Political Humor | Choices for a Barack Obama Cabinet

36 responses so far ↓

• 1 Les James // Nov 6, 2008 at 1:02 pm

  I’m personally hoping he doesn’t have any balls. The best hope for us is that he gets in there and finds out he’s in so far over his head that he will be completely indecisive.

  He can talk the talk, let’s hope he can’t walk the walk. Then there is the evil side of me that says “screw the idiots who elected this face, let them suffer with his Mussolini-like idealism.”

  Then I remember, I live here too.

• 2 JumpOut // Nov 6, 2008 at 1:34 pm

  I’d much prefer him to make a bunch a good decisions and prove wrong, or make a bunch of horrible decisions and be proven a failure, to him being indecisive. Indecisive is like mediocre. You can’t point to all the screw ups and get him out of office, but it’s not good enough to say, hey this guy ain’t so bad. And with the mindless sycophants in the media, an indecisive Obama will be the best thing since sliced bread. He’ll be tolerant and sensitive.

• 3 Les James // Nov 6, 2008 at 2:28 pm

  Being selfish (my evil side quashed) I don’t want a bunch of bad decisions. Because that would be…er…bad. But it may be necessary to get him out after four years. I’m so indecisive.

• 4 JumpOut // Nov 6, 2008 at 2:45 pm

  No, you’re not indecisive, you’re sensitive, and patient.

• 5 Les James // Nov 6, 2008 at 2:59 pm

  Screw your sensitivity and patients! I’m grabbing my Segway and I’m going to run over your ass!

• 6 Fiar // Nov 6, 2008 at 3:04 pm

  Sensitive and Patient? Les. I didn’t know you were gay. I’ll have to introduce you as the token homosexual of the site from now on.

• 7 Les James // Nov 6, 2008 at 4:00 pm

  Screw… no. Bite… You can French kiss my…DAMN IT!

• 8 JumpOut // Nov 6, 2008 at 4:35 pm

  Now you’re just being intolerant, Les.

  This comment thread has brought to light FIAR’s quickness to ridicule others as being gay. Me thinks thou doth protest too much.

• 9 Eric // Nov 6, 2008 at 4:39 pm

  It is beyond question that the only position for Comrade William Ayers is Director of Homeland Security. Comrade Wright as Minister of reeducation camp propaganda. Comrade Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has already offered his services as Secretary of State.

• 10 Super Liberal // Nov 6, 2008 at 9:05 pm

  Obama won’t be so bad, he’s just a peanut farmer from Georgia…wait a minute I might be thinking of someone else.

  Ah well, liberal politicians all look the same…awesome!

• 11 Chris Cameron // Nov 6, 2008 at 9:51 pm

  Only Comrade Monty would compare Carter to Obama in a positive light.

• 12 Angie // Nov 7, 2008 at 12:29 pm

  *snort* Flavor-Aid.
  *snort* Oh, Les. LES.
  *snort* All libs look alike. *double snort*

  I think I found my funny again. And my nose hurts now.

  The rate I’m going, I’m gonna be dancin on all the money Bammy is gonna give me… Just this week: Fired from one job, threatened firing by another, ominous emails from a third asking me if I wanted them to find my replacement… and the fourth one is only temporary anyhow. I won’t have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it outta.

  Yeah, I love “capitalism” in America. (Still looking for the correct terminology for capitalism that has been dorkled by a giant corn cob. I don’t THINK it’s capitalism; but I could be wrong. It’s been known to happen once; but I could be wrong about that, also, since I have a strong suspicion that I am always right.)

• 13 Jr // Nov 7, 2008 at 6:55 pm

  Fear not, friends! Obama is scouring the halls of Harvard for qualified Cabinet candidates as we speak. What could possibly go wrong?

  Oh, wait… isn’t GWBush a Harvard grad?
  Nevermind.

• 14 Chris Cameron // Nov 8, 2008 at 12:01 am

  You can tell a Harvard grad but you can’t tell them much, as the old saying goes…

• 15 5.2trillionandcounting // Nov 17, 2008 at 7:44 pm

  these web sites r so funny people rip on someone who has not even taken office yet, because they are so idiotic they cant see that there own party has royally screwed up this country . its funny how some people care more about there party than the good of the country. im just sayin give the guy a chance shit we gave bush 2( and he was still stupid the second term) comrade Obama come on. whats going on in this country right now is socialism

• 16 Fiar // Nov 17, 2008 at 8:52 pm

  its funny how some people care more about there party than the good of the country.

