An Obama Cheer Me Up

This is circulating on the web these days and has hit my inbox with some regularity.

Since our late night comedians often inject truth into their monologues you might want to consider what they are saying*.

(*See disclaimer at bottom).

At the worst, it might make you think - at its best it might make someone rethink this idea of "change" we never get.

You know the honeymoon is over when comedians say:

The liberals are asking us to give Obama time.
We agree...and think 25 to life would be
appropriate.
--Jay Leno

America needs Obama-care like Nancy
Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.
--Jay Leno

Q: Have you heard about McDonald's'
new Obama Value Meal?
A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you
has to pay for it.
--Conan O'Brien

Q: What does Barack Obama call
lunch with a convicted felon?
A: A fund raiser.
--Jay Leno

Q: What's the difference between
Obama's cabinet and a penitentiary?
A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers,
and threats to society. The other is for housing
prisoners.
--David Letterman

Q: If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were
on a boat in the middle of the ocean and it
started to sink, who would be saved?
A: America !
--Jimmy Fallon

Q: What's the difference between
Obama and his dog, Bo?
A: Bo has papers.
--Jimmy Kimmel

Q: What was the most positive result
of the "Cash for Clunkers" program?
A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper
stickers off the road.
--David Letterman

Solution to the problem in Libya :

They want a new Muslim leader, Give them ours!

 

* Disclaimer: This was sent to me and as such I cannot confirm that these quotes are even directly attributable to those noted or if indecent liberties were taken by whomever individual(s) originated this internet chain mail.

It is what it is folks.

I am just passing it along for the, um, comedic value.

Just have yourself a chuckle. Nothing serious here.

 

Follow sMACkTalkMac on Twitter

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Mike-

    I love ya man-but all of those quotes are fakes....some have been circulating for quite some time. Not even an issue of liberties being taken-just absolute fabrications.

  • In reply to koolking83:

    Thought so my friend, but that was why I added the disclaimer and categorized it as Humor / Satire. At least worth a chuckle, but on the serious side do have concerns as to the "change" thing given Obama's reversal on Super Pacs. Of course that is also a major gaffe by the Supreme Court and I suppose that is just the way it is, huh?

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    Here's the thing...I certainly didn't feel good about it-but what can he do? The Supreme Court makes this election-and all subsequent ones, gun fights, and Obama is supposed to bring a knife? I don't think it's necessarily hypocritical-but rather a necessary and yet nose hold worthy example of unsavory means (which are in conflict with his beliefs) to a more savory end. If he loses the election, the Supreme Court will inevitably veer even more Right...and then what? No chance of Citizens United being overturned!

    Hope all is well Mike!

  • In reply to koolking83:

    Sure of course, I get what you mean. It is a darn shame though. Let's face it, political discourse will be extinct given these forces acting upon our politics. I kind of miss the old days where a couple of power politicians from either side can sit down and forge an agreement palpable to each ( and their constituents).

    Yes things are going pretty good, hope all is well with you too Steve. Always a good thing hearing from you.

  • In that they were probably fakes is indicated that some of them are attributed to.Letterman I quit watching him when the "have sex with the production assistant" stuff came out, but I doubt that he changed his politics.

    Leno will make a joke about Obama on occasion, and he generally has been the only one who has been somewhat even handed, politically. However, he has 4 Republicans to one Democrat, and Santorum (how conservative is Santorum? He won't go down an escalator) and Romney (how rich is Mitt? [I forgot the punchline]) are too easy.

    Notable is that Craig Ferguson is not listed, and that he can still get jokes out of Bill Clinton 12 years after Bill left office.

  • In reply to jack:

    Letterman the Lefty, yeah that's what forced me to reevaluate the email, but even he has been known to throw a few towards Obama. I usually catch the 1st fifteen minutes of him to see if there is anyone worthwhile coming on but change the channel quickly most times. Leno is, as you say, equal opportunity in his jokes and I give him credit for that. But hey, a good comedian will attack both sides if they are worth their salt. Ferguson is a stitch, but sometimes overplays his gay lifestyle. Hey to each their own but with the obligatory gay character in nearly every TV series - well, let's just say it is getting old.

