We Wanted Things Changed, Not Deranged!

Oh, I don't say it often, but when I do, I mean it. God bless Jon Leibowitz. Well, you know him as Jon Stewart, the quick witted host of The Daily Show. That guy really needs to be airing in a time slot which could ensure that more people would catch his act because let me just tell you, folks would learn a heck of a lot about how things really are and how things work. It's what this country has been missing for oh-so many years! A prime time cynic! (No, Archie Bunker did not count!)

Jon Stewart's brilliance is highlighted this time in the political sector which is but one of many of the wide variety of sectors that this country has to offer in order to keep the citizens thoroughly confused at all times. Confusing? Good, it's working.

We begin with our President, Change-y McOptimism Barack Obama, speaking to soldiers and the media and anyone else who could just wander in at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. And with all of the rhetoric of previous administrations, he announced that our war in Iraq would soon come to an end. These were his words: "Let me say this as plainly as I can, by August 31, 2010, our mission in Iraq will end."

Well, that is good news! So they're all coming home?! Ehhhh....not so fast. President Barry, please continue.

"We will retain a transitional force to carry out three distinct functions. This force will likely be made up of 35 thousand to 50 thousand US troops."

Well, that sounds kind of like they're staying there. See, this is what I hate about politicians and politics in general. They talk to the American public as if we're stupid or as if we are four years old and retarded. Look, you can say what you're saying one of two ways. You can say "One mission will end while another one begins" or you can say "We're wrapping it up, but we're not quite done yet." Either of those or a variation thereof is fine. What is not fine is saying that the mission in Iraq "will end". See, "end" means "done", "over", "finished", "kaput", "completed", "no more to do"! Those words mean "end". "Retain" does not mean "end". No, "retain" is just a fancy "not end" is what "retain" is.

But if you're asking the most fervent supporters of the Obama administration or even the less fervent, but still supportive supporters, they will tell you that what the President said, well, that was change and change, as you may distinctly recall, is what we were promised. After all, this is what President Barry had to say about our troops in Iraq:

"Our mission will change from combat to supporting the Iraqi government...training, equipping and advising Iraqi security forces, conducting targeted counter terrorism."

See? Change! Right?.....What?.....Really?.....Wrong?? It can't be wrong! It's change! Let's just compare what President Barry just said to one of Bush's speeches about our troops in Iraq and then the change will be apparent:



George W. Bush on September 14, 2007: "As this transition in our mission takes place our troops will focus on a more limited set of tasks, including counter terrorism operations and training, equipping and supporting Iraqi forces."

President Obama on March 3, 2009: "Our mission will change from combat to supporting the Iraqi government...training, equipping and advising Iraqi security forces, conducting targeted counter terrorism."



OK, that's not change. That's the SAME!! We were promised change!! He said the word "change", but he didn't "change" anything! It's the same!!

I'm catching onto this administration. What they do is re-hash the same old jargon. (I'm tired of the word "rhetoric." Good Lord, give the mainstream media a new word, especially one with a catchy spelling like "rhetoric" and damn it all if they don't beat that word into the ground within a week. Do those folks not own a thesaurus? Even a pocket version would be fine.) They just mix up the words and they seem really fond of keeping something the same and just calling it something else. But I already know that if something has "changed" it will be "different"! But that wasn't "different!" That was the SAME!!

Let's look at a statement by the Secretary of Defense Robert Gates from March 1, 2009 when he was on Meet the Press and said, "The units that will be left there will be characterized differently. They won't be called 'combat brigades'. They'll be called 'advisory and assistance brigades.' " That's like the political-speak version of tom-AY-to / tom-AH-to. Either way you slice it, it's still the same thing.

Below is the video clip of the brilliant and witty Jon Leibowitz on one The Daily Show. It's exactly the same as I described above, so don't go expecting any "change" other than pictures and people who talk so that you can hear them. Aside from that, it's the same.

Rock on, President Barry! I'm still waiting for the change that is being distinctly remembered as having been promised to us. It'd be OK if you started with your speeches. Everyone's gotta start somewhere.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Mess O'Potamia - The Iraq War Is Over

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things With Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Joke of the Day

Sphere: Related Content

Does Anyone in Washington Pay Their Effing Taxes?

It seems as if the politicians in Washington, DC have been divided into two camps. There's the We Pay Our Taxes Camp and the We're SO Much Better Than The Little People We're NOT Going To Pay Our Taxes And We're Going To Laugh At YOU For Paying Yours, Ya Chump Camp. OK, so the second camp has a rather lengthy moniker. How about it I just shorten it to "The Jackasses"? Does that work? It seems to. It stays.

