Yep - i'd bet there are billions of couches scattered all over the various agencies that make up the Federal Government. I'd even bet that Jack and Barack have even organized a volunteer task force in each agency whose sole purpose is to scour each couch and turn over the change found there keep our Federal Government going.
Tin Cans Hidden In White House Lawn:
And you thought Michelle was just making some sort of 'healthy food' garden thing or something. Nope! It is a well established fact that during the depression, FDR buried cans of money on the White House lawn as insurance for when 'things really got bad'. I do commend the first lady for getting her priorities right and using the child labor to get this done though. Way to go Michelle!
Clothes Pockets:
The Obama's spare no expense when they go on vacations. Therefore it does not stretch the imagination that Barack may have left a few million or so of 'walking around money' in his pockets from those trips. Yeah, they will have sand all over them & stuff, but Barack knows a lot of guys who can laundry clean that money for him from his Chicago days.
Car Seats:
Apparently the President has a great many limos. They are always in use by lots of rich people, so it is a pretty good bet that there is a great deal of change in the seats that has fallen out of pockets. Unfortunately I suspect that searching there won't be near as productive as other options as they are probably searched by the Secret Service each time the limos are used. Damn that Secret Service! Why do they hate America?
Old People:
Old people are a well known source of money. How many times as a kid did you go to your gullible old grandma and say 'can I have some money for candy?' Every time she would give it to you, even when you were in your teens and just trying to get some beer money. Barack and Jack can probably work that angle too. Old people love to help out.
Nigerian Prince Scam:
This may come as a revelation to some, but our current President is is 1/2 black and may actually have been born in Kenya - a country not far from Nigeria (or at least on the same continent). This makes him a natural to pull the 'Nigerian Prince' scam. It would be so believable!
With all these options, I am thinking that Congress can just return to their offices and go back to sleep on their couches there. Just someone be sure to wake them up when the 'Obama's Organizing for Capitol Couches' volunteers comes by.
But that is not what I wanted to write about. No, this picture got my attention:
Particularly, the lectern that he is using grabbed my attention. Here's a close up of it from another article and a different angle:
I was like wow! That doesn't look like a traditional representation of the American eagle. It looks a little strange. I tried using google image search on it and got this:
Huh? I didn't expect that! Satanism aside, I had to try to find out where that goofy lectern came from. Going back a year, I discovered this article where Obama used exactly the same lectern for the Iftar dinner last year - here's a screen capture of the opening video clip:
One begins to wonder if he brought that lectern in when he wanted to appear especially presidential? I did a little more digging to see if I could find other presidents that had used that lectern and hit some paydirt. Here is a picture of Bush with it:
Even Reagan appears with it:
Digging a little deeper, it appears it goes with the state dining room - here is a picture of it all by itself from 2006:
There is a motif of eagles in the state dining room, so maybe it came in with them. The earliest pictures I could find of them was back from the Roosevelt administration (1906):
My conclusion? I believe that rather than being a 'demonic' eagle, the Bamster's use of the eagle lectern in an attempt for him to adopt a 'presidential pose'. That he drags out this artifact frequently is just another indication of both his insecurity and his need to try to link himself to the greatness of the office as opposed to any substantial contribution he has made to the country. I have yet to get an answer back from the Reagan library as to the provenance of the lectern or if any other administrations has borrowed it. What would be particularly funny (and pointedly 'culturally insensitive') would be if this lectern, so prominently featured in honorary Muslim state dinners, came from some Anglican church (which traditionally use an eagle motif).
UPDATE:
I got a timely response to my query from a Reagan Library exhibit specialist. To summarize, VP Rockefeller and his aide, Joseph Canzeri wanted a nicer lectern for the VP's press room. They had an 1840s era eagle motif lectern restored for use in the press room. Later President Reagan used it (as seen above). It was used in the White House for special events through President GW Bush's first term. Since the lectern was the property of the Canzeri family, the family felt that it's association with Ronald Reagan was so strong that it donated it to the Reagan Library for display. I will probably dig a little more and see if I can find out where the 1840's era eagle came from. Oh - the one Obama uses? It's a 'reproduction' of the one in the Reagan Library. If you look closely at the Bush picture above, you will see that the lectern is the same reproduction one that Obama is using. Draw what conclusions you will from that symbolism and juxtaposition.