    As for getting Clinton 12 years after the fact, well Clinton offers a lot of material given his missteps dating back to being Arky's Guv. I would tap that till its dry too.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    With Craig, it is undoubtedly an act, since he has had 3 wives and two children, and even had his mother in law on to promote a book. He married both sexes on Drew Carey, too.

    On the other hand, one has to wonder about that Geoff Peterson.

  • In reply to jack:

    I knew he was married once, but I thought he had had a late in life coming out not that long ago. Oh well, now I am confused.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    His most recent baby was born Feb. 2, 2011.

    His mother in law was on Nov. 11, 2011 to plug her book.

    But like I mentioned, on the Drew Carey Show, Mr. Wick was married to Drew for immigration purposes, but later was married to some preacher's daughter.

  • In reply to jack:

    Interesting. Like I said I read it somewhere and then when I watched one of his shows, he pretty much owned up to it. This was in December sometime. But hey, maybe he was spoofing or I was half asleep. It doesn't matter though - to each their own.

  • Certainly sounds like more ELEPHANT MANURE to me. We all know they can sure DUMP lots and lots!

    Be careful everyone it is certainly getting deep. We'll probably need a row boat by the time the election rolls around -- that is is everyone can stand all the SMELL!

  • In reply to JackF66:

    There is enough on both sides stinking it up F66, remember too, donkey shit ain't exactly aromatic especially when it comes out the front end. And that my friend is the state of national politics today.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    Well, so much for the legacy of Thomas Nast.

  • In reply to jack:

    Was my descriptiveness of the donkey not as two-fisted as Nast?

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    Nah, just that your post 4 hours 17 minutes ago seemed to dump dirt on both of his characters, or vice versa. ;-)

  • In reply to jack:

    Just my level of frustration with both political parties; I suppose the level of robocalls have finally gotten to me. And not only that - the partisan dribble as opposed to people actually looking at the issues is non-existant too. I heard the breakdown on Jessie Jr last night - even though he is under investigation by the ethics committee - 69% of his black base are solidly entrenched; race I guess trumps any real value he has brought to his district in his years there - absolutely amazing. And then the base complains?

    BTW - I have always loved Nast's work, especially his Tammeny Hall depictions - but I must admit too, that he was mostly one-sided - I on the other hand think both sides suck and will continue to point out both evils. I guess that makes me an equal opportunity basher.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    On your last sentence, apparently there are too few on Chicago Now. From Publius on one side, there was a new one who seemed thoughtful, but it turns out that his only agenda is to have a Black Scandanavian Green Party Socialist state, and from that perspective, the Democrats are not left. (Look up AmeriViking). So, I'm no longer interested. But at least Chicago Now lets people vent.

    On JJJr, I said before that that race depended on how many white people live south of Steger in that district. The poll you cite indicates that JJJr. lost 11% of the Black vote from the last election, but Halverson is starting to look like a real witch (appearance wise, which doesn't happen to help).

    If you want another bizarre one (which only affects Cook County), I don't see why the Supreme Court Judge candidate who is running that she is endorsed by Emanuel and looks about 142 years old, is running ads with "Aurie" Puchinski's picture making Puchinski look she is about 35.

    But as you mentioned, most of this doesn't matter.

  • In reply to jack:

    On your "last sentence observation." Yes there are, but apparently Chicago Now is more interested in volume and pop up adds these days. But in fairness, I suppose they are no different than other blog sites (and the Sun-Times when it comes to pop-ups). Jack the way I see it, though, people are diverse and as such we will always see diverse opinions and agendas - human nature?

    JJJr - well you hit it on the nail long ago but am heartened that he has lost 11% of his base support. Halvorson - interesting comment, I asked my wife about her and she thought much of her appearance was due to a medical or genetic thing. Personally, I am not sure and told my wife that her appearance is a bit hard to take at times, but I feel bad in saying that because I always felt looks are superficial qualities and we need to concentrate on the substance; we had Halvorson here in the 11th and opened the door for Kinzinger because of her actions regarding "side meetings" out of earshot. That I have a problem with especially when it dealt with sanctuary and illegals. That angered many and trust was compromised. Jr. has been able to deliver money for Illinois, unfortuantely very little of it helped his constituents directly. So I would have a problem with the "business as usual" aspect as well as his snarkyness and his sense of "entitlement."