So now we have our two camps and of all the dumb luck, it just so happens that President Barry keeps selecting people for his Cabinet from "The Jackasses Camp"! HOW does that happen? Not once, not twice, but we're up to three times at this point! Pssst! Barry! Don't do this blindfolded any more! Choose from the other camp!! The one with law abiding citizens! You don't want a Cabinet full of Jackasses! (No one does, really.)

Here's the part I really don't get: Have you seen the application for employment within President Barry's administration? It's seven pages long! It has sixty three questions (and none of them are multiple choice! No, they're all essay!)! It asks you the names of anyone you've cohabitated with in the past ten years! It wants to know if you have a Facebook page, a MySpace page, a blog (the bloggy folks are probably instantly disqualified)! Do you own a gun? They want information about members of your family that could be "a possible source of embarrassment to you"! (Well, yes. They would be known as "my family"! All of 'em. Every one. Bunch of freaks, I'm tellin' you.) They even include in Question 8 "Briefly describe the most controversial matters you have been involved with during the course of your career." The most controversial matters? At work?! I try to avoid controversy at work (and I've worked in psychiatric hospitals)!.

But questions 33 through 41 are specifically dedicated to taxes! And frankly, I find nine questions about taxes a bit much. Let's whittle that down a bit, shall we? Here we go: "Have you paid all of your effing taxes? If not, we don't care why. We just won't hire you. Next!" What's wrong with that? That's pretty much all you need to know. If you want to know more, you can always ask the person about it. You don't have to hire them. You certainly don't have to let the entire country know that you want to hire them. Barry.

First there was Timothy Geithner (that's pronounced "tax cheat"), nominated by President Barry to be Secretary of the Treasury, who "...failed to pay a total $34,023 in taxes from 2001 to 2004" according to the Seattle Times (and everyone else). Here's the thing with this guy: he "...filed amended tax returns for 2001 and 2002 after Barack Obama nominated him. He did so for 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 after an IRS audit in 2006. He did his own taxes in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2005." So he's audited in 2006 and his taxes are in disarray and unpaid and then THREE years later when Barry taps him, he still owes money because he just continued to not pay! Please note the tax years in question were all years that the guy did his own taxes. His explanation? The tax code is complex. What?

No S, Sherlock! It's 68,000 pages chock full of complex! But you were the head of the Federal Reserve in New York! You're supposed to understand complex! And now you're in charge of the finances for the entire country?? Lord help us all, we're doomed. Nice. Next!

Then there was Tom Daschle, taped for Secretary of Health and Human Services. Turns out that a couple of days after his nomination, he revealed that he had "...just filed amended tax returns to reflect $128,203 in back taxes and $11,964 in interest" for years 2005-2007. What didn't he report? Oh, that would be the car service that a friend had given him, the estimated value of which was around $250,000 and Daschle estimates that it was 80% for personal use and about 20% for business use. WTF?!?

A freaking car service?! Holy crap, dude! You can't drive yourself to your speaking engagements? Oh, wait. It was mostly for personal use. You can't drive your own ass to the store? You have to have someone else drive it there for you?! Wow, that's not arrogant and elitist and hypocritical at all! Jackass. Next!

Next would be a one Nancy Killefer who was tapped for chief performance officer (whatever that is). She withdrew after being nominated when it came up that she hadn't paid payroll taxes for one of her household staff employees. What kind of a staff does she need you ask? Well, she needs two nannies and a personal assistant! Two nannies? Is she the OctoMom? No. She has a teenage son and teenage daughter and each one of them, apparently, has their own personal nanny! Nice. Oh, but get this: Her unpaid taxes caused the DC government to slap a lien on her house because she failed to make the quarterly payments for over a year and a half. And even after they slapped on the lien it still took her over five months to pay the bill. (Why do liens always get "slapped" on? They're never just "put", they're always "slapped". "Slapped" as if the people "putting" on the liens are....um, well...people who slap things! Yeah, that's it. Where was I?) That must be a lot of money that she owed right? Sure, if you consider $298 in unpaid taxes "a lot of money".

You penny pinching tax cheat. Your children have individual nannies and you're trying to get out of paying an extra $298?! Oh, well, of course there was the $48.69 in interest and $600 in penalties that accrued, but only after you didn't pay it!! What is wrong with you?! And did I mention that she used to be on the IRS Oversight Board? She did. What a weasel. A sneaky weasel. Next!

Yes! There's more! We now have the husband of a one Hilda Solis (Hilda? Pretty.) who was tapped for Secretary of Labor who finally coughed up $6,400 last week to settle liens placed on his business, some of which dated back to 1993! The Barry Camp says that she shouldn't be responsible for what her husband does. If she signed off on the tax forms that he filled out for them, then yes she should. And of course, the liens were for unpaid property taxes. (The business that her husband has is an auto repair shop. Interesting. She's about to be the Secretary of Labor and he's about to change my oil. Huh.)

