Project Wonderful Banner

Tuesday, January 06, 2009

That damned Michele Obama

What's Mallard raving about today?

Michele Obama, The Clintons.

Nothing, and I mean nothing, is more indicative of the complete intellectual bankruptcy of the Conservative movement than their continuing obsession with a blow job from 1996.

And, yes, I am avoiding discussion of whatever sort of harpy that is supposed to be.

27 comments:

exanonymous said...

Breaking news from FOX:

Clinton got a blowjob from someone who wasn't his wife!

I have to laugh when this is brought up. Not because I think cheating on your wife and lying in court is funny, but because it makes me think that some conservatives are a little jealous. I don't have the link, but it wasn't THAT long ago Mallard was excusing toe-tapping.

dlauthor said...

Naturally, today Tinshley accidentally drew a decent caricature of Blagojevich Hair (albeit as part of a weird hybrid with Lucy Van Pelt on a sort-of-dun-colored Nancy Reagan).

Maybe tomorrow he'll draw Al Franken and he'll look like Michelle Obama.

Rootbeer said...

The Tinz has now been leaning on the "New Year's Predictions" trope for over two weeks.

Expect the wave of predictions to finally subside in late May or early June.

rewinn said...

Clinton: peace, prosperity, a balanced budget. Maybe oversexed but we knew that when we elected him (remember Jennifer Flowers?) Left office infinitely more popular that Bush.

Obama: not terribly worried about being compared to Clinton.

Conservatives: definitely jealous.
Mallard Fillmore: fail.

Anonymous said...

You commie faggots dont realize that the half-breed Obama is just like Clinton and your stupid if you dont understand hes corrupt and Michele will be worse then Hillary and whitewater blue dress blarrgh i cant find my pills

Squid Vicious said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Squid Vicious said...

Perhaps Tinkl...er...Anonymous should lay off the pills a little bit, his incoherence is becoming incoherent.

Squid Vicious said...

Presumably, Tinkley would conclude that if Obama had made his cabinet look more like JFK's (i.e., full of old white guys), Michelle would have to dig up Marilyn Monroe and spread her remains to the four corners of the earth, so as to prevent her from coming back to life and seducing Barack.

Anonymous said...

I had no idea that Obama was married to The Joker, circa 1980s. The true tragedy of this Administration is going to be when Michelle Obama beats Joe Biden to death with a crowbar, then gets appointed as Iran's ambassador to the UN so that Batman can't bring her to justice for it.
Actually, that's not to far off from wingnut talking points. Who knew that 30 year comics and 12 year old sex acts were the cornerstone to right wing ideology?

Michael said...

Anon #2, you're forgetting the other cornerstone: the 30 year sex act of Republicans fellating Ronald Reagan.

Factinista said...

Barack Obama's married to Condoleezza Rice?

Michael said...

Her interview questions will be:
- "Ever dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?"
- "The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules. And tonight you're gonna break your one rule."
- "Want to see a trick? I'm gonna make this presidential pencil disappear!"

Marion Delgado said...

Mallards accuracy is as per usual.

She was only technically a "White House intern" - she was at the Pentagon, which is how Linda Tripp managed to worm her way into her confidences. But a technicality lets them pretend she was going to the White House every day, and imagine maybe she was, like 18, and Clinton was hitting on all the interns there like Warren Beatty on a babysitter.

They got to know each other after serial philanderer Newt Gingrich closed down the government. In a sense, Clinton and Lewinski were both off the clock with nothing to do, and the Devil made work for their idle hands.

Marion Delgado said...

As a licensed harpiologist, I believe that's a Western Greater Harpy. They're only found in the four Stroggyli Islands in the South Agean Sea.

Patrick said...

I've never understood why I was supposed to care who the president was having sex with. Seems like something that was pretty much his own business.

MartyRotten said...

Is that Michelle Obama or Jack Nicholson? It's kind of hard to tell.

Anonymous said...

Patrick...
Clinton lied to a grand jury. That happens to be against the law in this country and if you or I did it we would be behind bars. Understand??

Anonymous said...

How Obama got elected. I would bet many of the Duck and Cover followers were part of this poll. Watch the video, you just may be on tape making the news and an ass of yourselves. Of course you do the later on a daily basis. You certainly should be proud. Obama and the country are now in deep shit. The man does not have a clue.

rewinn said...

"...I've never understood why I was supposed to care who the president was having sex with...

Men who obsess about another man's sex with a consenting adult have "issues".

Those are the only "issues" the GOP thought it could win with, so that's what they went with.

And the corporation media loved the issue, not just because it sold a lot of airtime, but because it crippled Clinton's last could of years in the White House and doomed Gore's run. The corporations that own the corporate media profited more from the Bush regime than from all their entertainment programming put together.

I suppose Tinkley, with today's strip, is just hoping to get on the GOP/corporate gravy train.

Anonymous said...

Rewinn
See Anon's explanation to Patrick.

You are the one with the sex "issues", the person who is always worried that Mallard, a cartoon duck, does not wear pants. And that BT draws "penis" chins.

I guess we know why you are retired and hang around this blog all day...another out of work "hack lawyer".

rewinn said...