    Aurie, yes bizarre but her problems began when she "switched sides" - now I don't believe she was the only one to do that to get back at the slatemakers - but it did tick off long time supporters of her father.

    In the end, yes doesn't matter. Slatemakers rule in Illinois and the GOP has been complicit when they decided to endorse the combine. Politics is just dirty here and I mean that from a criminal standpoint too.

    Change is hard to come by - but I believe we must continue to speak our minds and keep hammering the point - ideology in Illinois is non-existant.

  • I've told some of the Chicago Now bloggers directly that I was going to hit them in the pocketbook by removing my bookmarks to them. Probably of minimal effect, though.

    General observations about the election:

    I voted at about 9:30 a.m., and it wasn't busy. What surprised me was that there were only 2 touch screen machines but only one paper ballot carrel. It might be that David Orr figured that people had early voted, but more than likely that there wasn't going to be a turnout. Anyway, with them not offering paper ballots, I guess Cook County avoided the predictable "something has to be fouled up" in every election in Illinois.

    I also figure that I canceled out one person's vote, but if you had voted, there might have been more than a cancelling out effect. Anyway, like in economics, it is the macro rather than the micro that counts.

    The jerk I mentioned earlier about County Board of Review was running smear ads on the radio at least until 5 p.m. Apparently it is a fairly new tactic to run smear ads when they can't be answered, although his opponent was running ads for the past 3 weeks saying that all "jerk" had was smear ads. Anyway, it seems like the smearer lost.

    Hopefully, we get a few months off before the real pre-November crud hits.

  • In reply to jack:

    I hope you are right about the pre-November crud my friend. Your observation of the low turnout evidently was something officials had anticipated even out here in Will. Turnout was dreadful and while I believe 100% in your macro statement there is another dynamic - far too many candidates ran unopposed and/or were slate-maker pair-offs. People are tired of participating in a rigged environment. Durbin had just commented on the turnout - but conveniently avoided the dynamic and instead laid it on disinterest in Romney. Far from the truth.

    For the record, if Romney is the nominee, I would vote for him over Obama on the precept he couldn't be any worse than what we have and because I don't think "moderate" is a bad word. The primary, though, could not move me. In addition to the party sniping I cannot in good conscience vote for an unopposed Biggert and a host of county commissioners. Even if I embarked on an "anti candidate" that nimrod Bill Foster wins big. So it really wasn't all about Romney vs Santorum - just way too many other intangibles that forced me into cutting my lawn - damn my backyard grass was getting to the point where a smaller dog than mine would have gotten lost. There was another motivation too - had I picked-up a ballot it probably would have given one party or another a sense that they had me locked up for November - I would rather they NOT know where I lean in the General Election. The way I see it, now the candidates must answer the question of what makes them different than the other to get my vote. So that is another angle, at least for me.

    All in all - this primary was a real joke and for the first time in my life felt compelled not to participate because of the gerry-mandering and unopposed nature of candidates on ballots. It is very, very rare that I would forgo my obligation but felt it right based on the "other angle."

    So I guess in some ways those "smearers" won the day on that score. But I will speak in November!

  • In reply to jack:

    p.s. - it wasn't a total loss though - my wife kept our household streak alive when she was #29 at 2pm. BTW - she has never missed any election and uses them to vent against those she really dislikes.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    In unopposed races, I flip the coin t see if I vote on them or not; usually I don't. At least the touch screen machine is not as insistent in that regard as the chad or scanner machines.

    Again, what might have sped it up in Cook is that most of the county races were one Dem and no Rep. Apparently the only heat was in the Circuit Court Clerk's race where there was the Tribune and Emanuel endorsed hack against the incumbent self-endorsed hack who won, but that's an office that shouldn't be elective in the first place.

  • In reply to jack:

    Normally I do exactly the same, however we really had a super short ballot and the two contested events were a foregone conclusion on who would win; Peck and Kalinsky since they were heavily party backed. The way I see it, why show my hand for November and declaring a party preference? November will see me splitting the candidates for different offices as I see it right now. I hate these partisan primaries anyway but normally go along. Our ballot though was really hum drum. I had to laugh though, the Will GOP wanted everyone to tick the uncontested candidates box as if a mandate was being given. Silly.

Leave a comment