Manhattan Infidel

Calling it the“civil rights issue of the Century” Mark Hansen, presiding Bishop of the Lutheran Evangelical Church in America raised his strong opposition to President Obama’s choice of Elana Kagen to be the next Supreme Court Justice of the United States.

“With the retirement of John Paul Stevens there will not be one Protestant member of the Supreme Court.  When you look back on all that Protestants have contributed to America, what with Art Linkletter and Mary Tyler Moore it is inconceivable that this could happen.”

He then called for a day of protest and asked  that all Protestants “Raise Holy Heck.”

Katherine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop and Primate of the Episcopalian Church in the United States called on Obama to “Stop his exclusionary practices.  We need a Protestant on the Court to protect all that we hold dear - the Constitution, the separation of Church and State, Wiffle Ball, cardigan sweaters and Mary Tyler Moore.”

The General Conference of the United Methodist Church has urged its members to “Smoke their pipes while ripping the patches off their jackets and throwing them to the ground” in protest.   Note:  The UMC later recanted, saying through a spokesman that what they originally proposed was “extreme, even for us.”  They later issued a statement to the effect that if the rights of Mary Tyler Moore are respected then they can live with a protestant-free Supreme Court.  “For now anyway.”

Throughout the United States worried police have reported crowds of “demure and very well behaved Protestants” returning their Mary Tyler Moore DVDs in protest.  Said one police chief:  “They were all very polite.  Except for the Methodists of course.”

The Administrative Committee of the Presbyterian Church in America called the return of the DVDs a “Sacrifice the Supreme Being Demands until the abomination of having no Protestants on the Supreme Court is rectified.” They also reminded members to pay any parking tickets on time. When asked if they too would be ripping the patches off their jackets the Administrative Committee said “Who’s doing that?  The Methodists? Figures. They are out of control.  Seriously.  We don’t even like to be around them.”

The American Baptist Church of America said that it would be amenable to a meeting of all Protestants to seek redress of their grievances as long as it didn’t lead to “breaking bread with Methodists.  They are a bunch of patchless libertines.”

Informed of Protestant opposition to Kagen, Francis Cardinal George, OMI, President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops said that while he respects their opinion, it is important that a Protestant not be on the Supreme Court as “it may lead to Deism.  Hey, I just said Deism.  Everybody gather around.  Group hug.  Group hug people.”

Mary Tyler Moore could not be reached for comment.

Since the arrest of Faisal Shahzad for the attempted car bombing in Times Square speculation has turned to his possible motives.

On The View Thursday morning Joy Behar talked about her disbelief that Shahzad could be a bomber.

“Look at him.  He’s so handsome.  How can a handsome man be a bomber?  I bet he was angry over something Rush Limbaugh said.  I bet he’s embarrassed at Sara Palin’s stupidity.”

From all accounts it appears that Shahzad was a model immigrant who had no problems assimilating into mainstream America.  He married a beautiful American-born woman, got a college degree and bought a home.  But then things turned bad for him.  His home went into foreclosure.  He lost his job.  He separated from his family.  Neighbors mentioned “quirky habits” such as jogging at night while wearing explosives strapped to his chest.

“I said good morning to him once and he responded ‘Die Infidel dog!’  But I didn’t think anything of it.  He was quiet and kept to himself” said one neighbor.

Another neighbor states that they used to exchange recipes.

“I gave him my special recipe for fudge that’s been in the family for generations.  He told me how how to use an alarm clock to set off a car bomb.  But I didn’t think anything of it.  He seemed so nice.”

Experts brought in by Homeland Security have focused on possible economic motives for the attempted bombing.

“He seems to have been singularly oppressed in America.  He lost a job.  He was not getting rich.  But what seems to have really set him off is when his house was foreclosed.  Obviously he was angry at Democrats for their perceived role in causing the housing meltdown.”

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg speculates that Shahzad had a political motive.

