About Me

Name: Garnet92
Location: Plano, TX
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Nancy Pelosi - Resurfacing Again? [Satire]

 (or perhaps it should be pothole repair, overlaying, retreading, etc.?)
 
We had so much fun recently, poking fun at Nancy Pelosi; I just had to give it another go. Considering that she and her band of thugs are politically raping the country, it’s the least we can do in return.

~~~

Dr. Seymour Heine is Nancy’s Reconstructive Surgeon, he specializes in the repair of facial cracks, rutting, sunken trenches and general resurfacing. She now has him on retainer to be immediately available in the event of flaking, crusting, or catastrophic sagging of various facial components.

As required by his malpractice insurance carrier, Dr. Heine takes photos of a patient as they progress through the reconstructive process. Following is Fig. 1, a “before” picture taken last year just prior to Dr. Heine’s extensive reconstructive procedures.
 
Figure 1
 
Fig. 1
 
WARNING: Do not allow the image (Fig. 1) to remain stationary on your PC screen for more than 20 seconds or risk stoppage of your system clock.

Writing in the Journal of Reconstructive Folly, Dr. Heine detailed the procedures that were necessary to bring Mrs. Pelosi’s face up to code. Renovation was so extensive that Dr. Heine was required to secure a building permit.

It was necessary to remove the existing epidermis and flabodermis to a depth of 7 mm (exceptionally deep), and then remove scale, mold, and dermal debris to provide a clean base surface. A tack coat of tar emulsion was applied to aid adhesion for new layer.

Compaction was necessary to smooth out ripples and bumps, followed by multiple layers of a polymer-modified bitumen material. A latex grout was troweled into surface deformations and hairline cracks to facilitate smoothness, durability, and skid resistance.

The following photo (Fig.2) was taken after the temporary scaffolding has been removed from the upper portion of her face. One can detect the sunken appearance of the eyes prior to the procedure to extrude the eyeball out to Mrs. Pelosi’s preferred Marty Feldman-like protrusion.

Figure 2
 
Fig. 2
 
In Fig.2, her new Bondo® nose has not yet been ground down or chiseled, thus the sharp pointy tip. An unfortunate incident delayed the operation when Mrs. Pelosi’s nose accidentally punctured a clipboard being carried by Bertha Venation, an intern recording Dr. Heine’s narrative. The clipboard was rendered useless and two nurse assistants labored for ten minutes to remove the impaled clipboard from Mrs. Pelosi’s pointy proboscis.

In Fig.3, Dr. Heine is shown checking the Speaker’s face to quantify the amount of loose or excessive skin. There appears to be enough epidermal excess to make a toaster cover and some coasters, although Mrs. Pelosi is known to favor human skin lampshades.

Figure 3
 
Fig. 3

Another unusual incident marred an otherwise precision operation when Dr. Heine lost his grip on the Speaker’s excess skin and the elastic-like rebound of the skin to its natural droop caused a flap-flap-flaping sound (not unlike an old roller window-shade) which terrified the doctor’s pet cat “Tummytuck” into convulsions. The cat later cashed in life #3.

Fig.4 represents the final stage in the two-stage procedure. Here the Speaker is displaying the new pulled-back and stapled skin, silicone implants (cheekal, not boobal), temporary stick-on Jolié lips and eyebrow decals. The hair is (obviously) a wig held in place by hook and loop (Velcro®) fasteners to cover the ring of staples holding her facial façade in place.

This is a delicate stage in the reconstruction, and while the Speaker is beginning to look “normal,” various parts of her face are merely tacked in place and could be undone by the release of a vigorous fart.

In Fig. 4, the Speaker’s appendages are shown in their final locations and only the mouthal region remains to be completed. One may notice that the teeth in Fig. 4, appear to be tightly clenched together.

The last of several unfortunate accidents occurred when Eileen Dover, the doctor’s surgical assistant, jumped when Dr. Heine squeezed her left buttock and she squirted too much cyanoacrylate (Krazy Glue) between Mrs. Pelosi’s teeth. As a result, they are fixed in a continuous smile until they can be hydraulically separated.

Mrs. Pelosi is taking nourishment nasally, (she seemed to be adept at snorting). One can certainly see the promise that these substantive cosmetic improvements will bring.

Figure 5 is the “after” picture, taken after the completion of the final procedures and a complete detailing. Cosmetic engineers and facial reconstructionists have been known to work magic, and they certainly did with Mrs. Pelosi. One can hardly recognize Fig. 5 as the same woman as in Fig. 1. Dr. Heine is considered the Michelangelo of California Reconstructive Magicians. He has truly worked a miracle here.

Celebrity gossip has Brad Pitt now wanting to trade Angelina in on an older model – the Speaker. Go figure.