So I am recovering from 'too much summer fun' and flipping through the channels. Now I usually get pretty much all my news from Drudge and the like because a) it's up to date, and b) I can filter out the crap that I am not interested in. That being said, the only news network that I trust to give me mostly unbiased news in Fox. Thus, I stopped channel surfing on Fox News to see if there was anything going on in the world that I didn't know about already.
The show that was on there was the one with Sheppard Smith. Now I will admit that I find his news delivery entertaining and his producers generally package the news in a way that is entertaining and interesting. That being said, he was not talking about anything I hadn't read about already on Drudge. The main topic at the time I was watching was about Putin's snubbing the Bamster on the Snowden affair. Sheppard started off with this picture that was the same as the one that led on Drudge:
All fine and good. Not quite sure why Putin has to wear cammo to go pike fishing, but ok. Also not quite sure this photo is real - I mean look at the size of those hands. They don't quite match the rest of the picture do they? What followed all this though was what creeped me out. It was a whole series of pictures of Putin with his shirt off doing stuff, and Sheppard Smith oohing and awing over them.
Now I am not a homophobe. I could care less what a person does in the privacy of their own home. That being said, watching two men kiss in public bothers me a little. However watching a gay national TV personality gushing over half naked pictures of a middle aged leader of a country with nuclear weapons still pointed at me made me more than just a little nauseous.
This is why I read all my news now. I don't need to be spoon fed the facts of the day by foolish people. I suspect that the reason that too many of my countrymen remain ignorant is that they prefer to watch the news rather than read it. The problem is compounded when, in the pursuit of entertainment, they turn toward the likes of Cobert, John Stewart, and yes, even Sheppard Smith to learn what is going on in the world around them.
Here's a couple of interesting animal myths that I see have been debunked...
First up is the myth that the komodo dragon bite while not containing venom, is deadly due to all kinds of nasty bacteria that live in its mouth. Now I have seen these guys on numerous trips to the national zoo in DC. They are truly scary creatures. To be pursued and bitten by one or more of them would keep me up at night if I lived in an area where they roamed free. I, like most people that read the description of them on the placard by the their cage noting this 'fact', took it at face value that it was true. Well, it turns out that some scientist did some deeper thinking about it and studied it a bit more and concluded that it was all bunk. Turns out that water buffalo that they killed by biting went and wallowed in nasty feces filled mud, then died from infection. Yea Science!
Next up is the color blindness of dogs. This is one that I have heard all my life and again took at face value - dogs can't see color. Well it turns out that isn't quite true. They just can't see all the colors. They actually do have receptors for blue and yellow, but not red and green. Scientist constructed some test to verify that was true, and Science! proved it was. Now it turns out they are just like humans who have trouble seeing red / green. Is that you? Check it out:
Update!!! Welcome IMAO readers. While I suspect you are here to admire the fine art, I do occasionally write stuff too. By all means bookmark me and visit occasionally or do the RSS subscribe thing over there ----------------->
The ice cream is always free here! Yea! Free Ice Cream! Oh - no tip jar (yet), I mostly only do the writing thing. Look around a bit and that's all you'll see - writing and stupid youtube video links to old white guy music and such... enjoy!
So I noted with interest this story about a killer in Cleveland who apparently did his victims in abandoned houses and wrapped then in plastic. It was like a real life 'Dexter' - almost. Apparently he was just another really bad guy that killed women. He wasn't a genius sociopath like Dexter either, but just emulated another infamous Cleveland serial killer Anthony Sowell. Nothing quirky or romantic, no 'code', just a couple of sick bastards. Oh, and even though it wasn't mentioned in the story, there is one other aspect of this guy that will regulate this to the back pages of the news. Here's his picture:
Since you probably haven't heard of Anthony Sowell, here's his picture:
From the article, I am guessing that most of their victims were black. Just a touch of that 'peculiar institution' crime that we are not supposed to pay attention to... Would it be wrong to wish for a more painful death than the needle or the chair?
