Let's Do Away With Balls
Okay, it's become very clear to me, and very clear to Rachel Maddow and anyone else trying to keep up with the Inaugural Ball appearances by our new first couple, that these Balls are nothing but trouble.
Either Michelle has to sweep her own long dress out of the way as she dances, or Obama steps on it. He's so busy trying to keep his slow, precise beat, he doesn't even notice that his First Lady Love is having her hem trampled.
I say we cut out the Inaugural Balls and let the First Couple get some well-deserved sleep, so that our new President can be ready to end our occupation of Iraq tomorrow.
What say you good people? Yea? Or nay?
Either Michelle has to sweep her own long dress out of the way as she dances, or Obama steps on it. He's so busy trying to keep his slow, precise beat, he doesn't even notice that his First Lady Love is having her hem trampled.
I say we cut out the Inaugural Balls and let the First Couple get some well-deserved sleep, so that our new President can be ready to end our occupation of Iraq tomorrow.
What say you good people? Yea? Or nay?
Advertisement
I misread your title there Liz. then when you started talking about my favorite Cable news gal, well I really started to worry.
Dances, yeah, lets do away with dances.
Any rate, I say yea.
January 20, 2009 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Keith and Rachel have been showing Barack and Michelle dance to the same song "At Last" at about seven different balls so far, and only in this last one did Barack not step on the hem. It's gotten to the point where the two of them are snuggling and joking about it to themselves (as they have every right to).
It reminds me why I quit Duran Duran in their comeback heydey just a few years ago. I was SO excited to see Simon and John and Roger and Nick and Andy together again after 20 some-odd years, I can't tell you. I went with my college friends to four different concerts in 2004-2005 when Duran's new Astronaut CD came out, and all I saw was the same moves being done, the same set list being followed, concert after concert. It got to the point where I could shout along with Simon and gyrate my hips in perfect synch with his, while I was 25 rows away from him.
I like the idea of having Michelle and Barack show up at each ball, but they don't have to keep dancing the same dance and stepping on the same hem each time, do they?
Give these two a break. Let them wave, let them do some freestyle dancing to some old school Earth Wind and Fire and then let them go to the next ball, if they must.
Oh, and, um....sorry if my title was, um, misread.
January 20, 2009 11:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I dont know. I just get a kick out of reading you.
January 20, 2009 11:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's mutual, DD. Believe me.
But, I'm happy to report that the two of them have got it down now, so that Michelle knows she has to pull at the side of her long gown at a certain point, and Barack lets her spin more widely away from him so as to allow her dress to turn completely.
By 1 AM EST they should have this down pat.
Now I've just been told by Keith and Rachel that after the balls are over, there's a champagne toast at the White House. But our new President will not imbibe because he has a big day tomorrow, getting us out of Iraq. There's a poem here somewhere...
January 20, 2009 11:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a style trend setter, Michele should have seized the opportunity to break new fashion ground which would really benefit her and her few ilk.
She should have had a stylist design something for her which would conceal most of her head. Not only would it benefit her, but those around her would be saved much unnecessary revulsion.
January 21, 2009 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I say nay! I love watching them dance together! I don't care if he does step on her dress! I think it's cute!
January 20, 2009 11:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wrote this somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but you're right. It is cute that he steps on her dress, and it is cute that she giggles and kisses him when he does.
January 21, 2009 12:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know! I could see it all the way from here, but you asked yeah or nay, so I nayed! :-)
Isn't Arthur adorable...worried about his hangy downies?
January 21, 2009 12:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
How would you like to be forced to "rearrange" every time you sat down?
January 21, 2009 9:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I thought so too.
January 21, 2009 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's all this fuss about presidential balls? (Not as good as the SNL, Emily LaTella, "What's all this fuss about presidential erections?")
Sorry, couldn't hold it in any longer.
I say NAY. We need some pomp and circumstance occasionally. It's 12:14 as I'm writing this, and Barack is holding up, but Michelle is looking pretty bad. We've all had nights that went on too long, with much less reason. They'll get over it. These balls are a thank you to the people who made the day possible.
But there is a bigger issue looming. When is the tyranny that is womens shoes going to end? Why do we walk in little tiny, pinchy, little sticks? The worst thing you could on? Everyone else is bundlesd up, there's Michelle walking in the parade in hose and heels? It's absurd. ANd I love shoes - but I limit my time in them. I said to my son she should be wearing boots, and I was glad Dr. Biden had the good sense the wear boots. But I swear it's the shoes that is making the first lady look so drained.
January 21, 2009 12:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have the best answer to that....I broke my little toe back in November and have been wearing flat shoes and/or sneakers at work ever since. BEST thing that ever happened to me. I feel so free without those clunky heels on.
Heels are a man-made nightmare that women need do without.
January 21, 2009 12:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know that is the exact reason I never got into being a transvestite. The priests and bishops like women's dresses of course, but they keep the men's shoes on the whole time.
January 21, 2009 12:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
TMI, if you ask me...
January 21, 2009 12:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, there's the proof in my pudding right there.
January 21, 2009 12:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Along those lines, when Jon Daily interviewed Gene Robinson on the Daily Show last night he enquired as to whether Gene was handicapped by the fact that being a bishop he could only move diagonally through the crowd. Gene's reply was priceless: "You know there was a queen on the board as well".
I fell out of bed laughing!
January 21, 2009 9:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll bet he even inquired.
Hey, I haven't finished my coffee...
January 21, 2009 9:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Man, if that's all that's holding you back, that's a close call!!!!
January 21, 2009 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awww - Barack just used the 'backward and in heels line'! 12:40, and it's the last dance. They had expected it to be at 2:25. At this rate the troops should be home and Gitmo will be empty by Friday.
I must confess, we did a few shots to the occasion (thank god it wasn't a drinking game involving hearing "At Last"). I swear the mistakes in my last comment weren't there when I pressed, "Submit."
January 21, 2009 12:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lis, I broke my foot twice, and swore off heels afterward, but eventually they weasled their way back into my closet.
DD, you reminded me of a time I was shopping on South Street in Philly. I was in the store, and I noticed everything seemed to be for tall people. It wasn't until I got to the shoe section, and the smallest size was 10, did I realize that although it had women's clothes, it wasnt a store for women.
January 21, 2009 1:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now THAT'S a funny story!
January 21, 2009 1:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Re: your title, Lis-
That's what she said!
January 21, 2009 9:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Another thought related to the alternate meaning of this post's title:
Let's do away with references to the size, state, lack of or overabundance of anyone's. And I mean male or female. Ack!
January 21, 2009 9:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm still having nightmares about HRC and her supposed attributes!
Seriously, though - it's related to what I said in the current thread about pundits. The automatic default to quips about somebody's anatomy is another example of intellectual/conceptual poverty. Whatever happened to guts, grit, fortitude, courage, chutzpah,or a dozen other positive descriptors of personal power? Too much lazy defaulting to one LCD (lowest common denominator) term.
January 21, 2009 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
ps to Lis - not a gripe against you, I'm just on my soapbox - I loved your title, a fine use of sly punnery : : :
January 21, 2009 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think they should drop 90 percent of the balls, or go down to one, and give the money to charity, or use it to plug the current holes in our government. One of these so-called "balls" could be held at the White House, done a hell of a lot more cheaply and we could save one hell of a lot of money.
January 21, 2009 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
There must be at least two! It is what nature intended ... oh, sorry, putty, just being silly.
My thought is the dress had techinical difficulties. All that money on the dress and she could not dance in it? Come on! Who designed that, anyway?
The First Couple managed it perfectly and even at #10, when the music started you could see the FC, but they had "left the building". A terrific example of how couples should relate.
January 21, 2009 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good one!
January 21, 2009 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heehee! Dammit, I'm sorry if I came off like a grizzled old poop above. I guess I shoulda been more clear - the thing that bugs me is hearing every hackneyed gabber in the universe quipping about the size of (or lack of) someone's orbs. It's enough to drive you nuts. Makes me testy.
January 21, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just let it all hang out. I mean, it was nice out, so I left 'em out!
January 21, 2009 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Balls have gone from a joyful celebration to a duty -- like sex in your eighties.
January 21, 2009 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are wonderful - all the balls. Don't do away with any of them. Enjoyed by all.
January 21, 2009 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure, you can get rid of all the Inaugural Balls, but, then we're stuck with a bunch of Inaugural Eunuchs ...
January 21, 2009 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
January 21, 2009 10:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
MrSmith1
now that was clever!
January 21, 2009 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I went to college in DC. Never attended a ball. Didn't want to. But it's not gonna happen... Fine by me if they get rid of them. But... not gonna happen, I predict.
January 21, 2009 10:37 PM | Reply | Permalink