  To what party do you refer? I am not the member of any party. Last time I checked non-existent political parties tend not to pass legislation.

• 17 5.2trillionandcounting // Nov 17, 2008 at 10:07 pm

  when certain party members that are usually represented by a fat animal cant say anything good about there own guys they turn to remarks about socialism and other words that scare people(i lived in Italy and Less James knows nothing im sure about Mussolini-like idealism or any other socialist countries or he wouldnt compare Obama to them) I dont know why people talk about things they dont know anything about.

• 18 Chris C // Nov 17, 2008 at 10:28 pm

  “these web sites r so funny people rip on someone who has not even taken office yet, because they are so idiotic they cant see that there own party has royally screwed up this country.”

  Dude did you even think through your comment? By your logic we shouldn’t make fun of any Presidential Candidate since technically none of them were in office yet.

  Come back when you can run with the big dogs.

• 19 5.2trillionandcounting // Nov 17, 2008 at 10:33 pm

  yea and whats really your point crissy did you really think through yours and do you really have one

• 20 5.2trillionandcounting // Nov 17, 2008 at 10:45 pm

  president elect is that what u needed to hear crissy

• 21 Chris C // Nov 17, 2008 at 11:15 pm

  ‘Crissy?’ What are you 12?

  Stay on the porch with the other kids. You’ll be safer there.

• 22 Angie // Nov 18, 2008 at 12:03 am

  Yeah, Chrissy. Come on, quit picking on that poor Obama. Geez. You’re so mean, and so is Les and Fiar. You’re just big brutes.

  Pass the KooK-Aid, please - my cup is empty.

  5.2 trillion what? Brain cells demolished?

• 23 Fiar // Nov 18, 2008 at 10:10 am

  5.2 trillion what?

  Maybe that’s the number of potential future Liberals we’ll never have to worry about because of Liberal women exercising their freedom of choice.

  these web sites r so funny people rip on someone who has not even taken office yet, because they are so idiotic they cant see that there own party has royally screwed up this country.

  If McCain had stolen the election, would you take offense to the brutal bludgeoning I would be handing him, or would he not deserve being given a chance?

  We’ve already had 8 years of a Liberal Democrat in the White House, and our choice was to elect another Liberal Democrat or another Liberal Democrat. Either way, we’re stuck with Liberal Democrats running our country into the ground.

• 24 Angie // Nov 18, 2008 at 5:13 pm

  It’s all good, though, Fiar. Just like has always happened in our country since Lincoln, the Dems get in for a brief fling before we hear a sonic boom: Voters rushing the booth to hurry up and get another Republican in office (except FDR, of course). You might remember this “nonsense” I spewed a while back:

  Beginning with Abraham Lincoln:
  Republican Presidents serving in office: 18
  Democratic Presidents serving in office: 9

  Elections won by Republican candidates: 23
  Elections won by Democratic candidates: 14

  Wars under Republican President: 3 (Civil War, Persian Gulf War, Iraq War)
  Wars under Democratic President: 4* (WW I, WW II, Korean War, Vietnam War) *The “Cold War” began during a Democratic administration and ended some 40 years later during a Republican administration.

  Republican Presidents impeached: 0
  Democratic Presidents impeached: 2

  Republican Presidents successfully assassinated: 3
  Democratic Presidents successfully assassinated: 1

  Number of “cross party” tickets: 1

  Since the Civil War:
  1. Republicans have been elected more often and covered more terms than Democrats.
  2. Cleveland (the only President elected to 2 non-consecutive terms), Wilson, FDR (the only President to be elected to 4 terms), and Clinton were the only Democratic Presidents invited back” (elected) to serve another term - 4 in total - while 7 Republicans have been re-elected to a second term.
  3. Long “strings” of Republican terms are generally followed by a single Democratic term (exception being FDR/Truman).
  4. Republican Presidents have a greater likelihood to be assassinated, while Democratic Presidents have a greater likelihood of committing an impeachable offense.
  5. More and bigger, “bloodier” wars have happened during Democratic administrations.