 
 
 
Quite a remarkable job, eh?

Everything went well until a minor (4.0) earthquake hit the San Francisco area and the tremors jiggled her lower lip off – but it’s ok, she has a bumper-to-bumper 12,000 mile warranty.

 
Tags: pelosi   Satire  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (20) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Pelosi or Bin Laden, Who’s The Enemy?

I know, I know, Osama is the founder of Al-Qaeda. He claimed responsibility for the carnage of 9/11 and has been officially branded a terrorist. He’s an undeniably bad guy. But what has he done TO us lately? His inaction has been far less damaging to the United States than Nancy Pelosi’s actions (and absence of action).

Which one is really an enemy?

San Fran Nan, in the face of increasing gasoline prices and the plight of working families, has chosen to thwart all efforts to increase our own production of oil. She has blocked all efforts to even allow a vote. Why? Because she knows she and her minions will lose.

The price of a gallon of gas is only one problem. Our growing dependence on foreign oil is potentially much more serious – MUCH MORE SERIOUS.

Instead of drilling for new oil, she wants to release oil from the strategic preserve. Apparently, she doesn’t understand why the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is there. Let’s look at the meaning of the word “Strategic”: Highly important to an intended objective; Essential to the effective conduct of a war.

Either Rep. Pelosi doesn’t know the definition of the word “strategic” or she thinks that we are in a situation where defending ourselves against $4.00/gal. gasoline is more important than defending ourselves from an supply disruption – whether caused by an aggressor or a natural disaster.

We currently have 727.2 million barrels in reserve (U.S. Dept. of Energy). Our capacity was authorized to be increased to one billion barrels by The Energy Policy Act of 2005. Those one billion barrels were determined to be a reserve in case of war or disruption in the supply of oil – not to temporarily reduce the price at the pump. We’ve tapped the reserve only twice: in 1991, during Desert Storm and again in 2005 (after Katrina) to replace output from shutdown Gulf of Mexico facilities. Each of these drawdowns were for 30-35 million barrels. The current inventory in the SPR would last from 33 days (with no domestic production) to 98 days with continued domestic production – and only supplanting imported oil.

The SPR is insurance, pure and simple. It would allow our economy to survive a serious blow. Reducing our “insurance” exposes the country to dire consequences if the unthinkable occurs. Is Nancy really willing to go “all in” and expose the country to economic disaster? Apparently, politics is more important to Sen. Pelosi.

Drawing down the SPR is the best solution Nancy’s got? Based on her current immovable position, she could be potentially more harmful than Bin Laden.

Let me say that I’m sure if we were attacked, she would change her tune. I’m sure that DEEP down inside she is a patriot. But she is placing the country and our economy at serious risk for purely political reasons.

There aren’t many LESS noble reasons to stonewall any exploration of domestic oil – and for that unyielding position, I believe her to be currently more dangerous to the country than Bin Laden.
 
Tags: pelosi  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (7) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama, Pelosi, and Reid … Oh My

No way Jose, not gonna drill in ANWR, not gonna drill offshore. We need to be investing in alternative sources. Isn’t that pretty much it? The democrat’s answer to $4.00 (and rising) gas prices?

So that means that the United States is “satisfied” to keep our oil production static – no need to increase production? In the face of becoming more and more dependent on foreign oil each year – that’s ok? Continuing to send billions of our dollars out of the U.S., some to countries that aren’t our friends, is ok? No real benefit to becoming more energy independent is there?

The dems tell us that solar, wind, wave, thermal, hydrogen, and the energy source de jour will replace petroleum as our primary source for home heating and transportation. They tell us that even if we did start drilling in currently prohibited areas, we wouldn’t see an appreciable impact for ten years – the implication being, that ten years is so far in the future, it’s futile to begin today.

If you believe that, I’ve got a magic rock that can predict lottery numbers – I’ll be happy to sell it to the highest bidder. Anyone who believes the crap coming from Obama, Pelosi, and Reid (OPR) is a genuine prospect for my rock.

It’s extremely unlikely that any of the “alternative” energy sources will be mature enough in ten years to take over the non-transportation uses of petroleum (home heating, jet fuel, asphalt, lubricants, and kerosene). And we can't forget the other countless consumer products that aren't widely recognized as being petroleum derived. For example, solvents used in paints and ink, paraffin wax used in candles, cosmetics, and candy, roofing materials, detergents, film, pesticides, and more - the uses are seemingly endless.

Of course, we still have to figure out how to make asphalt from a summer breeze or paint solvents from sunshine. The point is: oil is here to stay. We can (and should) begin to transition to some other main source of vehicle power and home heating, but it will take time and we must consider the interim. During those interim years, I don’t think that U.S. citizens will be willing to sit still for continually increasing gasoline prices – to what? $8-10/gal.? And worse, if a belligerent act or natural disaster stops the flow of oil into the U.S., what then? How many of you remember rationing?