So what exactly is Camp Obama doing with those 7 page application forms for everyone? I can't imagine that they would just nominate these people under the assumption that they are squeaky clean. I also can't imagine that they would just nominate these people and not do their own background check on them. It's pretty simple to see if someone has tax liens, owes back taxes, hasn't paid taxes, etc. But then again, after the AP broke the news of Killefer's issues, a member of Camp Barry asked the AP reporter how he found the lien. Apparently, they're going to need a few tips on how to conduct a more thorough and effective background check. I'm sure our national security will be much better than this! Much better! Sure. Oh, yeah. I feel safer already.

Seriously, what is wrong with these people? I don't know whose behavior I find to be more egregious, that of the nominees or that of the people doing the vetting for President Barry. I realize that if you keep choosing from Camp Jackass that's what you can expect, which is why I say stop choosing from Camp Jackass! (I can't believe that Geithner made it through and is now the head money guy for the country. I hope he's taking the complexity of the tax code to heart and doing something to revise it and streamline it to make it less complex. Because if the head of the Federal Reserve thinks that it's "complex", imagine how difficult it is for people who do NOT have a background in economics and in tax codes. Those people are effed. And yes, the books in that picture would be the tax code! )

I want some of that stimulus money or recovery money or whatever they're calling it (other than "The Ass Reaming of the American Public") to go toward auditing every single member of the House, the Senate and Congress as well as President Barry's entire staff, driver's and nannies and all! Seriously! That's what I want. I want an audit of all of those weasel's taxes. I'm fairly versed in tax code (it's a sick hobby, what can I say?), I'd be happy to help! You guys know where to find me. Just say the word and I'll have my driver come and pick me up and my nannies do my laundry and pack my clothes and I'll be right there!

Come on, President Barry! Use your head!

Sphere: Related Content

Putting the Cap back in Capitol

I'm not exactly a fashion monger. Mongrel, perhaps. Monger? Not so much. But I do notice what people are wearing. I'm not a blind mongrel. I don't always notice the subtleties, but that's why I watch things like the inauguration with people who do notice them and who point them out to me so that I may mock them later. Thanks for that! And now, let the mocking begin.

There were a lot of hats at today's inauguration. A lot of hats. For me, my range of hats that I am familiar with is rather limited. I know of the knit beanie, the baseball cap and the cowboy hat as being the headwear that I am most aware of people putting on their heads frequently and in public. (It's the "in public" part of it that really makes all the difference. For all I know, the full feathered Indian chief headdress is also a quite popular decoration for one's noggin, but only in the privacy of one's own S&M dungeon. So that really doesn't count as far as "popular" in the realm of headwear. Carry on.) But I am not in Washington, DC, nor am I a politician. God, no, I'm not a politician! (I don't play one on TV and I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night either.) Apparently, in DC, the headwear is different than the rest of the country. It's also different from the rest of people that are normal. Even the people that visit DC seem to feel the need to get in on the odd hat style. Behold! Politicians and famous people with lots of furry hats!

From the looks of things, the fur hat store must have had quite the run or quite the sale before the inauguration because everywhere the cameras were panning, there was someone that looked as if they had just been released from exile in the Ukraine. I halfway expected all of them to lock arms and do that one dance where everyone kicks their legs up and yells, "Hey!" (I'm guessing it's a jig of some sort, but that's pure speculation as I have zero training in jig identification.) But that's Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia up there sporting the fur top. And below is Rep. Charles Rangel who looks like he was just released from some sort of very patriotic mental institution.

I love the photo below, as it sports many hats and also displays a one Bill Clinton who is trying his hardest to not be either sad or angry that he is no longer the most popular President this country can remember. Don't be sad, Bill. You had a good run. We loved you even after that whole unfortunate incident between you and that intern was pointed out. You had a good run. Now, if you wouldn't mind, could you wake up Snore-y over there. Michelle Obama is trying to hear people speak at the inauguration of her husband.

There were also quite a few fedoras out there as well today. The last person I can recall seeing wearing a fedora was either in a photo or a pimp. (Truman favored the fedora, I believe. But he wasn't a pimp, so I guess it must have been Truman.) Here's Ted Kennedy sporting his fedora and seeming to have a great time, all pre-luncheon seizure. He looks like a somewhat perverted reporter from the 1930s. Or maybe he's just drunk again.

Celebrities were out in full force at the inauguration and they were not only sporting the furry hats, they were sporting fur in general. It was pointed out to me that there were a lot of people wearing fur at this event. I thought that we, as a people, had come to some sort of an understanding quite some time ago (and without the help of PETA, thank you very much) that fur was bad. I guess fur is bad to celebrities until they have to go someplace outside of Hollywood and Los Angeles. Then fur isn't bad as much as it is warm. At least, that's what the philosophy seemed to be given the amount of fur walking around that was not attached to an animal. ANYMORE.

