02
Mar
10

Drudgery March 2, 2010

Guest Blogger Jack O’Brien: Offering random weird thoughts stimulated by an intravenous connection to The Drudge Report

And now, the News:

Capitol Hill police chased away crowds of men with fresh ten-dollar bills in their hands from the outer doors of the office of the Speaker of the House. Since she refused to admonish Congressman Charlie Rangel, powerful Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, for his ethical lapses there’s a rumor that there isn’t anything so dirty she wouldn’t do it.

Lines formed outside bookstores this morning ahead of the release of Mitt Romney’s new book, “No Apology: The Case for American Greatness.” Sales, however, didn’t seem to reflect the tremendous crowds.

Luther Matthews of Boise, Idaho was interviewed in a Barnes and Noble. “I’m just here to keep warm. I never owned a damn book in my life,” said Matthews.  Sentiment was much the same in Weehauken, New Jersey. “If you bring the cup back every day you get free refills. I found this ‘un in the dumpster out back,” exclaimed Lucy Bonini, also known as the ‘cat lady’. “I liked the pictures in his book,” said Lucy. “I ate some of them.”

Obama economics advisor Larry Summers is quoted today as saying that this Winter’s storms will “distort” forthcoming unemployment figures. Summers went on to describe the distortion using a Victoria’s Secret ad from Cosmopolitan Magazine.

“As winter peaks,” said Summers, making a gesture toward the apogee of the 34-C IPEX, “we must be prepared for a throbbing bulge in unemployment.” Summers hastily added, “Women are likely to be hardest hit because they aren’t strong enough to shovel snow and that means they’ll get stuck inside their apartments, the phone lines go down, they can’t call in, they’re presumed frozen to death and they’re summarily written off the employment roles – in favor of men who were able to lift their cars out of the snowbanks and set them back down on salted streets. Happens all too often,” concluded Summers.

The Supreme Court takes up the case of a Chicago man who wants the right, get this, to own a handgun for personal protection. God help us. Known as the “What part of no don’t you understand?” law, Chicago adopted the ordinance shortly after it was announced that there was no more crime in the Windy City, hence no need for protection of the cold steel type.

Lawyers before the Court today got into a particularly heated exchange with Justice Sotomayor who asked, “Where does the Constitution give some crack-head the right to protect his sorry-ass with a piece?” Plaintiff’s council replied, “Those rights are from God, Justice Sotomayor.” To which Sotomayor responded, “Come on bro’, they didn’t even have guns back then.”

Advertisements

1 Response to “Drudgery March 2, 2010”


  1. March 11, 2010 at 3:00 am

    Mr. Jack Obrien,
    On your news post 3/2j10 you commented about the Supreme Court Case regarding right to carry a gun. “The Supreme Court takes up the case of a Chicago man who wants the right, get this, to own a handgun for personal protection. God help us. Known as the “What part of no don’t you understand?” law, Chicago adopted the ordinance shortly after it was announced that there was no more crime in the Windy City, hence no need for protection of the cold steel type.”

    YOUR INTENTION IS NOT QUITE CLEAR. WERE YOU BEING “TONG IN CHEEK” “SARCASTIC” OR WHAT? YOU WER NOT CLEAR. IT APPEARS THAT YOU WERE CHAMPEONING THE ANTI-GUN POSITION. IT SEEMS IMPOSSIBLE THAT CHICAGO COULD HAVE NO MORE CHRIME, SO THAT WOULD MAKE YOUR COMMENT SEEM TO BE A SARCASTIC STATEMENT. THE WHOLE TONE OF YOUR PARAGRAPH WAS SERIOUS. YOUR COMMENT ABOUT A CRACK-HEAD, AN ADDICT NOT HAVING A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PROTECT HIS SORRY-ASS. OF COURSE HE HAS A RIGHT. THE MAIN, NOT ONLY, REASON FOR THE 2ND AMENDMENT IS FOR THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA TO PROTECT THEMSELVES AGAINST A TOTALITARIAN GOVERNMENT, A FASCIST GOVERNMENT. DID YOU NOT READ THE FEDERALIST PAPERS? WHICH EXPLAINED THE THINKING OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS DURING THE TIMES OF THE CREATION OF THE CONSTITUION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS. WHY DON’T YOU SAY CLEARLY WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO SAY. TAKE A POSITION CLEARLY. NOT TO DO SO INVITES CRITICISM OF MY TYPE.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Cheryl Prater

Managing Director

Another Disclosure

The views expressed on this site are solely mine and do not necessarily reflect those of my clients. Please don't hold them responsible. Momma tried.
Copyright © Applecross Media 2010. The content on this blog are the sole property of the author unless otherwise noted and may not be used or reproduced in any manner unless expressly permitted by owner at cprater.applecross@gmail.com. All Rights Reserved.

%d bloggers like this: