Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Post No. 165: BREAKING NEWS: President Obama Seen Cavorting with Someone other Than the 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 expenditures 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 carrying 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 always 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, the Institute for Applied Common Sense (Well sorta, some of this is in the public domain).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
'Spector,
ReplyDeleteThe tale is clearly a cautionary metaphor which speaks to careless wishing and the fulfillment thereof. "A chick with long legs" is indeed one example; unspecified "hope and change" might be another . . .
The Independent Cuss
Independent Cuss:
ReplyDeleteHere it is that we try to lighten things up, pursuant to the advice of many of our readers, and someone recognizes the serious, metaphorical message in the joke.
Oh, BTW, during the last Presidential election, CSpan2 Book TV aired a program where the author discussed the results of his or her research, which suggested that something like 5-10% of Democrats, and 5-10% of Republicans, essentially debated and defined the ideological constructs of each party. The point was that the vast, vast, vast majority of the citizens of this country have their lives dictated by the most active and vocal members of society, who also happen to be more privileged .
ReplyDeleteWe strongly suspect that the same thing is occurring with the debt ceiling debate. The debate is not really about the debt ceiling per se, but rather a very deep, long-standing debate about the role and size of government. It’s never been resolved, and never will be resolved in our representative democracy. However, in the mean time, the regular folks in our society run the risk of being irreparably damaged. The elites (the upper and upper middle socio-economic classes) on each side of the fence have theirs, their corporate contributions, decent jobs and income, and will fare just fine economically. It’s the ordinary citizens (lower middle socio-economic class) who will most likely get screwed, no matter which side ultimately prevails in the short term.
Has that not been the way of the world since at least the Biblical era? And has it not been the way of this nation for decades?
ReplyDeleteThat was the outstanding thing about America: for many years, it actually offered a degree of equity to those of us who populate the lower socioeconomic strata. Now all of that is gone in the name of higher profits and misguided, ego-driven idealism . . . and no one will admit it or engage in a discussion about it. To me, those are markers of a society firmly locked in the death spiral.
The Independent Cuss
Little did we realize, when we first generated this post, that Rupert Murdoch's influence would come to light....
ReplyDelete‘Spector,
ReplyDeleteThe telephone-hacking of the murdered girl is disgraceful and does make one cringe, but I believe that this sort of chicanery is committed by the media far more frequently than it is discovered. The tabloid media has used such techniques for years, but it has become increasingly difficult to distinguish “serious” media from the tabloid variety.
I doubt that any press organization has clean hands in this regard; let us hope that because Murdoch is being used by the rest of the media as a scapegoat (no surprise) that some changes will be made industry-wide to discourage the destructive behavior of which I contend that they are all guilty. I doubt it; as our government becomes evermore intrusive, so does our Fourth Estate believe that it has the right to follow suit.
The Independnet Cuss
We're almost on all fours with you on this one, Independent Cuss.
ReplyDeleteWhat is perhaps most disturbing is that the majority of us with the power of ballot do not seem to realize it, or are not sufficiently motivated to do something about it.
Where we differ with you is with respect to your characterization of our society as being "firmly locked in the death spiral." We think that there are enough people sufficiently pissed off right now that the U.S. might rally one more time. However, we are not sure whether the movement will be sufficiently organized, coherent, and lead to pull it off.
'Spector,
ReplyDeleteI was sufficiently pissed-off to rally with others all the way back in the 1970s, but nobody wanted to talk about the substantive issues back then, either. Their primary interests during the Age of Aquarius seemed to begin and end with the freedom to indulge in recreational drug use, which I consider to be one of the coffin nails if any civilization.
Socioeconomic equity for the self-employed and working classes wasn't on anyone else's radar screen back then (or now), and while I was young and full of piss and vinegar, I was too uneducated, too undisciplined and too angry to try to focus attention where it was most needed. You certainly can't deny that our circumstance has worsened greatly in the last four decades, just as I predicted back then.
And no, I wasn't (and am not) a socialist, though I admit that I am a bit of a pragmatist. I seek only to fix problems involving gross injustice wherein the rug has needlessly been pulled out from under those who keep (or who once kept, prior to “downsizing” and “outsourcing”) this nation running on a functional level. When capitalism is perverted into wholesale exploitation and abandonment, and when gratuitous government regs only serve to make survival a bit more impossible for us, it is time to reassess this nation's priorities.
The Independent Cuss
Independent Cuss:
ReplyDeleteCheck out our newest post on Betty Ford, which should be published within the next 2 hours, and our reference to the complexity of the American citizen. We will then provide our response to your comment, or perhaps we need not do so.
There is so much complexity to each and every citizen in the United States, and we would submit far more than the citizens of other countries, for a multiplicity of reasons.
ReplyDeleteIt is virtually impossible for an elected leader, or system, to "adequately" respond to the issues of one citizen, much less a nation of 300 million citizens. It is a strain on representative democracy, even in its purest form, without all the corruption and greed in the mix.
'Spector,
ReplyDeleteSo, obviously, they should not (and do not) even waste their time trying.
Although, when one thinks about it, they certainly seem to do a pretty good job of taking care of the wealthy on one end and the citizens who can't be bothered to try to work on the other . . .
The Independent Cuss
Just saw a piece on CNN during which they noted that the debt ceiling goes back to 1917, and that since 1960, we've raised it 65 times. (The modern debt limit was established in 1939.)
ReplyDelete