I am probably not the only American that knows about Prince Albert only because of the pipe tobacco and the prank call gag... but times, they are a changing... and now with the Real Prince Albert stepping down, the prank call will no longer make sense (if it ever did).
This new DC area 'Meetup Group' "Furlough Fun Days' made me laugh. I have to admire the 'making lemons out of lemonade' attitude. If they are going to take a pay cut and be forced to take time off, they might as well enjoy it... Of course a real pay cut would involve no time off, but that's not the way the federal government works.
I was thrilled when I read that the Navy had finally gotten their drone to successfully land on a carrier (twice!). That's why this article indicating that it had to abort and land at Wallops was a bit of a let down. Reading through the article, I saw where the reason for the abort was that it was directed to seek an alternate landing site when it detected a hardware anomaly. To put it another way, the program management decided that rather than risk a crash into a carrier if was not going right, the drone would instead land someplace safe.
The larger question is what does this say about an operational role? If that 4 acres of friendly territory is the only place to land for a million dollar drone having difficulties, what will the operational scenario be then? For other drones operating in other hostile environments, the answer is easy. If they can get back to base, let them try to land and clean up the mess if they can't. This question is a bit more complex when the base is the volatile deck of a carrier. 'Cleaning up the mess' just got a little more costly. I suspect this is why the Navy has been so careful in their adoption of drones for use on carriers.
While perusing the news of the day I came across this article about how Harry Reid was going to force the issue of getting the President's nominations approved by doing away with Senate Rule 22 where a 2/3 majority was needed to overcome a filibuster. The rule has stood since 1960 or so (a good discussion of the Cloture rule and filibusters can be found here). Since I reviewed that article and stuck it in my notes to think about, the Republicans and Democrats in the Senate have come to a 'compromise' and the rule change is not going to happen. Rather that write an entire essay on the merits of the filibuster, I am thinking more now about the nature of that compromise and how and why it came about.
To understand the 'what' of the compromise a little divergence into the history of situation is necessary. Back in January 2012 Obama was getting frustrated that he couldn't get his nominees into office to do his bidding. The Republicans had filibustered his appointments, mainly because he failed to do his due diligence in ensuring the people he nominated had met the Senate Republican's minimal standards for bipartisanship. To ensure that he did not attempt to make recess appointment, the Senate Republicans forced the Senate to never be out of session. Faced with this, Obama ignored the Senate and declared that he was making 'recess' appointments anyway, and appointed two members to the National Labor Relations Board. The Republicans went the Federal Circuit Court and sued Obama. They won the case as the court noted that the appointees were illegally in office. Obama appealed at the next level up (the Supreme Court) and they have yet to listen to arguments on the case. In the meantime, the appointees did not step down, but continued to serve and make rulings. This is how things sat until yesterday, when Reid announced he would use the 'nuclear option' to change the Senate Rules to remove the 2/3 vote requirement to overcome a filibuster in order to get Obama's appointees in a up or down vote.
As noted above the rule change didn't happen. What happened instead was a compromise where Obama (and the democrats) withdrew the nomination of the two illegally serving NLRB members, and in exchange the Republicans withdrew their filibuster threat and allow other unrelated nominees to proceed to an up or down vote. On the surface this is a fair trade. Underneath, it is no compromise at all but an complete hoodwink of the Republicans by Obama and the Democrats. Any three card Monte con operator can show you how it's done.
Reid and the White House did not install their real candidates for the NRLB. The ones they wanted were actually the ones that they negotiated with the unions to fill those positions. That in itself is an outrage, but I digress. The Republicans took the bait when Obama made the illegal appointments and sued for redress. This set up Harry Reid's move the threaten a rule change to one of the Senate's most honored traditions - the filibuster. The Republicans blinked, and Reid got a boatload of Obama's appointees slipped into place. We have only to look at the outrageous effects of the departing Napolitano's leadership at Homeland Security to image what havoc these new appointees can wreck on our democracy.