  1. The Federal Reserve Act was ushered in under a Democratic administration (Wilson). There were numerous reasons the Founding Fathers laid the responsibility of coining money in the hands of the Congress, deliberately avoiding a centralized banking system; but in 1913 Wilson and his Congress subverted the Constitution and derailed the American economy for generations to come.
  2. The institution of social programs (welfare) leading to dependence on the government came about during a Democratic administration (FDR). While these programs may have been necessary at the time, most should have been abolished at the end of the Great Depression. Instead, allowed to grow and expand, they created generations of “welfare families.”
  3. The opening up of free trade leading to the loss of many American jobs was signed into effect during a Democratic administration (Clinton). We’re living this, and I don’t think I need to elaborate on this subject.

• 25 5.2trillionandcounting // Nov 18, 2008 at 11:49 pm

  Our nation began its existence in debt from the Revolutionary War. Jefferson argued to eliminate the debt, and Hamilton argued it was necessary to keep the nation together. The Hamiltonians won, the conservatives of their time, and consequently it has also been argued that this difference between these two founders was the beginning of the liberal/conservative split in our country.
  Since 1938 the Democrats have held the White house for 35 years, the Republicans for 36. Over that time the national debt has increased at an average annual rate of 8.5%. In years Democrats were in the White House there was an average increase of 8.3%. In years the Republicans ran the White House the debt increased an average 9.2% per year. Those averages aren’t that far apart, but they do show a bias toward more borrowing by Republicans than Democrats even including World War II.
  If you look at the 60+ year record of debt since the end of WWII, starting with Truman’s term, the difference between the two parties’ contributions to our national debt level change considerably. Since 1946, Democratic presidents increased the national debt an average of only 3.2% per year. The Republican presidents stay at an average increase of 9.2% per year. Republican Presidents out borrowed and spent Democratic presidents by a three to one ratio. Prior to the Neo-Conservative takeover of the Republican Party there was not much difference between the two parties’ debt philosophy.However the debt has been on a steady incline ever since the Reagan presidency. The only exception to the steep increase over the last 30 years was during the Clinton presidency, when he brought spending under control and the debt growth down to almost zero.
  Comparing the borrowing habits of the two parties since 1981, when the Neo-Conservative movement really took hold and government spending raced out of control, it is extremely obvious that the big spenders in Washington are Republicans and their party’s presidents. The only Democratic president since then, Mr. Clinton raised the national debt an average of 4.3% per year. The Republican presidents (Reagan, Bush, and Bush II) raised the debt an average of 10.8% per year. Since the Neo-Conservative movement has become the dominant force in the Republican Party the national debt has grown and continues to grow at an unsustainable rate, by any measure you care to use.Experience has shown that “trickle down tax cuts” only work to concentrate the nation’s wealth into fewer hands and never help to rebound the economy.
  The only time we have seen national debt reduction in the past 60 years was when Democrats were totally in charge of our government or when one party was in the White House and another ran Congress.
  In the past 60 years when Republicans were in control of the presidency and both Houses of Congress, neither debt, nor government spending was ever reduced. The last time a Republican Congress reduced the national debt was in 1947, under Truman’s leadership.
  The last time the debt was reduced was in 1961 during President Kennedy’s first year in office. It has been almost a half century, 46 years, since this nation has paid down any of its exponentially increasing debt. (Had President Bill Clinton been in office one more year we would probably have seen a debt decrease in 2001.)
  The failure of the financial and insurance markets can be directly related to the tax and regulation policies of the Neo-Cons.
  Fortunately our nation is fundamentally strong and it has always had the strength to overcome bad presidents and their failed economic and foreign policies. Our economy can and will endure the downward vortex of this misguided Neo-Conservative trend as well. However, for the sake of our nation, our jobs, ours and our children’s future let us all hope that we see an end to the dominance of the short sighted, Middle Class-killing, Neo-Conservative economic polices soon.

  and by the way angie Nixon was what party

• 26 Angie // Nov 19, 2008 at 2:11 am

  Nice, Trillions. You following in the footsteps of The One and Doorknob Joe, PLAGIARIZING another person’s work w/o giving them credit??? I wonder if that would upset Mr. McGourty… although I suppose you could be he, huh? I doubt I would go so far as to assume that, though, based upon your initial comments here in comparison to the relatively more articulate article from which you PICKED AND CHOSE statements to lift out of context.

  Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t recall saying anything about the debt. Did I st-st-stutter, c-c-causing you to be c-c-confused? I have that p-p-problem in real life, so m-m-maybe it c-c-carries over onto the internet? You shouldn’t have a problem with that at this point in the game, after listening to Barry for almost 2 years.