Here we have Alicia Keys who is sporting some lovely and large black furry earmuffs. While I do enjoy Alicia Keys' music, I do not pay all that much attention to what she looks like and thus, I do not recall her ears being that large. Actually, I do not recall many people's ears being that large EVER. It's like two Firestone radial tires (round and run flat, of course) mated with some sort of forest creature and their offspring was that set of earmuffs! Actually, now that I think about it, I think she must have some sort of furry Princess Leia thing going on. The resemblance, seen below, is uncanny.






Here's Anne Hathaway sans fur, but with the fly-eye sunglasses and a lovely knit beret of sorts. She appears to have attended the inauguration sans crazy stalker boyfriend. Good move. That's change you can believe in right there, Anne.

Walking into greet change behind her is the head clad in fur that belongs to a one Rachel Leigh Cook. She's a good looking chick (whoever she is), but the fur ball on her noggin there is just off-putting, is what it is. You people don't need fur. There are other things that keep you warm. Microfleece for example. Um, is goose down "fur", per se? It's not really, but it is if you're the goose. I'll get back to you. I need a consultant for that one.

Beyonce and Jay Z showed up looking as if they got dressed in the dark. He and his humongous raccoon hat (quite possibly with the raccoon still attached) as he strives for a modern day, hip-hop Davy Crockett look. And she and her lacy, purple, fingerless right glove which she uses to wave at the throngs of admirers that she thinks that she has. It's either that or she's just waving off folks who don't recognize her and are trying to give her change. After all, that's what people were here for, right?



I don't know who the woman sitting behind Diddy (or whatever his name is on Wednesdays) is, but her furry hat looks to be modeled after the Crown Royal logo, only black instead of purple. It also looks to be the same fur that is lining Diddy's lapel. Perhaps someone fashioned him his jacket with the scraps from the woman's hat. I've gotta tell you, I'm not real big on the man fur thing. Men just shouldn't wear fur. I guess they can if they're a pimp, but men really shouldn't be pimps either, so I guess I'm right back at "Don't wear fur!" The natural blonde woman at the bottom of the photo looks to have gotten a bit carried away with the BeDazzler on that mushroom beret she's wearing there. As part of the "change" that we were promised, can that include banning the BeDazzler? Please?

Over on the right here we again have fur-lapeled Diddy who appears as if he is standing guard behind a one Denzel Washington who decided to come to the inauguration dressed as one of DC's homeless, it would appear. And standing next to Denzel, why, that's the late Redd Foxx, ladies and gentlemen! Back from grave for change!

If someone could point Don King there towards the nearest psychiatric facility, that would be some welcome change right there. What is wrong with that man?

This is Sting and his standing so close to him wife, Trudie Styler. Again, with a fur hat. Sting, to his credit, does not appear to be wearing any fur. Though the man has had some odd streaks in his lifetime. Fur boxers wouldn't be out of the question, but I'm not checking. I'll leave that up to Trudie. She looks like she already knows the answer, but also looks like she might enjoy the task.

Finally! My absolute favorite look from the day of change. And it's brought to us by filmmaker Spike Lee. Spike Lee appears to be wearing a baseball cap with two headdress-esque fur pieces cascading down from behind the brim. On TOP of that, he has pulled up and over his head what appears to be some sort of black Gortex hood that is lined with fur. Where in the hell did he find that get up? Or did he just make it in his garage out of old radial tires? Does he spend a lot of time at sea and the coat also acts as a life preserver in case of a maritime mishap? What is with that coat? Wait! I've got it!

It's very similar to the coat which made an appearance in an episode of Seinfeld. George's Gortex coat! I think that it's one and the same. Look at this:

If not the same coat, then definite the same designer and absolutely the same concept! Yo, Spike! "Change" means "different"! Your coat doesn't look much different than Costanza's there. No, in fact, you both look ridiculous. Warm you may be, but you look ridiculous.

Apparently, "change" included "fur". Who knew? Not I. Barry, I know you have a lot on your plate right now, but if you could get this change that has occurred to change back to the non-fur wearing, non-change it was before, that would be just great. Thanks. I appreciate that. Oh, and congratulations! I can't wait for the change that is distinctly remembered by some as being promised to us!

Sphere: Related Content

When It's Time To Change

Are you ready for your change? Because change is coming. We were promised change. It is distinctly remembered that is what we were promised. Change. And here it is! Your day of change! Oh, and you'll feel changed all right. By the time it's over, a lot of people will feel change. And I have the feeling that a lot of people are going to be rather disappointed when they step back and look at the change that has occurred. They'll think that it wasn't the kind of change that they signed up for when, in fact, it is exactly the kind of change they signed up for. They were just too busy swooning and softly weeping to really wrap their heads around the changes. We'll get back to these folks in a few.