It is shameful that Mitchell, and yes, even the RINO McCain allowed this to happen without even a whimper. There is one bright spot. I noticed this morning that Rand Paul is already announcing that he will use the filibuster to prevent the wackos like the failed broadcaster Rachel Maddow from getting on the Supreme Court. Let's hope the Senate minority leadership does not find a way to silence him. What I fear is that Reid's above actions are just the opening act in a play that will ultimately end in killing the rule and tipping our republic on it's head. The Republican leadership has proven that they are weak in opposing him, so it is only a matter of time. America likes that their representative in the Senate has the power to stop bad legislation in it's tracks with a filibuster. When they remove that privilege, the Democrats will be exposed as the tyrants they truly are.
So this winter was pretty mild by DC standards. We really only got one noteworthy snow, it didn't really shut anything down, and the winter was atypically warm. We had the added benefit of an excess of firewood, so we were able to generously supplement our heating cost by keeping the wood stove going overnight anytime the temperature dropped below freezing. Due to all this, I purposefully ignored failure of the heat pump on one side of our split level palatial estate. At worst when it got cold enough, the 'EM HEAT' would be triggered, turning on electrical heating elements, and hot air would be blown through the system, and I would open my wallet to fork out a few more dollars to the power company.
With the coming of summer, I switched the heat pumps over to 'cool' mode. As the days heated up, it became increasingly clear that the heat pump was just not functioning. I finally relented and the A/C experts were called in. An initial check of the coolant pressure in the unit revealed that there was no pressure and the coolant in the system was gone. Further investigation revealed that a vibration in the unit had caused one copper pipe in contact with another to wear through, venting the coolant. Here's where the full ignorance of the federal government as embodied by the EPA caused an expensive intrusion into my life.
To understand why a short history lesson is in order. In 1968 a couple of chemist noticed that CFC molecules reacted with ozone in such a way as to effectively remove them from the atmosphere. The scientist continued to study this effect and, upon discovering that the ozone layer around the earth was developing holes, raised an international outcry in 1984 that the released CFCs from cooling and heating systems (as well as aerosols) around the world were going to cause irreparable damage to the atmosphere and doom us all to a horrible skin cancer death. The whole story can be found here. This led to the passing of an international treaty in 1987 by the United Nations called the 'Montreal Protocol'. It was perhaps the first time that all the civilized nations in the world banded together to address a global man made threat. It was wonderful, noble, and breath taking. Tragically it was based on an acutely flawed scientific theory, and not really strictly adhered to by the signatories. But other than that, it was really great.
As pointed out here, a study in 2007 based on years of satellite observations, indicated that the 'hole in the ozone layer' was mostly nonsense as the ozone in the upper atmosphere is anything but uniform as it is well, air. This makes detection of a 'hole' somewhat problematic as air moves around. This has led to numerous scientist questioning the validity of the studies that led to the fore mentioned treaty. Common sense would lead one to wonder how the CFCs from the A/C units and aerosols, which even in their heyday represented one molecule in billions and billions of air molecules, somehow worked their way into the upper atmosphere and found the ozone molecules and reacted to them before they reacted to anything else like rain or dust, opening up a huge 'hole' in the atmosphere.
It should come as no surprise to anyone paying attention to the effect of 'Climate Change' zealots that the federal government and the current administration in particular is unwilling to reconsider this treaty based on new facts. Instead they have accelerated the adoption of the treaty, doing their best to save the human race from a painful and horrible death, or something like that.
At this point you are wondering what does all this have to do with a broken heat pump in northern Virginia? We had five options for addressing the broken heat pump, listed here in order of what one would guess at for cost in a world untouched by federal regulation:
Buy fans, sweat, and hope it doesn't get too hot...
Repair the leaky pipe and refill the system.
Leave the system in place and buy window units to cool that side of the house
Replace just the aging outside unit.
Replace the whole system.
As part of the accelerated implementation of the Montreal Protocol, the EPA has stopped the production and thus the availability of R-22, the CFC laden gas used by most heat pumps installed in the US. The laws of supply and demand have thus kicked in causing a dramatic multiplication of the cost of the remaining supply. Just five years ago, a recharge of our system from zero pressure would have cost us less than $100. At current rates, a recharge was estimated to cost over $800. Thus option 2 was a non-starter.
