this became a regular, nightly routine, and whenever the bartender saw the two approaching, he simply asked, "The usual?" On each occasion, Willy took care of the tab by simply reaching into the pocket. Even when the price of the Champagne increased, the aide still pulled out the exact amount needed, even though he was not informed of the increase.

According to Teetotaler, last night following the House vote, a despondent President came in, and ordered Sauza Blue Reposado.

"Same for me," said the ostrich, with a subdued tone and a Southern drawl.

"That will be $29.20," said the bartender.

Once again the aide pulled out the exact change.

The bartender thought that since the President’s guard might be down, it might be a good time to address his curiosity about the President having just enough money in the pocket to match the amount of the bill.

"Excuse me, Mr. President, but may I ask perhaps an impertinent question?” “Sure,” replied the President.

“How does your aide manage to always come up with the exact change for your bill out of the side pocket of that satchel, every single time?"

“First of all, let it be clear that although the taxpayers pick up the tab for my drinks, they do not pay for the ostrich’s. But to get to the crux of your question, several years ago I was cleaning the attic with Michelle and the girls, and found an old Middle Eastern lamp. When I rubbed it, a Genie appeared and offered me four wishes, three of which I made in a family, group setting.”

“My first wish was that I be elected President when the nation was in a perilous state, so that I could prove how effective a smart guy could really be as President.”

“My second wish was that if I, or the nation, ever needed to pay for anything, I could just put my hand in the side pocket of the satchel containing the Nuclear Football, and sufficient funds would be there."

"That's brilliant!" said the bartender. "Most people would wish for a specific amount of money, but you'll be as rich as you want for as long as you live!"

"Well, so one would think,” said the President. “Whether it was a gallon of milk, a new home in Hyde Park, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, or MediCare, the exact money was always there," said the President.

"That's fantastic!" said the bartender. "It’s clear why they call you 'The Anointed One.'”

“Not so fast my friend. My third wish was that I locate and eliminate Osama bid Laden during my first term.”

The bartender said, “Sir, obviously you are on a roll. But you’ve been more than generous in sharing with me things which are obviously personal in nature; consequently I would not dare ask about the fourth wish, which you did not share with your family.”

“But there's one thing I still don't understand. What's with the ostrich?"

According to the bartender, the President replied "I was afraid that you would ask that. My fourth wish was for a chick with long legs."

The bartender commiserating with the President, and trying to switch the subject said, “I heard about your defeat in the House earlier today. Obviously that is what drove to you to order this very potent tequila.”

The President responded, “That’s the least of my concerns. The House vote suggests that Rupert Murdoch finally got to the Genie, who cancelled my unlimited funds capabilities. But that’s just a political problem, which a sharp politician can handle.”

“I’m drinking tequila because I can’t figure out how to explain the ostrich to Michelle, and Bill Clinton has been absolutely no help at all.”

© 2011 and 2013, the Institute for Applied Common Sense (Well sorta, some of this is in the public domain).

11 comments:

  1. “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt
    limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S.
    government can’t pay its own bills. ... I therefore intend to oppose the
    effort to increase America’s debt limit.” Senator Barack Obama, March 16, 2006.


    I guess that was before he found that bottle.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Douglas:

    Thanks much for your provision of the Obama quote. It reminded us of two things:

    a) "I, ____, take you, ____, to be my lawfully wedded(husband/wife), to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part;"

    and a piece we have posted on a number of occasions:

    b) 27 Situations Where People We Respect Claim Lying is Appropriate.

    Apart from lying or intentional deception, should an elected official, who upon taking office for his or her first term and stating a position, be permitted to change that position after 2, 6, 12, 20 years?


    Are there any circumstance that would justify an elected official changing his or her view on any issue, let's say gay rights, abortion, stem cell research?


    Should a person in his or her 20s, 30s, 40s, be permitted to change their philosophical position on a fundamental issue?


    Should a business be permitted to change its position or business model after X period of time?


    Should a church be permitted to change its position regarding moral issues over time?


    Should a commanding officer in the War in Iraq be permitted to change a fundamental tactical position or strategy (applicable to all warfare, let's say for example, what percentage of the troops of any unit are killed before surrendering or retreating) upon entering Afghanistan?

    ReplyDelete
  3. So much read into a simple quote of a strongly held position which is, apparently, "no longer operable." I might add highly defensive in tone and nature.


    I don't know the answers to your questions. I have held a simple rule for most of my life: if someone espouses a position and then changes that position due to a change in his personal circumstances then he never held that initial position strongly.


    And... perception is reality.


    I merely posted the quote, I leave it for others to interpret it and to judge accordingly.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Douglas:

    Our response had nothing to do with you or your intention, if any, associated with your posting of the quote. Your comment appeared to be a factual one, without any embellishment or slant, and neutral in tone from our reading of it.

    In our view, Reader A posted a quote indicating that Politician B took one position about Issue C in 2006, and Politician B, while in a different political office, is implicitly, if not explicitly, taking a dramatically different position about Issue C now. Politician B commented in 2006 that the failure to address Issue C was a failure in leadership (apparently on the part of all elected leaders in the jurisdiction to which he was referring) and now there is a different set of elected leaders who might be regarded as having failed their leadership responsibilities.

    There was no reading of anything into the quote, except as reflected above. There surely was no position taken as to the appropriateness of changing that position, or the characterization as a failure of leadership.

    As we strive to do in connection with every issue, we simply raised questions about changes in position by various individuals and entities in an effort to flush out whether there is some principle our readers can take away from the change which you so appropriately brought to our attention.

    In your second comment, you raised another interesting issue, actually two, by noting:



    "[I] don't know the answers to your questions. I have held a simple rule
    for most of my life: if someone espouses a position and then changes that position due to a change in his personal circumstances then he never held that initial position strongly."


    First you isolated a workable principle which perhaps others could use. Second, you raised the issue of the "strength" or "depth" of one's positions or convictions at various points in time. Now that we think about it, it also raised a third issue, namely whether one has to utter a position in a public setting for it to be compared to a subsequent position on the same issue, or whether just thinking about the issue, and then changing one's view (without uttering) makes a difference.


    Actually, we now see a fourth issue raised in your second comment, namely what if the circumstances are not truly personal, but rather external, or perhaps affecting those closely associated with that person, or perhaps affecting those remotely associated with that person.



    While we did not take a position, or express our pleasure or displeasure with the apparent change of position on the part of President Obama, or the extrapolation of the conclusion that there has been a failure of leadership on the part of our current elected officials, we will state OUR principle, applicable to this subject:


    If a politician takes a position about an issue at one point in his political career, and then changes that position at another point, if asked by a reporter, or another politician, or a citizen, as to why a change in position has been made, that politician should be able to articulate reasonable factors prompting the change in position. That explanation may or may not satisfy people.


    Perhaps most importantly, we wanted to examine the issue of "changed circumstances," which do occur in peoples' lives.


    We would imagine that there may have been some anti-gun control advocates among the parents of the kids killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School. It would not surprise us if one or two of those parents have now changed their positions on gun control.


    Applying your principle, does that mean that the theoretical parents really did not hold their anti-gun control position that strongly?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Once again, you ask a question for which I have no answer. And you read into my comment (while denying having done so) so much more than what is stated or intended. I state the latter because I want you to understand that I, too, can make statements or ask questions merely to allow people to consider such issues as I raise.


    I have, by the way, no idea what an "anti-gun control advocate" might be, do, or think. I wonder if there is anyone, anywhere, who is an "anti-gun control advocate." I certainly do not know any. Do you? Could you explain exactly how I might determine one from say a "anti-gun advocate?"

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi to all, how is everything, I think every one is getting more from this web page,
    and your views are good designed for new viewers.
    Here is my weblog ; online usa casino

    ReplyDelete
  7. Your means of explaining everything in this paragraph is really
    fastidious, all be able to simply know it, Thanks a lot.
    My webpage : binary options affiliate programs

    ReplyDelete
  8. I am curious to find out what blog system you are working with?
    I'm having some minor security issues with my latest website and I would like to find something more safeguarded. Do you have any solutions?
    My blog post ; casino usa online

    ReplyDelete
  9. I believe this is one of the such a lot significant info for me.
    And i'm satisfied studying your article. However wanna remark on some normal issues, The site taste is perfect, the articles is in reality great : D. Excellent activity, cheers
    Feel free to visit my blog : Get More Information

    ReplyDelete
  10. Its like you read my mind! You appear to know a lot about this, like you wrote the book in it or something.

    I think that you could do with a few pics to drive the message home a little bit, but
    other than that, this is great blog. A fantastic read.
    I'll certainly be back.
    my page :: slots for cash

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hi there, I discovered your blog via Google at
    the same time as searching for a comparable matter, your web site came up, it seems good.
    I have bookmarked it in my google bookmarks.

    Hi there, just became alert to your weblog through Google,
    and located that it's really informative. I am gonna be careful for brussels. I'll be grateful should you proceed this in future.
    Many other people will be benefited out of your writing.

    Cheers!
    Here is my blog :: real money online slots

    ReplyDelete

"There Are More Than 2 Or 3 Ways To View Any Issue; There Are At Least 27"™

"Experience Isn't Expensive; It's Priceless"™

"Common Sense should be a Way of Life"™

Opportunity to Serve as "Guest Author"

This forum was designed to be YOUR forum for the civil exchange of ideas by people with all points of views. We welcome the submission of articles by all of our readers, as long as they are in compliance with our Guidelines contained in Post No. 34. We look forward to receiving your submissions.