There are also the folks who are aware that "change is coming" and, while they're prepared for it, they're not overly thrilled about it. A few of those folks are seen here:

I have absolutely NO idea what in the world any of those guys and the ones that aren't pictures are going to talk about on their shows from now on. Opening monologues? Virtually eliminated with the departure of George W. Bush. Look for 5-7 minutes of shadow puppets and Knock-Knock jokes.

But those guys are ready for it. They live their fantasy lives based firmly in reality. Others? Not so much. People think they want change. But that's only because people have forgotten that we don't like change. No, we don't. We prefer things to be the same in the vaguest of senses. If our lives are good, we prefer to keep the goodness about them. If our lives suck, we prefer to keep the suckiness about them because we've gotten really good at all of the bitching we do about said suckiness. Here are just a few examples of people who are going to be disappointed with their forthcoming "change".

• The Gays.

Now, I don't know how they all missed it, but Barack Obama is not in favor of gay marriage. For some unknown reason, even though he had made it very clear that was his position, many of those in the gay community were seemingly confused. (I don't know what it was that confused them. Maybe they thought he was a top?) Thus, when he invited Rick Warren to speak at the inauguration, there were gay hissy fits being thrown nationwide. I think that a fair number of those who were upset by Barry's selection of Rev. Warren are thinking that things are going "to change". I don't think that they are, meaning, I don't think Barry is going to change his mind about this one. So the gays will be disappointed.

• Left-Left-And-Farther-To-The-Left Liberals

These folks are going to be disappointed when they realize that Barry isn't and never was that much of a leftie. He's left, but he's not psycho left. As depicted in the handy chart below, these folks see Barry as the image on the left (catchy, eh?), but he's really more like the image on the right. And regardless of left or right, Barry has done something that most politicians (yes, he really is a politician!) don't do and that is he has tried to be all inclusive with those that surround him. He has also tried to come across (and succeeded) as the sort of guy who can see things from all sides. But that comes across to some as he's going to see things from all sides and then side with the left. I don't think that's necessarily true. These folks will be disappointed.

• The folks who constantly keep referring to him as our "first black President"

They will be disappointed when, after they have run that phrase and that categorization into the freaking ground (which, by my estimations, based upon current overuse figures, should be right about 10.73 minutes after he is sworn in as our "first black President") and then people start shooting back with, "Um, he's half white!" They will be disappointed to learn that they have to share Messiah Barry with the rest of us. To speed up their disappointment, I'm just going to start referring to him as our "first half-white President" and see how that goes for awhile

• The woman who left this message.

The angry and delusional woman who left the message was clearly agitated that the bank was "trippin' " and was going to repossess her vehicle. After all she told them that she "was going to get it tooken care of." (Tooken? Honeybabe, forget about the car and get some English lessons tooken care of, will you?) She also clearly explains that she is "not rich like y'all". Apparently, in her world, "y'all" is "rich". But she lets them know that she will be rich. Why? "That's because we got Ba-rack o-BA-ma!" That woman is going to be disappointed. And angrier. Probably still delusional as well. But she will definitely be disappointed.

• The woman who made this statement:

Clearly, that woman knows something that I am not aware of. According to her, with Barry being President, she is no longer going to have to worry about putting gasoline in her car! She is also no longer going to have to worry about paying her mortgage! Why? Because she helped Barry (get elected) and now Barry is going to help her! You know, I pay close attention to the news nearly every day, but I must have missed the day when Barry said that when he was elected that he was giving away free gasoline AND free houses! I like houses! I like gasoline! I helped Barry get elected! Where's my free gas and house?! Yep, that woman is going to be disappointed.

• Many, many individuals in this crowd:
  
  

The emerging theme that I keep hearing in Barry's proclamations of change to come is individual responsibility and hard work. For everyone. But that's not the emerging theme that I hear from a lot of people. No, a lot of people expect to sit back and have this whole recession nonsense cleared up by the weekend or, at the very latest, Super Bowl Sunday. (Barry wouldn't let us have our Super Bowl all recession-y, would he? No! Of course not!) Then again, I don't know if I blame 'em. When things are going crappy, who doesn't want someone to just step in and save the day? But what if someone 'saving the day' is them telling you what it is that you need to do? That's not the kind of saving a lot of people have in mind. Those people are going to be disappointed.

And finally, I have to imagine, after seeing the photo below, that the Bush daughters are going to be a little disappointed, but not so much in Barry but more for how things are going to go for them. After all, their dad wasn't even officially out of office at the time that the photo was taken during the Pre-Inaugural Bash With Lotsa Singing Celebrity Folks, and look at 'em! Suddenly and without warning: bag ladies! That was quick!