Selecting option 4 was similarly repugnant but for a slightly different reason. It turns out that foreign manufactures of these units have less trouble obtaining R-22 than what is available in the open market in the US. I suspect this is due to less stringent treaty adherence in such places as Mexico and China. They used to supply these units charged with coolant to make them more attractive to domestic installers (gotta love that free market adaptation to our onerous government regulations). It didn't take long for the government to close that loophole and prevent these units from entering in the US with stored coolant.
Given this loophole closing action by the ever vigilant EPA, and perhaps their friends at the TSA, the cost of a new unit would just be additional expense on top of the cost of a recharge. If the aging inside unit sprung a leak, we would be back to another recharge cost and additional unit replacement cost. Option 4 was therefore a non-starter. It is worth noting here that these units are specifically designed for use with R-22 and the environmentally acceptable R-410 will not work in them. I have read where in some third world countries they have used natural gas as a replacement for R-22. The A/C experts assure me that given it's combustibility, such a replacement is highly dangerous as even closed systems don't always stay that way.
Option 3 became the cheapest approach. We only really needed to effectively cool two rooms in that part of the house. Window units, while tacky, were relatively cheap (<$100) and would probably do the job, albeit expensively from a power consumption viewpoint. They would not of course help up in the winter, and we would have to purchase some other option to help out in the fall. If we were to ever sell the house, we would have to repair or replace the non-working unit or take a hit in our asking price. There were similar concerns for option 1.
If you are guessing that we went with option 5, replacement of the whole system, you guessed correctly. The new system, which cost over $6000 installed, is based on R-410, and is an 'environmentally friendly' coolant system. We were fortunate that we could still afford such an installation. In my walks around the neighborhood, I have noticed several of my neighbors seem to have their windows open and fans going. I suspect, given that most of the houses in the neighborhood are of the same vintage, they have had similar failures but do not have the funds for a replacement.
I find it outrageous that this ignorant government policy has transported my typical suburban neighborhood back 40 years to an era where many houses did not have A/C and relied on wood for heating. The next time you think that government regulations don't effect you, think again. I suspect this is just a small taste of what we are in for when the 'climate change' crowd gets their way. I also suspect that if Obamacare is not staunched, we will see similar intrusions into our daily lives that will be even more onerous.
I'm just glad that nice young man of color (1/4 black, 1/2 white, 1/4 Peruvian) didn't get railroaded by the justice system....
Update (07/16)
So now it's open season on non-black looking people? Just of few miles north of where i'm sitting, they beat up another 'white Hispanic' at gun point in retaliation for the verdict. They were safe though, as the strict gun laws in Baltimore ensures that their victim would not be armed. These guys near Memphis who did the same thing to a white jogger are not so intelligent, though in the heat I guess it is easy to see their victim was not armed. In that area it is pretty common for folks to go around armed. My 80+ father still lives in Memphis. He had a holster mounted on the Segway that he used to get groceries. Even at that age he is still an excellent shot, though I do wish he lived in a better neighborhood.
I am sure that given the Zimmerman acquittal there is going to be a great deal written about it by the pro and anti gun crowd. I felt that I needed to add my two cents into the fray, so here I go.
As the average white guy, I was shocked to see that they were even still prosecuting Zimmerman. I could not understand the motive for trying to put the guy in jail. Yes, he was useful for motivating the black base for Obama, reminding them that he was 'one of them' working against the 'crackers', thus ensuring an almost unanimous, if not entirely racist, black voting block. He has been useful, but there was no point in the going after him - it would just make the prosecutors look foolish and petty.
But my logic was flawed. Of course they had to prosecute him. The problem is that the people manipulated stayed manipulated. The really believed the narrative that the white Hispanic guy gunned down a black kid because he was in the neighborhood. They believed they had another 'Rodney King' level racial incident and they damn well wanted their justice. So a prosecution was enjoined.
Since they make it a practice to be willfully misinformed, they will not look at the trial transcripts or read articles about it written by objective reporters and bloggers. They will not note that this 6'2" kid decided to jump this little twerp that was following him, beat the crap out of him, then died in shock when the 'twerp', in mortal fear for his life, fought back by defending himself with a gun. No, the sound bite they will go with will be very similar to what I heard on NPR this morning. It went something like this:
Despite DNA and expert testimony to the contrary, the jury found Zimmerman not guilty of murdering a black child on his way home from a convenience store.
