Fun with politics and news! Covering Lol Politics and Lol News. Breaking news — lol-style.
Lolcats
Loldogs
Celebs
Look-Alikes
News
Sports
Graphs
Nostalgia
FAIL Blog
Engrish
Store
  
 

« Previous | Next »

Used to be me



Obama pictures and McCain pictures

Used to be me, Shoulda been me. That Michelle is hawt.

(President Bill Clinton, Senator Hillary Clinton, President George H. W. Bush)

picture: dunno source, via our lol builder. lol caption: NObama08

» Recaption This

» See All Captions

Incorrect source or offensive?
News to make you lol. DiggThis
Reddit
Stumble
Facebook

Add this to your blog:
(Copy & paste code)

You May Like:

This funny political picture was posted on Thursday, January 22nd, 2009 at 1:00 pm.

» 209 Comments

Leave a comment
  1. AntiFester says:
    January 22, 2009 at 1:03 pm

    Eleventy-third!

    Reply
    • Miss Manners says:
      January 22, 2009 at 4:14 pm

      Technically, the caption ought to omit “President” from before the names of Clinton and Bush. Neither of them are President any more.
      Check out the most recent Miss Manners column for details.

      Reply
      • Scum says:
        January 22, 2009 at 7:51 pm

        Perhaps you should stick to explaining under which circumstances it is deemed appropriate table etiquette for me to wash my balls in the finger bowl.

        Former Presidents of the United States of America, are still referred to by the title President.

        Reply
        • Uncle Fester says:
          January 23, 2009 at 2:54 am

          due to an oversight in the wording of the laws… It’s always amused me…

          In the civilised world, when you stop being Prime Minister you go back to being plain old who ever you were…

          Reply
          • PortlandMark says:
            January 23, 2009 at 5:59 am

            I’m not really well versed in the parliamentary system, so forgive the ignorance: is a PM actually an elected position? I thought it was more like our House and Senate leaders: a position determined by a vote of the legislative bodies, not the population at large. This would account for the difference, imo.

            Reply
            • purple switch says:
              January 23, 2009 at 7:27 am

              Here in the UK, the PM is the member elected by the ruling party to lead them. So it’s a lot like a house/senate leader, except that they are the executive. When the population at large vote for a party at a general election, they know who will lead each party, and that vote is often seen as a vote for that leader as much as a vote for the party.
              Local government is elected sepatately, and MP’s (the local representative to the governement) are elected separately to local councils.
              In other news, British government is overly complicated and in need of refrm.

              Reply
              • purple switch says:
                January 23, 2009 at 7:28 am

                In further news, my words are mistyped and in need of vowels.

                Reply
              • Uncle Fester says:
                January 23, 2009 at 8:46 am

                In need of reform… perhaps. Looking at the dog’s dinner that everyother country seems to make, I quite like our creaky old system, that mostly halts the excesses of govt, although the extension of power of DSS to be able to searchh ‘privileged information’ without warrant or court order, was an invitation to abuse of power, and couple of other odds and ends… Dangerous Dogs act, the hand gun restrictions that put us on a par with New york for hoops to jump through to hold one, etc…Only thing that gladdens my old, blackened heart fully is the current fetish for cameras. Oh, I love that. They long passed the ability to use them in real time…

                Reply
                • purple switch says:
                  January 23, 2009 at 1:51 pm

                  Most of what we have works well because intelligent, reasonable people have spent a lot of time coming up with it. And the judicial branch is generally pretty impartial.
                  If you’re looking for a poster boy for bad new laws, surely it’s the Serious and Organised Crime Act. There are definitely some issues there.
                  More than anything else, I’d like us to adopt PR. Yeah, I vote Lib Dem, and yeah, I’m pissed my vote means so little.

                  Reply
                  • Uncle Fester says:
                    January 23, 2009 at 1:56 pm

                    Knowing the rampaging incompetents we seem to elect, I’d sooner not have them fiddle.
                    Says a lot when they want to introduce PR only in areas where first past the post ‘favours’ the BNP.

                    Reply
            • Scott says:
              January 23, 2009 at 8:38 am

              You are VERY well versed there. I used to live in the UK before moving to the US and that’s a distinction I may not have come up with. Good point :)

              It’s interesting – in a political system that claims to mistrust power and holding onto it for too long that we still show a lot of respect to former Presidents. I like it.

              Reply
      • GT says:
        January 22, 2009 at 9:47 pm

        All Presidents, present and past, are reffered to as “President.” And I think it’s quite appropriate to wash your balls in the finger bowl. Makes perfect sense to me.

        Reply
        • PortlandMark says:
          January 23, 2009 at 6:01 am

          Correction: FINGERS are washed in the finger bowl. Balls are properly washed in the kitchen, with the aid of a stiff brush and a vigorous maid.

          Or, you could bring clean balls with you, which I recommend. (It only takes one experience with the brush to convince a man!)

          Reply
          • purple switch says:
            January 23, 2009 at 7:23 am

            On the flip side, it only takes one experience with a ‘vigorous maid’ to convince a man the risk is woth it.

            Reply
      • Aidan says:
        January 23, 2009 at 3:48 pm

        Miss Manners:

        Love the Miss Manners syndication. But I hate to correct you/her. Protocol is not decided by journalists.

        According to long accepted protocol, a person is referred to by the highest title to which they are elected. Once a President, always President. It is acceptable, though not required to add a qualifier — a newspaper might identify Former-President Clinton. But introducing him he would be President Clinton and addressing him, Mr. President.

        Reply
        • rhorho says:
          January 23, 2009 at 3:56 pm

          The same is true for military rank. The person with the rank usually
          designates that s/he is retired, but it’s not necessary.

          Reply
        • Uncle Fester says:
          January 24, 2009 at 9:51 am

          Not universally. Baroness Thatcher was, until she was granted a life peerage, Mrs Thatcher, not the Right Honourable Margaret Thatcher, nor Prime Minister Thatcher. Mrs Thatcher. That was it.

          Reply
  2. AntiFester says:
    January 22, 2009 at 1:03 pm

    NOW you can troll on me!

    Reply
  3. g-money says:
    January 22, 2009 at 1:06 pm

    Dude, that’s hilarious!

    Reply
  4. Alex says:
    January 22, 2009 at 1:07 pm

    Bill Clinton horny jokes… they will never not be funny, even as another new president takes office. Good times, good times.

    Reply
  5. wimple says:
    January 22, 2009 at 1:16 pm

    Nailed it!

    Reply
  6. rhorho says:
    January 22, 2009 at 1:20 pm

    Looks like somebody took care of the skip in NObama08’s record.

    This one shows a knowledge of the classic comedic Rule of Three, even…

    Reply
  7. Jesseh says:
    January 22, 2009 at 1:21 pm

    For a second I thought Hilary had Bill’s thought bubble D:

    Reply
  8. Hell Hath No Fury says:
    January 22, 2009 at 2:58 pm

    Bill Clinton…speaking TRUTH?! The ground just got colder…..

    Reply
    • Uncle Fester says:
      January 22, 2009 at 3:53 pm

      Bell curve… has far end… nuff said

      Reply
    • Czernobog says:
      January 22, 2009 at 4:08 pm

      That’s a thought bubble, my ma.. my person.

      Reply
    • Paul says:
      January 22, 2009 at 7:56 pm

      Er, it’s pretty hard to have failed to notice that Bill Clinton was among the most honest Presidents of the past 50 years.

      He lied about his affair. Probably the first man to ever do that, right?
      About things in general, he was FAR more honest than either of the President Bushes, President Reagan, and probably Presidents Kennedy and Johnson. Perhaps less so than Ford or Carter, but overall, Bill Clinton’s record of honesty is quite good.

      You know, you don’t really have to repeat everything the media tell you to say.

      Reply
      • froofrou says:
        January 22, 2009 at 8:12 pm

        I think you’re speaking a little out of turn about the presidents of the past being less honest than Bill. We have no way of knowing that because we have no way of knowing what every president deals with when their feet hit the ground every morning. It is the nature of the job to have some (actually a lot) of secrecy around a LOT of areas, and lying about what is happening is the only way a president can retain the security of the nation. In a smaller part, the security and well-being of residents OF that nation.
        -
        As was brought up on a recent thread about torture, when you do something once, it becomes easier to do it a second, third, and fourth time, ad infinitum. If Bill Clinton could ‘look the American people in the eye’ and lie to their faces, then I guarantee you that he was lying about more than just that.

        Reply
        • Uncle Fester says:
          January 23, 2009 at 3:07 am

          All politicians lie. It’s why they get elected.

          Reply
          • froofrou says:
            January 23, 2009 at 3:09 am

            I agree. That’s why it’s ludicrous to put one politician’s record on truth up against another’s. It’s like comparing mass murderers and their killing techniques.

            Reply
            • Uncle Fester says:
              January 23, 2009 at 3:16 am

              No, then you’re looking at the style they used to carry it out… :twisted:

              you’re up very late/very early?

              Little un still off colour?

              Reply
              • froofrou says:
                January 23, 2009 at 7:52 am

                LOL, a little. I’m trying to come up with a good apples to apples comparison for you, but I’m drawing a blank. Since this IS the 3rd sign of the Apocalypse (us agreeing), then I’m sure no more need be said. You understand the spirit of what I meant :-)

                Reply
            • Paul says:
              January 23, 2009 at 6:39 am

              Again, I could not disagree more, and I think it’s terribly naive to say this. It is true that “all politicians lie”, but it’s also completely irrelevant. All _people_ lie. That doesn’t mean we’re all equally honest.

              There are, in fact, dramatic and obvious differences among politicians with respect to their honesty. I went through that “they’re all liars” stage quite a few years ago. I know, it makes people feel like they’re sophisticated and worldly to say things like “all politicians are the same, they’d say anything to get elected”, but it’s not. Teen-agers say it, and so does the drunk in the corner bar who doesn’t know Afghanistan from Albuquerque. It takes no sophistication whatsoever to whine that all politicians are liars. It does take some to question the conventional wisdom and point out that some politicians are considerably more honest than others.

              Reply
          • purple switch says:
            January 23, 2009 at 7:16 am

            “It’s how they get elected”
            Fixed.

            Also, it’s important to be willing to choose between bad and worse (unles you want to become a revoultionary). If you just opt out of the democratic process, you’re giving silent consent for the government to do what the hell it likes. That’s the nature of democracy; if you don’t vote you’re complicit.

            Reply
            • Uncle Fester says:
              January 23, 2009 at 8:13 am

              No, I meant ‘why’, which is why I said ‘why’ and not ‘how’… you choose the lies you like and best match the things you’d like to happen. Some may, a lot won’t, realise this, and the politico KNOWS that it’s all expedient sounds to get their arse into power.

              The promise of a politico, as I’ve said before, like a hooker telling you that you’re the best she’s ever had… it makes you feel good to hear it, but you’re mad if you’d bank on that…

              And as I have ALSO said before, in a democracy, you vote for the lies you like. If you don’t vote, then there’s a 50-50 chance of someone actually voting for the lies you like and them getting power… in the end an individual vote makes little difference, but the whole myth of ‘democratic process’ makes that statement somewhat heretical. I tend to vote for the lies I like. I don’t expect any of them. For the record, I liked Gov Bush’s lies in 1999, the ones where he was going to pull back the ‘policeman of the world’ role… that was a nice lie. Never happened, but I liked the lie.

              Reply
              • purple switch says:
                January 23, 2009 at 2:07 pm

                Yeah, I don’t vote for the lies I like. I vote for the guy who seems like he’s least likely to do what I don’t want to happen. Largely because of his already nvested political capital that can’t be written off.
                I think we men the same thing… ‘why’ they are elected as opposed to ‘how’ they get themselves elected. It just read weird to me, not trying to be an asshole.
                Democracy does work. It just doesn’t mean what people think it does. It always results in people getting the kind of government they deserve, one representative of themselves. It’s just that most people are lazy, inept and dishonest.

                Reply
              • Danbala says:
                January 24, 2009 at 1:17 pm

                I thought people, when elections are about persons, also tend to vote for the taller one, the one more often considered “handsome”, etc? :/

                Reply
        • Paul says:
          January 23, 2009 at 6:25 am

          I do not agree.

          Obviously as you and others here said, all Presidents (and in fact all politicians) lie. So do all of the rest of us, of course. I’m quite sure that Clinton lied about his affair with Lewinsky, and I’m quite sure that he lied about quite a bit of other stuff as well, including, as you pointed out, things that he had to lie about in order to maintain appropriate security.

          But I’m not talking about any of that. I’m talking about basic day-to-day ways of talking about the things that we all think about, and the things that make up most of the political controversies. The fact of the matter is that with respect to those kinds of things – abortion, welfare and the nature of opportunity in the U.S., religion, evolution, and so on, Clinton was consistently far more honest than either of the Bushes or Reagan. No comparison.

          I’m not interested in pretending that everyone is equal or in playing political correctness games. The fact is that there are real, important differences among politicians with respect to their basic honesty (and in many other respects). As you pointed out, when you lie once, it becomes easier to do it again and again, so eventually the anti-abortion rights folks can look you right in the eye and claim that they’re just “defending life”, and the creationists can look you right in the eye and claim that they’re pushing for stronger science standards, and the anti-gay folks can look you right in the eye and claim that they’re “defending marriage”. No matter how much the media want to play along, I’m not going to pretend to believe any of that bullshit.