Sphere: Related Content

Plenty of Balls

Change is coming! I distinctly remember someone saying that they distinctly remember being promised change. And that change is almost here! Or so they say. ::::sigh::::: There's going to be some changes all right, but I don't know if they're the ones that a lot of people seem to think that they're going to be. I think the 'change' is going to be in people's overly optimistic attitudes from 'Yay!' to "WTF?" I'm sure there will be change, but it certainly won't be overnight. I wish I could remember where Barry was when he gave a speech which contained the line, "We are the ones we've been waiting for." Huh. Um, Barry? Yeah, do you happen to know what took us so long? Did we just wake up late? Long weekend? Where've we been?

Actually, it's probably a good thing that change won't be coming overnight because there's no way that Barry would be able to oversee it. After all of the swearing in (which, incidentally, usually contains almost no swear words) it is strangely customary for the newly elected President and his newly appointed (by default) First Lady to attend a number of Inaugural Balls. Now, why on earth there needs to be more than one ball, I have no idea, but the whole Inaugural Ball tradition has been going on since James Madison was elected in 1809 and there doesn't seem to be any sign that it's going to let up any time soon.

But things were easier back in 1809 as opposed to 2009. Back then, James Madison had to attend A Inaugural Ball. Singular. One. Barry, on the other hand, will not be so fortunate. No, him and Michelle will be making their way to not one, not two, but ten, yes ten, TEN freaking Inaugural Balls. And those are just the official Inaugural Balls. There are, of course, several other unofficial balls. Why anyone would want to attend a ball of any sort is beyond me. Inaugural balls would be no exception to that sentiment. I've read accounts of them being hot, loud and very crowded (which is kind of how I'd describe my trip to the grocery store this evening. Why would I need an Inaugural Ball to accomplish that when I have Safeway!?).

With all of the "change" that Changey McOptimism there has promised us, is it really a good plan for him to go to so many balls? He'll be plum tuckered out the next day I would imagine. And it's hard to whip up a bunch of change when you're exhausted. Never mind if he spends some of his evening turning water into wine or parting large bodies of water as well. He'd have to sleep for a week to recover from all of that in one evening, wouldn't you think?

I can't imagine that Barry or Michelle are looking forward to the ball hopping on Tuesday. They just don't seem like the ball hopping type of folks. And here's what they don't have to look forward to...Behold! A list of the Official Inaugural Balls:

• Neighborhood Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
• Obama Home States (Illinois and Hawaii) Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
• Biden Home States (Pennsylvania and Delaware) Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
• Midwest Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
• Mid-Atlantic Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
• Western Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center.
• Commander in Chief’s Ball at the National Building Museum.
• Southern Inaugural Ball at the National Guard Armory.
• Eastern Inaugural Ball at Union Station.
• Youth Inaugural Ball at the Washington Hilton.

Again, those are the official Inaugural Balls. Behold! A list of the really silly sounding unofficial Inaugural Balls:

• Congressional Black Caucus Inaugural Ball at the Capitol Hilton.
• Creative Coalition Inaugural Ball at the Harman Center for the Arts.
• Recording Industry Association of America’s ball for Feeding America.
• BET’s Inaugural Ball at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel.
• Africa on the Potomac inaugural celebration at Crystal Gateway Marriott in Arlington, Va.
• American Music Inaugural Ball at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel.
• Inaugural Purple Ball at the Fairmont Hotel.
• Human Rights Campaign’s Equality Ball at the Renaissance Mayflower Hotel.
• Inaugural Peace Ball at the Smithsonian National Postal Museum.
• Impact Film Fund ball.

Um, what the hell are those? Africa on the Potomac?? Um, no it isn't! At first, I thought that the Inaugural Purple Ball was being hosted by Prince. But, as it turns out, it seems to be help out the UNCF (UNCF stands for "United African-American College Fund". Why there hasn't been a name change over there, I couldn't fathom a guess.) and to honor veterans and troops. Tickets ran from $5,000, $2,000, $1,000 and $500 and all of those are sold out. (It's nice to know that in the middle of this great economic crisis that there's still plenty of cash flowing around out there somewhere, isn't it?)

The Impact Film Fund ball was a bit trickier to pin down on what it's cause was (other than celebrating the arrival of the new Messiah), but I can tell you that Kanye West is 99.9% certain to perform at it! How's that for exciting, eh?!

The Inaugural Peace Ball being held at the Smithsonian National Postal Museum sounds like a little get together that's sure to bring down the house, doesn't it? Yeah, not quite. A ball at a postal museum. I think I'd probably rather have a root canal.

The Creative Coalition Inaugural Ball is sponsored by Pepsi and seems to cater to the famous for acting crowd. Some ticket packages for that event went for $100,000. That got you 50 VIP admissions to the Inaugural Ball and 20 admissions to the pre-Ball VIP dinner. So, wait. Fifty of you get to go to the ball, but only twenty of you get to eat? For one hundred thousand dollars? Now that's some change! For a hundred grand, I could not only feed all fifty of my guests, but continue to do so every day for the next ten years! I don't know how I'd feel if I received an invite that said "Ball ONLY" on it. I probably wouldn't feel too badly about it...until I learned that it was $100,000 and then I'd be pissed that I wasn't getting fed for some reason.