Unfortunately, OPR is right about one thing, their perception of the voters – the vast majority of voters are so clueless that they’ll accept whatever OPR tells them without question. These obstructionists have been able to thwart drilling in any new areas for years. The majority of voters weren’t concerned. But that was then, this is now. As gasoline prices hit the $4.00/gal. mark, the populace is beginning to wake up and speak. Polls show they’re saying “do something.” Those same polls show that people are ready to drill in the previously prohibited areas. We can also predict that the polls will remain linked to the price at the pump. The higher prices go, the more difficult time OPR will have holding fast. I believe that they know that they’re on shaky ground and the pressure to drill will increase right along with any rises in gasoline prices.
 
And this just in from an RCP contributor, David Harsanyi on July 18, 2008:

"On the bright side, it seems that reality is beginning to overtake fantasy. This week, Newt Gingrich's American Solutions for Winning the Future group delivered 1.3 million signatures to Congress, demanding that Washington allow more drilling. A recent Zogby International poll shows 74 percent of likely voters support offshore drilling in U.S. coastal waters, and 59 percent favor drilling for oil in the tundra of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge."

Make no mistake about the OPR’s positions. They are not stupid – true, they’re acting stupid, but they know exactly what they’re doing. They’re gambling. Gambling that they can hold on, and not allow any action by George Bush and the republicans to result in a positive result. This is 100% politics. Gaining (and retaining) power is more important than any effect on the population, on our economy, or on the security of this nation.

Here’s a thought, since OPR don’t believe that we really need the oil resident in ANWR or offshore anyway, why not drill it and sell it to the Chinese. That would aid in our trade imbalance with China, wouldn’t it? And we don’t really need it, do we?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Gasoline Games

Speaker Pelosi said calls to drill in protected, sensitive areas is "a hoax" perpetrated by Republicans and the Bush administration. "This call for drilling in areas that are protected is a hoax, it's an absolute hoax on the part of the Republicans and this administration," Pelosi said. "It's a decoy to punt your attention away from the fact that their policies have produced $4-a-gallon gasoline."

Their policies?”

 How asinine is that? The democrats (led by the environmental wackos) have prevented any drilling in the name of “protecting” these sensitive natural areas from being despoiled, and now they’re trying to blame republicans for the problem? Those preventing us from drilling are putting the U.S. economy in peril. If if weren't so dangerous, it'd be ludicrous.  

Here’s a fact that everyone should know: the area proposed for drilling in ANWR is 31 sq. miles, only slightly larger than the area of the Dallas/Ft. Worth Airport (DFW), (29 sq. miles). For this, we put our country’s security at risk? For this, we allow ourselves to be held hostage to rising prices?

The United States is in a precarious position. There are two extremely important points relating to our oil supply:
  • Suppose Iran sinks a ship in the Gulf of Harmouz, blocking the passage of oil tankers? What will happen here? And when the Strategic Petroleum Reserve runs out an estimated 33 days later?
  • If the supply is cut and we must ration, you won’t be able to get an unlimited supply even if you can afford higher prices.

Right now we’re complaining about $4.00/gal. for an unlimited supply of gas. If gasoline is rationed, we will welcome the opportunity to pay $8.00/gal. for “black-market” gas if we could get it. Gasoline rationing could become a reality if something happens in the Gulf of Harmouz to halt the flow of crude. When rationing comes, even the affluent will be affected; it doesn’t matter that you can afford it if there’s none to be had.

Rationing is not a “doomsday” scenario – it’s already happened. If you’re younger than mid 50's, you probably don’t remember any personal discomfort, you were too young. But coming from one who experienced it, a colonoscopy is more fun.

But in 1973, OPEC instituted an oil embargo. Because suppliers were limited in their stocks, gas stations were also limited in the amount of gas they could sell. They either limited individuals to 10 gallons at a time or let everyone fill up and just closed the station when the day’s supply ran out. And you didn’t just stop at a station and pump your gas – chances are that you had to get in line. And the queues were long waiting to get your gas – waiting an hour to pump 10 gallons wasn’t unusual. Seeing a sign at a station indicating that they were “Out of Gas” was a frequent sight.

And this just in: VIENNA:Published: July 10, 2008, The head of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries warned Thursday that oil prices would see an "unlimited" increase in the case of a military conflict involving Iran, because the group's members would be unable to make up the lost production. "We really cannot replace Iran's production - it's not feasible to replace it," Abdalla Salem El-Badri, the OPEC secretary general, said during an interview.

Further price increases and/or shortages are one incident away. Every time that loon Ahmadinejad frowns, prices go up. We are at his mercy. It could happen again.

DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »