Friday Funnies: Spying and the Senate


Spying and the Senate

NEXT: Brickbat: Welcome to the Herd

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Inaccurate. I don’t think the Senate could get Obama to express its anal gland. Other way around.

    1. Disturbing. However, who *is* the anal gland of the Senate? Barrasso, Corker, Crapo, and Schatz are obvious candidates; but Biden may be a more appropriate choice.

      1. I was going to say Schumer, but I realized he is the moobs of the Senate.

        1. I’m going with Feinstein.

          1. I thought the commentariat had agreed it’s now “Feinstain”.

            1. Cutesy names just make you sound like a petulant prog whining about Bushitler.

              “Feinstein” has made her actual name into a more than sufficient insult all on its own.

              1. Concur. For an extreme example, see Old Mexican’s tiresome “insults”

              2. You have a point, but….

                How many silly, insulting names did bush inspire? Half a dozen maybe?

                It is interesting to me that Obama has inspired so many more and likely holds the all-time record. Hell, a list of them would be as voluminous as a mid-sized city’s phone book.

                Along with his signature legislation I see that as part of his legacy.

                As for the other half-wits, well, it is kinda fun making up names.

                1. As for the other half-wits, well, it is kinda fun making up names.

                  It’s not that I disagree with the occasional punny or insulting name so much as the compulsion to use the same one (or a limited set) over and over again.

                  Puns have the shortest have-life of all humor. They cease to be funny after the second or third repetition, positively moribund after a few dozen, and under constant use start to sound like the illiterate guffaw of the mentally deficient.

            2. Concur. With all due respect, it’s “Feinstein”.

              She’s worked hard for that title.

                1. Making up great names for people like “Feinstain” may make you sound like a petulant prog whining about “Bushitler”, but that may mean those jabs are hitting the progs in the jaw…

                  They live by making mockeries of their opponents! See Sarah Palin, “Palin’s Buttplug” or anything they’ve directed at any other Republican female for the past six years. If we can make people like Feinstein look ridiculous in people’s eyes using the same tactics, why wouldn’t we?

                  Besides, some of these targets are irresistible. What, am I supposed to stop calling calling Liz Warren things like “Sitting Liz”, “Spitting Bull”, “Lie-a-watha”, or, my personal favorite, “Granny Cheekbones”?

                  The progs use that shit because it works! Not with logic-infused, principled libertarians, no, but guess what? The world isn’t exactly full of logic-infused, principled libertarians…unfortunately.

                  1. I have to agree. you didn’t build that. the progs who take credit for road construction did. and if Hitlery Clixon doesn’t like it, tough saggy bitch titties.

  2. The melty-faced guy from Raiders of the Lost Arc attended the Culinary Institute of America? But… but… it wasn’t founded until 1946.

    1. Actually, I think they were looking for the Lost Radius, not the Lost Arc.

      1. you mean those wings on top of the box weren’t a giant arc lamp?

  3. Obama’s yellow latex-clad erection is going something furious. …I have never seen anything quite like it. The only weirder thing I have ever seen was a dude’s johnson going ’round in a helicopter fashion.

  4. All credit to Bok, he captured Obama’s look of dog-induced sensual pleasure quite well

  5. What in the fucking hell is that tube thing on the mole man’s head?

    1. That’s a backhand, attached to the spine at the base of the neck. It’s a deformity among sinister people that leads to the derogitory ‘backhanded’. It’s less commong among dexter people.

    2. I thought it was a set of buttocks on a plate,

  6. I have no idea what message this is trying to convey. Is it that the Senate is the President’s lapdog (OK) and that the President doesn’t care if his lapdog gets spied on?

      1. and, yet, also no and no

    1. No, no, NO! The President’s eyes are *closed*! He doesn’t *know* his lapdog is being spied on!

      1. Not until he reads it in the paper the next day.

      2. Actually, shouldn’t the CIA be a puppet with the President’s hand up it’s ass?

        1. “its”
          Jesus, need coffee.

        2. Could the *CIA* get Obama to express its anal gland?

      3. I assumed that it was a deliberate closing of eyes.

        I think Bok fails here because the dog looks actually mad. The Senate is going to do precisely jack and shit about this.

        1. The Senate is going to do precisely jack and shit about this.

          Just you wait, NK. Ol’ Di seemed pretty pissed.

          OTOH, covering it up could very well be a Matter of National Security with a Compelling Government Interest.

          1. Oh yeah she’s so pissed I am sure she may even find it in her to blame a Republican or two.

            1. I am sure she may even find it in her to blame a Republican or two.

              It’s all BOOOOOSH’S fault.

              Actually I’m surprised she hasn’t already fallen back on that. Afterall, the Senate committee was investigating the CIA’s use of torture during his presidency.

        2. If it’s one of those little high-strong dogs that are all bark and no bite, then it’s the perfect metaphor for the Senate.

          1. man have you ever been bit by a Chihuahua? that shit hurts.

            1. If you’ve allowed yourself to get bitten by a Chihuahua you deserve the discomfort. Normal people just kick them away.

              1. They swarm like the little ratdogs that they are.

              2. they’re sneaky bastards. the one literally bit my heel when I walked away.

  7. “See, this is the dog talkin’ now…”

  8. I…I don’t….I don’t get it. And yet, I know it is awful. And, therefore, perfect.

    Happy Friday, Reasonoids. I got yer labels – RIGHT HERE!

    1. Happy Friday! Between work and comment squirrels this week sucked. My current goal is to drink away the memory. Someone start the drinking game, please.

      1. Very well.

        We didn’t have these posting problems when Virginia Postrel was in charge.

      2. You need a game to drink?

  9. If the dog is angry, why is it wagging its tail?

    1. The asses of the Senate are blistfully happy to be on the king’s lap… balls to balls, you might say. While those with eyes want their privacy.

      The king is sleeping, dreaming of flying off to his next 18 battle war. Either that or he’s mid orgasm.

      How’s that for a load of Friday BS?

  10. Why can’t Robert DogNiro remember one of his most famous lines from a movie?

  11. If that thing sticking out of the back of the pig… i mean dog.. is supposed to be a tail…. Dogs don’t wag their tail when they growl, do they?

    1. It could be that the dog has four tails with which to wag itself. But that would be too complex.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.