But that is clearly a rip off because if you buy the next package down (The Gold Package) from that one (The Platinum Package) you get 16 VIP admissions to the Inaugural Ball and only 4 admissions to the pre-Ball chow line. And that will still end up running you $50,000. So you're paying half the price of the Platinum Package, but you're getting far less than half of what they got. This isn't a McDonald's Value Meal we're talking about, so I'm thinking that things should be pretty much proportionate across the board. But they're not. (See? That's not change! The one's with more money get more! Re-dis-trib-ute! Re-dis-trib-ute!) With the Platinum deal, 40% of the folks get to eat, but in the Gold deal, only 25% get to eat. That's not the socialist economy I remember hearing promised to us!

How are the four of you that are getting fed going to explain that to the other twelve who aren't? "Uh, well, we didn't realize that not everyone would be able to go. But I brought you this roll! It's warm, 'cause it's been in my pocket for the last half hour! Where are you going? Don't leave! It's a PRESIDENTIAL roll!!"

Basically, all of the unofficial balls are put on by the entertainment industry and a bunch of other Hollywood tools. The official balls are put on by the political industry and a bunch of other Washington, DC tools. Either way, it sounds like a self-important tool fest. Barry will be sworn in at noon, EST. Afterwards, he will give a speech that you will hear endlessly repeated and or quoted until he is up for re-election in 2012. People will weep. Dogs will bark. I don't know when the Presidential bedtime is, but Barry will have from, let's say 1pm onward to attend ten Inaugural Balls. Doesn't that sound like how you'd want to spend your first day on the job? Who's watching the country while he's off boogie-ing with Michelle? (Don't tell me it's that Biden guy. I haven't seen him in months. Is he still alive?)

Good lucky, Barry. I don't know if I'm going to recognize the change right away, but if that's how your life is going to be, you will! Good luck with that.

Sphere: Related Content

Doom - Part Deux

It's here. Finally. Doom. Doom Part Deux, actually, as the fine folks over there at The Wall Street Journal Online have informed us that the "TARP Funds' Second Half Set For Release as Senate Signs Off on Request".

And how is that Doom, Part Deux, you ask? This is the second half of funds. (Now, "funds" is just a nicer term, one that doesn't get you all worked up into an angry and frenzied lather, for "taxpayer money". "Taxpayer money" is just a nicer term for "your money". But if the government said "your money" every time they actually said "funds", there would be an uprising amongst the villagers, torches and all, marching upon the White House, the Capitol, the Senate and even the Washington Memorial (just because people would be that angry.) So if this is the second half, what did they do with the first half? Good question. They don't really know exactly where all the money went and who did what with it. Bad answer.

Am I surprised? No, of course not, because I predicted this. Instead of focusing on the TARP bill itself, those self righteous, egotistical and self serving members of Congress held it hostage until they could have one of their little pet pork projects (the P-cubed) added into the bill. They clearly were not paying any attention to what the bill was about, as their heads were too far up their respective arses to pay attention to anything. All they wanted was to have their needs met so that they could feel good about themselves. (They really didn't need the TARP bill to do that. These guys suck and yet they act like they are doing a simply marvelous job. Well, they're not and their approval rating shows that their delusions of grandeur are not enough to persuade the majority of the country to believe them.)

There were things thrown in the TARP bill like:

• $192 million to Virgin Island and Puerto Rican rum producers
• $128 million to auto racing tracks
• $33 million for corporations that operate in American Samoa
• $10 million for small-to-medium budget film and TV productions
• $18 billion in clean-energy incentives so businesses can give benefits to employees who bike to work
• An extension of credits for businesses that employ people that live on Indian reservations
• $10,000 tax credit for training of mine rescue team members
• $6 million to the manufacturers of wooden arrows
• Reduction of import duties on some imported wool fabrics, transfers other duties to Wool Trust Fund to promote competitiveness of American wool

(Bummer. I was really hoping for some sort of a P-cubed for blogs.) Arrows? Wooden freaking arrows? THAT was your priority, you asshats? (And who knew that we needed to beef up the American wool market? I'm trying to remember the last time I wore anything made of wool. Actually, I'm trying to remember the last time I wanted to wear anything made of wool. Huh. That would be never. On both counts.) You wanted to borrow $700 billion from the taxpayers and the taxpayers relented because we're told that if this didn't happen that day the nation's economic situation would worse and we would be reading about the Great Depression and wishing that we had it so good! Not only did it take you over a week to pass the TARP bill (that's where the red flags went up for me. What happened to now? Oh, right. You have to write your wooden arrow proposal and shove it in there first. Good Lord. Could you please use one of those arrows and shoot it at me please?)

