Reply
Sun 27 Jan, 2008 09:32 am
Will Bush get the usual long applause when he enters the House of Representatives? How much applause support will the Republicans give him?
Will the crowd throw rotten tomatoes at Bush? I can dream, can't I?
BBB
Gus and Gargamel have great suggestions
Gus had a great idea posted on another site:
You know what I would love to see during Bush's speech tomorrow? A complete lack of applause. That idiot thrives on perfunctory applause. Every time people clap he leans forward and either gives a wink to the crowd or just maintains that clueless look of arrogance. I think a lack of applause would destroy the man. He would crumble and turn to dust.
And then we can have the janitor sweep up the dust and release it to the winds.
and Gargamel topped it off with more ideas:
Yes, I like that idea, Gus. But I would like to take your scenario further. Not only should there be a lack of applause, but during the awkward silence following one of our Honorable Commander in Chief's pauses, someone, Joseph Biden, say, should put his palms to his mouth and make a loud, obnoxious farting noise. After which there will be another pause, followed by uproarious laughter.
Then again, Bush might laugh, too. Bodily function humor, poo-poo and pee-pee, is probably his favorite thing after snorting coke off the Book of Revelations.
So, let's stick with your idea, Gus.
Now that it's over, what actually happened?
for those that still have kitchen tables Bush offered these kind words;
Quote:"At kitchen tables across our country, there is concern about our economic future," the president told the nation in his annual address Monday night.
Brilliant, I say, President George is frickin' brilliant.
But the speech, (was) interrupted nearly 70 times by applause.
More words from the president, regarding tax relief and people who support letting it expire,
Quote: Others have said they would personally be happy to pay higher taxes. I welcome their enthusiasm. I'm pleased to report that the I.R.S. accepts both checks and money orders.
I say that's almost funny enough to take on the road... 51 more weeks, and counting down...
Striking 'Daily Show' Writers Review State of Union Speech
Striking 'Daily Show' Writers Review State of Union Speech for 'NYT' Site
By E&P Staff
Published: January 29, 2008
The New York Times offers today at its Campaign Stops area on its Web site an appraisal of President Bush's address by a group of out-on-strike 'Daily Show' writers who call themselves The Topical Satire Initiative.
They are bitterly disappointed that Bush did not "bring to the fore the most pressing issue of our generation: human-animal hybrids."
January 29, 2008, 12:47 am
State of The Union: Shocking Omission
By The Topical Satire Initiative, Rachel Axler, Kevin Bleyer, Rich Blomquist, Steve Bodow, Tim Carvell, Scott Jacobson, Rob Kutner, Josh Lieb and Sam Means, who, when gainfully employed, write funny stuff for "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart."
We had been looking forward to President Bush's State of the Union address for months, knowing that it would once again bring to the fore the most pressing issue of our generation: human-animal hybrids.
On Monday afternoon, whitehouse.gov, our one-stop shopping site for neutral-colored residences, posted this important update on the proceedings:
"President Bush will deliver his State of the Union address on January 28, 2008. Whatever the form, content, delivery method or broadcast medium, the President's annual address is a backdrop for national unity."
Our guesses ?- and please bear in mind that we are neither pundits nor smart people ?- were:
Form: Macaroni collage
Content: In-depth analysis of monumentally important human-animal hybrid controversy
Delivery Method: Ice Cream Truck
Broadcast Medium: Tin cans, string
Boy, was our collective face red! Turns out, Bush chose to go with:
Form: Speech
Content: Economic stuff, Incentive stuff, Legacy stuff
Delivery Method: Mouth
Broadcast Medium: TV
Truly, the address was a firm, sure-footed and resounding proclamation that even our 43rd president himself was surprised he had to do another of these things.
9:06: The President arrives, fashionably late, and fashionably attired in a blue tie the exact shade of America's current malaise. After much hand-shaking, he takes his place at the rostrum, in front of Dick Cheney, a human-zombie hybrid, and Nancy Pelosi, a human-woman hybrid.
9:07: Bush gets down to business right away, talking about the economy, his stimulus plan, etc. Obviously, he's saving human-animal hybrids for later in the speech.
9:12: Tax relief. No mention of how human-animal hybrids could affect it.
9:22: Human-alcohol hybrid Ted Kennedy checks his program, trying to figure out who the guy in the blue tie behind the podium is, and if there's an intermission.
9:29: "I call on Congress to ban unethical practices such as
" This is it! "
the buying, selling, patenting, or cloning of human life." Human-animal hybrids, here we ?-
Um.
Hello?
He's just moved on to "matters of justice." Matters of justice!? How about the injustice of not discussing human-animal hybrids?!
9:30: Okay, now we're ticked.
9:33: America is responding to immigration by "deploying fences." If we had human-animal hybrids, we could line them up along the Mexican border. They would be dangerous, yet understanding. Does nobody see this?
9:40: Iraq.
9:53: Iran.
9:55: Wiretapping.
10:00: Wow. He's really not even going to mention them.
10:01: "
And the state of our union will remain strong." "God bless America."
Yes, we're a little shocked right now.
But in a way, we're almost glad President Bush didn't discuss human-animal hybrids in this year's State of the Union. Perhaps he understood that, with only one year left, they're simply too big for him to take on. (Some are, quite literally. Especially if the human is tall to begin with, and then the animal it's fused with is like a rhino or a blue whale.)
We look forward to next year, when the State of the Union is delivered by someone else. Someone more attuned to the plight of the human-animal. Maybe a centaur.
So, as usual, the only tool in your arsenal is ridicule, without a word of discussion of anything he actually said. It's so much easier to ridicule someone than to prove him wrong, isn't it?
I listened to the speech on NPR, and the commentator didn't even wait till it was over, but inserted his snide asides as the speech was being given.