          The Republican party would do well to make the tough decision to abandon the religious right and let those little liars fend for themselves. The Republicans do have some strong positive positions, notably on things like the need to clean up illegal immigration and the need to be more judicious about this bailout money. But as long as they’ve tied themselves so tightly to the persistent liars who make up the religious right, I could never vote Republican.

          Reply
        • Paul says:
          January 23, 2009 at 6:49 am

          I’m quite sure that President Clinton lied about things other than his affair with Lewinsky. I agree that lying about some things is in the nature of the position, in the interest of national security.

          I didn’t say that President Clinton didn’t lie, but rather than he was overall far more honest than either of the Bushes or Reagan, and possibly more honest than others. Your counterargument in fact misses the point. If it’s in the nature of the job, then that kind of dishonesty was there for all of the Presidents (at least the fairly recent ones, which was the extent of my list), and therefore has nothing to do with the relative honesty of recent past Presidents.

          But it’s quite possible to lie about other things, and of course by hitching their wagons to the religious right, the Bushes and Reagan put themselves in a position that required quite a bit more lying than is required of other politicians, including President Clinton. As you pointed out, when you lie once, it becomes easier and easier to keep lying. It’s even easier when your supporters back up your lies, and particularly when the major media have agreed to treat your lies as off-limits to critique.

          Now I recognize that the situation with respect to the elder Bush (41) is quite a bit different from that of his son or of Reagan, and perhaps I should not claim that Clinton was more honest than Bush 41. But I’m not at all interested in pretending that all Presidents are the same. They’re not.

          Reply
          • Uncle Fester says:
            January 23, 2009 at 8:16 am

            So a brown rat is less of an evil companion than a black rat, but they’re both nasty house guests…

            Reply
            • purple switch says:
              January 23, 2009 at 2:59 pm

              Jubal Harshaw said it best… the choice between bad and worse is a lot more emphatic than good and better. If things are already screwed up, we should at least try to make the best of it. If we all sit back and just capitulate, then it’s certainly not going to get any better.

              Reply
        • Hell Hath No Fury says:
          January 23, 2009 at 6:21 pm

          omg *has coronary attck and falls over*
          did you just…agree with me?!

          Reply
      • ubr says:
        January 23, 2009 at 1:04 pm

        srsly?
        .
        two quotes make a mockery of your position…
        .
        i did not inhale
        .
        i did not have sexual relations with that woman.

        Reply
  9. lintilla says:
    January 22, 2009 at 5:34 pm

    Slightly unrelated, but did anyone else find GHWB’s hat absolutely hilarious?

    Reply
  10. Wolvie says:
    January 23, 2009 at 4:40 am

    Not even bubba thinks Michelle is “hawt”.

    Reply
  11. Bush's Hat says:
    January 23, 2009 at 10:06 am

    I’m digging H.W.’s hat. He’s really thinking…”I’m glad Reagan got Gorbachev to tear down that wall, because now I get to wear their hats!”

    Reply
  12. Green Is Good says:
    January 23, 2009 at 1:03 pm

    Ha ha ha! You know Bill was checking out Mrs. Obama’s legs!

    What straight man wasn’t?

    Reply
  13. froofrou says:
    January 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm

    test

    Reply
  14. Dude says:
    January 30, 2009 at 11:53 pm

    Dude, Michelle Obama is a homely woman. Barak’s not a bad looking dude, but Michelle Obama looks like a pig with bear-like features. When Gore was looking for Manbearpig, he probably just saw Michelle loafing around DC

    Reply
Go to Top

Your Comment

 

 

Search

Get Daily Lol News Emails


EmailSubscribe
Enter your email address:
 
TwitterFollow us
on Twitter »
FacebookBecome a
Facebook fan »
RSSRSS Feed »

  • Recent Comments

    bitter charro Suprem… on SCIENCE
    D-Day on Nobody likes to talk abou…
    D-Day on SCIENCE
    bitter charro Suprem… on SCIENCE
    bitter charro Suprem… on Gay or straight…
    bitter charro Suprem… on Gay or straight…
    bitter charro Suprem… on Gay or straight…
    wicket_arse on You’re wrong about …
    bitter charro Suprem… on Gay or straight…
    defaultscreenname on SCIENCE

  • Tag Cloud

  • The National Archives

  • Most Popular Pictures

  • RSS Cheezburger Network Blog

  • Even More Lulz