Being a typical old white guy, I prefer to ignore the racial aspects of this. The issue that bothers me is a little more personal than that. It has made me re-evaluate the personal defense aspects of my own life. This is slightly more than academic to me. While I live in a Virginia county that is rather safe due to 'must issue' of concealed carry and an 'open carry' law that allows me to walk down the the street with a shotgun strapped to my shoulder, I do spend a good part of my time in the People's Republic of Maryland where things are not so safe or free.
It will come as no surprise to those that study statistics that gun violence is more prevalent in those areas where gun laws are most restrictive. Anecdotally, I can attest that holds true for Howard County MD. I recently had the misfortune of visiting the Howard County General Hospital ER at 2am on a week night. The place was very active. There were about as many cops as nurses in the ER bay, each one accompanying those under their care, either as victims or suspects. Even the dead body they rolled past me had a police escort. I would guess at least half of those being 'served' were gun related injuries. Yet guns are strictly regulated in the county. Go figure...
So how am I to defend myself in such a place. Stun guns are similarly regulated. Mace is usually ineffective and itself may be illegal. If a group of thugs decides to pound me, I have little choice but to accept my beating and hope nothing vital is damaged. In fact, that seems to be the position the government expects of citizens in these 'gun free' areas. Essentially, they limit the population to a 'defense only' strategy. Avoid dangerous situations by being aware of your surroundings and stay away from known dangerous areas. If you are attacked scream loudly, hoping that someone will call the cops and they will arrive in a timely manner (unless they are detained at the hospital). Give up all your valuables immediately to avoid getting hurt. Oh - and never, ever, ever, fight back.
Such a strategy assumes that crime can somehow be managed by the government. To some extent that is possible I guess. If you place your police in the 'trouble' areas, then they will be close enough to respond in time to help the victims and take them to the hospital. As long as the thugs behave and stick to their side of the tracks, the civilized sections of the county will mostly remain safe. It all sounds practical, reasonable, and manageable. What it is not is the expression of a free people with the right to be secure in their person or property. Yeah - it's a constitutional thing...
So I come full circle. Zimmerman was following a stranger in his community attempting to help his neighbors avoid the ravages of crime and was attacked by a young punk who thought he could get away with beating up anyone who bothered him. He chose poorly, and it is sad this life lesson had to be his last. Zimmerman's prosecution, rather than strengthening the civil society has had the opposite effect, not just because the riots that may be inevitable, but because it weakens the spirit of the personal freedom aspects of being a citizen of the United States. We are left with being 'lucky' to be in the right area of town, 'lucky' to have police nearby, and 'lucky' that the government is ever vigilant. I am just not sure I feel that 'lucky' anymore... and that's my two cents on this one.
So I keep hearing the Norwegian Criuse Lines ad which starts out "My parents think I was crazy for marrying a dolphin". In the background there are all the squeaks and noises to let you know she wasn't talking about a guy from the football team. A few parts of it:
Being a casual kayaker who is on the water pretty much every chance I get I was curious about the kayak he was in. It appears that he is in the ocean, a few hundred feet offshore, in a recreational kayak. This seems very wrong to me. Zooming in I see this:
Humm. Interesting. A Perception Sundance. Looking that up on Google, I find this description:
The Sundance 9.5 is the smallest and most nimble of our new Sundance family. The Sundance resembles a a touring kayak in design but features super-sized knee room and is ideal for lakes and ponds. A perfect boat for first time paddlers or anyone who's looking for a light and easy kayak that's stable and fun to paddle. The bow and stern deck rigging give you lots of options for storing gear and the standard Comfort Fit outfitting ensures you comfort while you are trying out this thing we call paddling.
Notice nothing there about ocean or anything like that. Now my first kayak was a Perception 9.5 - virtually identical to this one - though it appears to be the 12' version. It is exceedingly stable and takes a purposeful action to tip. That being said, I would never take it on the ocean. There are two reasons for this. First there is getting into the ocean. While the large cockpit makes it easy to get in & out, it also offers little barrier for water in surf conditions. This is compounded by the kayak only having a single sealed bulkheads. Unless you put a float bag in there, there is a pretty good chance that getting swamped by a wave will result in a rapidly filled kayak sitting on the bottom or close to it and you being stuck a long way from shore for a swim back, sans your $400 kayak (not that such a small amount matters to the $100,000,000,000,000 President).
The second reason I would hesitate to to take such a kayak in the water is the relative difficulty in paddling such a kayak. Yes it is maneuverable and stable, but with that comes a larger surface area in contact with the water. This means that to propel it through the water requires quality, efficient, and numerous strokes. This is fine for a 'lake or pond' where you are not fighting tide and current. Where he is pictured a good outgoing tide could quickly move him a mile or more offshore without the strength or ability to get back. That is the real danger of using an inappropriate kayak for the conditions. I have a hard time imagining his security detail allowing him to be put in such a dangerous situation.
Given all this I began to take a look at the picture again. I am not an expert in photo analysis, but to me it looks like it might have been photo-shopped. Open up to above picture and zoom way in. There are error lines all around the paddling 'figure'. There are no error lines around the kayak. Draw your own conclusions. Oh, and just for fun, google 'Obama blue shirt picture' - there aren't any of this style of shirt. I suspect it was changed to match the background. Looks like another 'presidential plastic turkey incident' to me.
Guess I was wrong - here is the Bamster's speech (H/T Weasel Zippers) - check out all the smiling faces. Actually the white guy to his right gives a kind of smart ass smirk when he sees the camera is on him... Watch & compare to the above if your stomach can take it...
An important element to the quality of a life in a place is the actual physical structure. It sets your frame of mind and is central to how a family connects. So lets see how the White House living space compares to a nice prison.
White House:
The White House living space is a bit cramped as it is a little known fact that the official residence really only takes up a single floor of that tiny little building on Pennsylvania Ave. I can see her point about it being, well, confining.
Nice Prison:
Now these guys have it made. Look at all the room those bunks have. And they each have their own little shelves to put their stuff on. Man, it's exactly like the White House!
Clothes
A very smart person noted long ago that 'Clothes Make The Man' (or women). Let's see how the confining role being First Lady and the dress codes compare to similar issues at a nice prison.
White House:
As we all know, the First Lady has to put up with being a fashion diva. Having to wear all those goofy outfits that every designer that comes along and offers her is a terrible burden. Somehow she manages to pull it off.
Nice Prison:
Now naturally in a nice prison the inmates have a somewhat more limited wardrobe. I mean really, they have to wear whatever the lowest bidder talks the state into buying. What a burden! Just like the First Lady.
Roomies
We all know how hard it is to live with people that we don't really know that well. All manner of people spend the night at the White House, so the First Lady is no stranger to sharing living space with people she doesn't really know that well. Lets see how that compares to the experience of a guest of the state in a nice prison.
White House:
Part of the sacrifice of being the First Lady is putting up with all manner of celebrities knocking on your door and wanting to sleep in your house. Michelle has to put up with all kinds of Hollywood and Entertainment riff-raff sleeping over. Beyonce and Jay-Z? I'm sure it was a terrible struggle to put up with them. At least she was able to send that funny little man away out the back door before anyone could see him.
Nice Prison:
In prison you get to be near all kinds of famous people. Imagine this nice family man living just a few doors down from you. Nice Prisons are just like the White House that way.
Phone / Internet
In today's connected world, access to communications is everything. Let's see how the restrictions put on the First Lady compare to those folks residing in a nice prison.
White House:
Since all sorts of foreign powers and well - nitwits - want to listen in on communications, the First Lady is limited to using defensible communication devices. Namely, the trusty old Blackberry. Not the latest iPhone or Android. A Blackberry! How awful for her. Of course, that is offset somewhat by her having access to a little communications center right in her own basement.
Nice Prison:
Well most prisoners don't have internet access. In fact, if they have been in long enough, they haven't even seen an android device. So, unlike the First Lady, they don't have to worry about such things. However, they too are limited to older technology like pay phones. Of course, their rates may be a little higher than the First Lady's, but you can't have everything. They are after all paying their debt to society. But I can see how they have communications challenges just like the First Lady.
Food
We all know that Michelle Obama has been front and center in the fight for all of us to have good and healthy food. It will be interesting to compare this area of living in the White House to a Nice Prison. 'You Are What You Eat'!
White House:
Get a load of that menu from a dinner the First Lady had to put on. While it looks yummy, I am not sure the bazillion carbs and calories is such a good idea. I imagine that the guys at a Nice Prison might just have an edge here.
Nice Prison:
I was right! While this doesn't look as yummy, it does appear to be balanced and healthy, and careful to not make one fat. Who knew that at least in the food department, the Nice Prison actually has the edge over White House living?
Entertainment Center
A very important part of living in America is kicking back and watching a movie or a game. Let's see how this experience differs between living in the White House and a Nice Prison.
White House:
Wow! How Dorky! Looks like the White House TV room can only hold a few close friends. that doesn't look like much fun at all, though I do like the ottomans. Guess it sucks to be you if you are in the back rows.
Nice Prison:
Look at those guys all cramped in a small room too. I bet the White House has a projected TV just like that. So the Nice Prison and the White House are virtually indistinguishable.
Trips / Outings
Now us normal people have no idea how difficult it is to travel like the First Lady. I imagine the the residents of a Nice Prison have issues just like the First Lady when they travel. Let's take a look.
White House:
Look at the cramped conditions the First Lady has to endure. But of course, the real attraction of travel is not the trip, but where you have to go.
I must say that residents of the Nice Prison don't get out as much. However, if they are lucky, they will get a chance to get out, stretch their legs, and get in some exercise doing good for society. Just like the First Lady on her trips.
Summary
After all this analysis, I think we have reached the startling conclusion that the First Lady was absolutely accurate in saying that living in the White House was just like living in a Nice Prison. I for one will be very careful to believe everything she says for now on.
Update!
IMAO Readers! Welcome! Much thanks to Harvey for once again granting me a LOTD! Come back & look around here occasionally. There is a quite a bit here, & occasionally I post amusing stuff like this. Thanks for visiting....
There is little doubt that Rubio lost a great deal of ground with his immigration reform support. Every right thinking American that was paying attention realized the parallels of that particular sack of excrement, it's construction, and passage and the way that Bamacare got to be law. The back door deals, the attached pork, the 1200 pages that no one but the lobbyist had read / written all were eerily similar to Bamacare. Rubio's complicit cooperation left him covered in the stench of Harry Reid's toxic senate byproduct. The easy fix for Rubio? Introduce a bill on abortion which has no chance of going anywhere or doing anything to try to shore up his base - both Cuban catholic and older white Floridian.
What would be the right thing for him to do? Admit that he was wrong, announce that he would stand in the way of every bill, resolution, or action in the Senate or House, be it a resolution on flowers or funding for bunny inspectors with filibuster or super-majority counter votes, quorum calls, and every other parliamentarian action available until Bamacare is rescinded and the Executive reigns in it's lawlessness. That is why he is in the Senate - not to make friends, be nice, or go along. His role and every other non-RINO Senator should be to block, harry, dog, frustrate, stonewall, get in their face, be rude to, demean their parentage, and if necessary physically engage the Democrats, in the Senate or House, who are hell bent on destroying this republic. They should be be thorns in every committee meeting, speaking out of turn, making a nuisance of themselves, even taking loud arguments into the halls, boo loudly every time a Democrat takes the floor, stand and turn your back during the State of the Union. In a word, be world class A-Holes - and be articulate when the press ask you why.
That would be leadership and just might give the Republican base, the true Republican base some hope that there are a few good men (and women) left in Congress that have to will to stop the fundamental changes to our government and way of life that the Democrats envision and the lawlessness of the current administration. The time for civility in Congress has passed. For those that think that this is extreme, consider that it is a far easier task to fight now with words and actions by a few in the halls of Congress than face a chaos later like what is playing out in Egypt.
Man - the pictures in the Daily Mail of these old rock stars are just scary! There is a lesson in there about the wages of hard living and drugs. I don't expect to stay young looking forever, nor do I expect my rock stars to either. That being said, I hope to age more gracefully than that. Alternatively, I am pretty sure they had a great time getting there...