Marion makes a pretty interesting point about why the consenting adult female is always referred to as an "intern".

Lewinsky was born in 1973, meaning she had been an adult for several years before her consensual hook-up with Clinton. Yet somehow GOPpies have this image of her as a hapless "intern", a victim, vulnerable when in fact she was a woman old enough to have (hypothetically) not only served in combat but to have completed multiple combat tours in Iraq ... if she'd been unlucky enough to be in the Guard during Bush's term.

And ... somehow we're supposed to care; today's strip just doesn't work unless we care about sex in the 1990s. I suppose if you haven't HAD sex since the 1990s, you might still care about Monica.

Mallard Fillmore is as timely as Beetle Bailey, only not as funny.

GeoX said...

Aw man, that link of Tinzey's is awesome. The basic point: most Obama voters hadn't heard of/didn't care about various right-wing talking points about the man! Shocking! A few that the article missed:

91% were unaware that he PALS AROUND WITH TERRORISTS and EATS BABIES!!!!11

94% were unaware that he plans to ban ADORABLE PUPPIES and DELICIOUS ICE CREAM!!!!!1

A stunning 98% did not know that he plans to CHANGE AMERICA'S NAME TO TERRORSTAN and FORCE US TO WORSHIP ALLAH!!!!!!!!111111eleventyone

Seriously, Tinz, could you possibly be any more of a joke?

GeoX said...

Also, this is good:

Of course you do the later on a daily basis.

Not quite on a daily basis, but you'd better believe that whenever I'm in a nightclub with a few drinks in me, I'll be doin' The Later all night long! It's the new dance sensation that's sweeping the nation! Oh yeah!

exanonymous said...

Jealousy:

Democrats, who are usually more tolerant of homosexuality, and say they are straight, have turned out to be (behind closed doors when no one's looking): straight.

It's something Foley and Craig probably wish they could claim.

Marion Delgado said...

Bruce 8:21, 8:25 and 8:53:

Clinton did not lie to a grand jury.

A partisan hack judge specifically defined the terms of the questions he answered, and emphasized a very narrow definition of sexual relations in particular, and his answers were ACCURATE and TRUTHFUL within the terms the judge herself insisted on. When her collusion with the prosecution (remember that Paula Jones eventually lost virtually everything on the merits - no evidence of him harassing her, discriminating against her, etc. - and that Clinton settled with her for a trifling sum just to make the publicity go away) in a perjury trap failed, she ruled Scalia-like that it had worked anyway. She should have been impeached and disbarred.

There was no grand jury. The Paula Jones case (remember her? see above) was a civil case. The partisan hack Supreme Court that later put Bush in as president against the results of the election ruled that a minor and ultimately unsuccessful civil suit took priority over the presidency.

The impeachment was, as all impeachments are, a political process of the House and Senate.

And Mallard is full of fail.

WV: "thote" as in "Mallard thote he thote, but he misthote"

Squid Vicious said...

Oh Lord, please save us from the giant black hole of ignorance that Anonymous (#1) continues to construct every time he posts here. To whit:

"Clinton lied to a grand jury. That happens to be against the law in this country and if you or I did it we would be behind bars. Understand??"

This is, of course, demonstrably false. While it is true to say that, "Clinton was impeached for lying to a grand jury," that statement has no legal significance without knowing the result of that impeachment.

As those of use who are not Anonymous (#1) know, impeachment is analogous to indictment in a criminal court. As those of us who are not Anonymous (#1) know, after a criminal indictment or an impeachment there is a trial to determine the guilt of the indicted/impeached party.

In Clinton's case, the House of Representatives impeached Clinton on one count of perjury and one count of obstruction of justice pursuant to their impeachment power in Article 1, Section 2. The Senate then held a trial pursuant to their Article 1, Section 3 power and found Clinton not guilty on both counts.

So, to clarify for Anonymous (#1), while it is illegal to commit perjury in the United States, you actually need to be convicted of perjury to be guilty of breaking the law.

Marion Delgado said...

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-clintonperjury.html


In 1994, Paula Jones filed a lawsuit against Bill Clinton, claiming that he had sexually harassed her three years earlier. The Paula Jones case led to a deposition in January 1998, in which the Jones lawyers questioned witnesses about possible sexual activity and sexual harassment involving Bill Clinton. Clinton himself testified before the deposition on January 17, 1998. During this deposition, he denied having "sexual relations" with Monica Lewinsky, as the court defined the term. His answers convinced his enemies that he had committed perjury. Because Vernon Jordan was involved in both the Whitewater scandal and a job search for Ms. Lewinsky, Ken Starr expanded his Whitewater investigation into the Monica Lewinsky affair. On April 1, 1998, Judge Susan Webber Wright threw out the Jones case, arguing that even if the charges were true, they did not constitute sexual harassment. However, Ken Starr held a Grand Jury hearing on August 17, 1998, in which Bill Clinton was questioned about alleged perjury in his deposition testimony. Clinton's enemies thought his answers in this second round of testimony produced new examples of perjury, and both his testimonies were presented in the Starr Report as grounds for impeachment.


Every time Wingnuttia forces us to revisit that era, we can see how scurrilous the denizens thereof are.