  Is there some misstatement of fact in my analysis? Did I *LIE*???? I did this in an honest effort, but I am not infallible. So with that in mind, if you’re going to plagiarize (or author) a “research” paper, you might want to go with one that’s actually RESEARCH - you know, based on FACT - rather than insipid lines of drivel conveying nothing more than conjecture and opinion with a glaringly obvious liberal slant. Historical research is subject to rather rigorous criteria of accuracy and reliability - not oozing bias and unsupported criticism. Unless, of course, you’re writing a history textbook to be used in the public schools system; then obfuscation, manipulation, and deceit are not only expected but highly paid.

• 27 Chris C // Nov 19, 2008 at 2:32 am

  Angie what do you expect? People like 5.2 copy and paste other people’s opinions instead of coming up with their own.

  On a side note money supply is much more important to the economy then anything else. The rapid increase in prices over the last five years was due to a rapid increase in the money supply via loans.

  Health care cost increases are partly due to that but more from a lack of competition, but that is a topic for another day.

  The topper was the stimulus checks. Note how the GDP shot up in June and prices soon followed in gas and food, essentials mind you, in July.

  The reason why there is no lending going on now is the economy has reached a ceiling on it’s money supply and until that gets lowered they are not going to print more of it thus risking hyperinflation.

  As complex as people try and make out economics it all comes down to supply and demand. Any time there is an imbalance the prices of goods and services will reflect this.

  5.2 I told you to stay on the porch. The big dogs around here run with actual facts, not cut and pasted opinions of others.

  How many times will you ignore my advice?

• 28 Angie // Nov 19, 2008 at 3:24 am

  TY, Chris. You get the Oreo Cookie Award today! I am on a continuous quest for knowledge, and I know where I can go for answers w/o the bull-honkers.

  While SOME people obviously don’t, I actually DO get the economics. I did that college thing, had my can parked in econ far more than required (sometimes illicitly, but the instructor just winked and smiled - I like to tell myself it was cuz I was cute). I grooved on that stuff, breathed it, lived it, ate it for breakfast, lunch, and supper. I don’t think you ever really lose an affinity for something like that, either.

  While 5.2 wants to cherry-pick nonsense from much larger nonsense, seemingly incapable of stringing a coherent thought of his own together and feeling a need to so thoughtfully “borrow” another person’s work, I think I actually have the credentials to speak on things like the economy (and even the debt AND the deficit, if he wants to try going toe to toe), having studied macro and microeconomics and political science (GET A CLUE, 5.2) along with a couple or 4 years of cost and intermediate accounting and finance, being an officer of the campus accounting club and member of AICPA, holding a seat on the school’s accounting program curriculum committee and another on the student judiciary committee, working as a tutor across some 40 subjects and teaching seminars, all while working full time for a lawyer and being a single mom to two children… oh, and having a transcription business on the side (I never do stuff small and to this day I am disillusioned as to this concept of “weekends”), all by the age of 21.

  So let’s see your CV, 5.2. When you’re ready to contribute something useful to the conversation, I’ll be listening. I’m not trying to be condescending (I think), but I’ve had it up to my eyebrows with useless garbage being regurgitated and offered up as PROOF of how evil conservatism is and how almighty and good and wise liberalism must be by default.

• 29 Angie // Nov 19, 2008 at 3:28 am

  BTW, here’s the article (and no, 5.2, I didn’t go seeking this out just because of you; I had it bookmarked already, to return to for a chuckle, immediately apparent where your comment had been lifted from).

  http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

• 30 Chris C // Nov 19, 2008 at 4:55 am

  Hehe I got the Oreo Cookie Award Nice!

  And to think I had C’s and D’s in math in school. Not like the liberal schooling I was forced to endure placed an emphasis on the subject. I had to find that out on my own.

  The Democratic-ruled education system wants people like 5.2 to be dumbed down enough in math, economics, and science to the point where they can’t use critical thinking and have to rely on the government for help or others to think for them.

• 31 Angie // Nov 19, 2008 at 6:51 am

  Yeah, fortunately for my kids, I’m such an “asshat,” I educated them the RIGHT way on my own! My 17-year-old apparently offended someone with one of his opinions (I was pretty proud of it, myself) and my 13-year-old asked to “excuse himself from the discussion,” forced to sit in the hallway when he gave an Angie-type argument during Obama Indoctrination Class. Of course, he didn’t get in a BIT of trouble from mom!

  It was funny, back in late September we went camping at Van Buren State Park over in SW Michigan and they had trick-or-treating. My 13-year-old didn’t bring a costume with him, but he came along for candy anyhow, ran off ahead of us slow-pokes. This guy tells him that since he has no costume, he has to tell a joke to get a treat. My son couldn’t think of one (he didn’t inherit my sense of humor) so the guy told him to go ask mom. He comes running back to where I was standing and says he needs a joke and why, and it fell out of my mouth before I could stop it (one of my bad habits): Obama. He says, “Mom, that’s not a joke,” and I told him, “Of course it is. The biggest joke passed off on an unsuspecting American public in over 2 centuries.” He starts laughing and runs off, and couple minutes later I hear shouting. I wander over and there’s this red-faced guy bitching, his wife trying to blend into the scenery, my son standing there mouth hanging open, getting hollered at. Guy says to me, “Who do you think you are blah blah blah G**-d*** Republicans blah blah blah G**-d*** Republicans.” Only thing is, I’m not a G**-d*** Republican, I’m a G**-d*** Independent, and I told him so, along with a few other choice Angie-isms. His face goes 3 shades of white, his mouth closes with a snap, and his buttocks meet his chair with a thump. “Welllll….. blah blah blah I’m union and we blah blah blah” as he hands over candy to all 5 of my children - and to me, too… with a smile.

  And I’m just getting warmed up for my newest mission: Taking assholery to new and previously unexplored heights (and depths). Good thing I got my funny back; just in time, too!

• 32 Fiar // Nov 19, 2008 at 7:35 am

  Exploring the depths of assholery. That’s a disturbing image.

• 33 Obama’s Civilian National Security Force | Political Humor by Radioactive Liberty // Nov 19, 2008 at 10:41 am

  [...] on their hands. We should stop our middle school students playing soccer, playing video games, and trolling blogs. We should stop our retirees playing golf, R.V.ing, and running for president. We need these groups [...]

• 34 BENJAMIN // Nov 20, 2008 at 12:31 pm

  PRESIDENT ELECT OBAMA
  AS A BLACK MAN, AND A MOVIE PRODUCER LIVING IN THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO, I HAVE TO SAY, I WOULD FEEL VERY BETRAYED BY YOU, IF YOU SELECTED HILLARY CLINTON OVER GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON FOR SEC.
  OF STATE!!!

  GOVERNOR RICHARDSON WAS THE PIVOT THAT CAUSE YOU TO WIN THE HISPANIC VOTE! HE TURNED HIS BACK ON THE CLINTON’S TO SUPPORT A MAN WITH A VISION FOR THE FUTURE.

  PLEASE DON’T TURN THAT VISION INTO POLITICAL FAVORS TO PLEASE THE POWERS THAT BE!!!! NO ONE HAS MORE EXPERIENCE IN FOREIGN AFFAIRS THAN BILL RICHARDSON; FORMER “U.S. AMBASSADOR”, NEGOTIATING TO FREE AMERICANS UNJUSTLY HELD IN PRISONS AROUND THE GLOBE.

  NOT TO OFFER HIM THAT POSITION WOULD BE A DISSERVICE TO THE COUNTRY, TO HIM, AND TO YOURSELF!!!! DO THE RIGHT THING!!!!!

  IF WE WANTED A 3RD.
  CLINTON ADMINASTRATION, WE WOULD HAVE VOTED IN HILLARY!!!!

  “CHANGE, NOT ASSIMILATION ”

  BENJAMIN

• 35 The Obama Cabinet a.k.a. The Clinton Years… Again | Political Humor by Radioactive Liberty // Dec 1, 2008 at 10:20 am

  [...] Obama cabinet is shaping-up (read: rumored) to be an all-star ensemble cast that includes such notables as Tom [...]

• 36 Barack Obama Presidential Coin Collection - The Change We Have Been Hoping For | Political Humor by Radioactive Liberty // Dec 12, 2008 at 3:18 pm

  [...] a Presidential cabinet stuffed full of Clinton retreads, and a continuation of Chicago style deep dish culture of [...]

Leave a Comment or the Terrorists Win!

If you're wondering how to get an icon next to your name, go to gravatar.com and sign up for a free account.
Remember, only terrorist sympathizers don't have a gravatar.