So while you guys were worried about yourselves and how self-important you could feel about everything when it was done, you seem to have overlooked one key element in this whole dealio. You didn't include anything about G-D accountability! There wasn't anything in there about how to track the money that was being given to the banks (so that they could have some cash flow and feel OK about beginning to lend more freely again). There wasn't anything in there about how the money was supposed to be used once it was given to the banks! And guess what happened?

Correct. You gave away the first half of the money (at least someone put some restraint on that plan) in your "effort" to help out banks that were having cash flow problems because they were too incompetent to not loan all of their money to people who can't afford to pay it back. And the banks took that money (who wouldn't?) but they don't seem to have done what they said they were going to do with it. Interesting. Oh, wait! That's right! There weren't any provisions on what they had to do with the money, that's right! They could have taken that money and built amusement parks that catered to child molesters, as there was nothing that said they couldn't and nothing could have been done if they had. Good plan! What's the plan for Round Two?

The same thing?!!? Are you effing kidding me?!

Basically, yes, that's the plan. This time, they are asking for the other half, the rest of the $700 billion of our money to be released so that they can use it to "spend $50 billion to $100 billion on a "sweeping" foreclosure-prevention effort." But they seem to be keeping the "how" part of that plan a secret, because I can't find any details on what they plan to do with that boatload of money. It wouldn't matter anyway, as their plan is flawed based upon that statement quoted above.

Everyone seems to be acting as if those who are being "foreclosed upon" and are "going to lose their home" are those who have been victims of these terrible economic times. They act as if every single foreclosure that is occurring is happening to someone who was perfectly capable and able and willing to pay for their mortgage and did...right up until the s-storm hit the financial sector. They act as if no one took out loans that they couldn't afford to pay back and now their home is in foreclosure. They act as if no one bought several houses with the intention of flipping them and making a profit and, unfortunately, did so right as everything finally started to fall apart and now they're stuck with a bunch of houses that they can't sell. They act as if no one bought houses with falsely (yet unknown at the time) inflated prices and when the price of the home dropped, they were then upside-down on their mortgage and decided to just walk away from it. All of those things are happening more often than people who are just hit with "troubled economic times".

You can't lump all of those situations into just one big pile and call it "the foreclosure problem" and then throw money at it to try to fix it. Do any of these Senators, Congressmen, Representatives have any sort of background or history in economics? Do any of them have any sort of economic education? Economic degrees? Anything at all relating to how the economy works? The answer is approximately 15%. That's not enough.

But you know what would be even better than those guys having any sort of knowledge about how the economy works and how banking systems work? What would be better is if any of them had the slightest hint of what reality looks like. If any of them could just come back down to earth for a while and see what's really going on, they might be able to craft a better solution than to simply bellow out, "More money, please!" (I picture them doing so dressed like kings, with a big turkey leg in one hand and a goblet of grog. Wait, grog was for pirates, right? What did kings drink? Ah, we'll pretend they captured the pirates and stole their grog.)

"The Obama team hasn't detailed where it will direct the next $350 billion beyond foreclosure efforts. It is expected to continue purchasing equity in financial institutions and might also buy troubled assets clogging the financial system." But wait. They already did that! That didn't work! Why are you going to keep doing it?! This doesn't sound very much like "change", Barry! I distinctly remember being promised "change"!

In case you have been too busy swooning over Barry to realize this, let me point out that he makes more statements that say absolutely nothing, yet you think that he's said something! And not only that, you think that he's said something brilliant and important! But in reality, he's just given you a bread sandwich. Two pieces of bread, a little bread sauce, bread in the middle, that's it. Nothing to it.

You want to have the American people have "faith" in you, Barry? You need to first figure out WHY the economy is the way it is BEFORE you throw more money at it. You also need to figure out WHY the first half of the TARP money didn't do any good. While you're at it, figure out where that first half of the TARP money went. Then, before any more perfectly good cash gets thrown out the window, start holding people accountable. Start putting provisions in place so that this won't happen again. This pile-o'-crap that the country is in right now didn't just blow in like Hurricane Katrina. This was man-made. Greed made this s-storm happen. But has anyone been held accountable? No. No one. If there aren't any consequences, what's to stop this from happening all over again? Nothing. Which, coincidentally, is exactly what we will all have left by the time you're done spending all of that money without knowing what in the world you're doing.

Doomed. Our doom-ation is upon us. I'm serious. This will not end well. Take those wooden arrows and shoot me with them. Dip them in poison, set them on fire and shoot me with them. The agony from that will be a lot less painful than how this TARP thing is going to turn out.

Sphere: Related Content