“My guess is that he is a teabagger and angry about the health care bill.”

Those interrogating Shahzad mention that he visited Pakistan for a couple months to gain expert knowledge on “how to kill the infidel.”

“At this point we believe that infidel is some sort of code word.  Possibly short for infidelity.  In which case it makes sense that he was angry at Democrats for what he sees as their perceived infidelity to the core values of our Constitution.  A perception that intelligent people know is wrong.”

No matter what Shahzad’s true motives may have been, New York was very lucky that the bomb did not ignite.

“I just hope Republicans don’t use this as an excuse to go after people of color.  I’m really worried about a possible backlash” said Mayor Bloomberg.

With the announcement that John Paul Stevens will be retiring from the Supreme Court, speculation was rife as to who President Obama would nominate as his successor.  The wait is over.  In a ceremony in the Rose Garden today President Obama introduced Spock as his choice to be the next justice on the Supreme Court.

“Spock has a distinguished career in the military, as a diplomat and as an intellect.  The Supreme Court would only be fitting as the next step for this brilliant mind” said Obama.

Despite these qualifications, the Republicans are expected to mount a serious effort to derail his nomination.  When asked about this, Spock replied that opposition to him would be “most illogical.”

Perhaps hoping to head off Republican opposition, President Obama touted Spock’s middle of the road judicial philosophy.

“I have not asked for Spock’s opinion on artificial birth control for Tribbles and I ask Congress not to use this as a so-called litmus test.”

Many observers of Washington feel that the nomination of Spock is a brilliant move on the part of the President.

“Given that he (Spock) has spent most of his career outside D.C., hell, outside Earth, he does not have much of a paper trail that can be used against him” said one commentator.

“I had dinner with him the other night and asked him his opinion on prayer in public schools.  All he said was ‘live long and prosper’ which you have to admit is pretty ambiguous.  It could mean he’s judicially conservative.  It could be interpreted as a liberal statement.  It could mean he had too much red wine.  It could have been the fact that Megan Fox was sitting in his lap” said another.

However Spock is not without baggage.  When asked if being a Vulcan will make him more “empathetic”  Spock replied that it would.

“I would hope that with the richness of my Vulcan experience I would come to a different conclusion than Earthers on certain subjects.”

Spock’s former colleagues are lining up in support of nomination.

James T. Kirk said “Of all the souls I have met his was the most human.  And he got almost as much I did.  That’s right. Suck it bitches.”

Leonard McCoy, former Chief Medical Officer on the Enterprise stated “I’m a doctor not a politician.  I think he’s out of his Vulcan mind but he should be a good judge.”

Even with his controversial “richness of Vulcan experience” quote Spock’s nomination is expected to pass in the Senate.

“I guess I’ll vote for him” said Mitch McConnell (R-Ky).  “I’ve only met the guy once.  He gave me some sort of neck pinch which knocked me out.  He said it was a Vulcan way of saying hello.”

Every day throughout the United States, Democrats gather to celebrate the mystery of Obama.  Senators, Congressman,  state officials, lay faithful face the celebrant as he intones the words, “This is Obama’s body, which is being socialized for you.  Do this in memory of him.” Despite the apparent harmony a sizable minority of Democrats say that during the daily sacrifice the celebrant should not be facing the congregation.

“In effect this creates a situation where the Democrats are closed in upon themselves. By facing the faithful the celebrant is actually turning his back upon the statue of Obama.  He should be facing the holy city of Chicago just like us.  We should all be facing the land where Obama came from and started his holy ministry” said one dissenting Democrat.

This controversy has ignited lively debate in Democratic circles.  According to the Democratic Constitution, “On Celebrating the Holy Mystery of Obama’s Body and Blood” all that is stated is that the celebrant “should not be a Republican or a racist tea bagger.” However, it has now become traditional for the celebrant to face the congregation.

“I like it” says Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.  “It creates a greater sense of intimacy. It is not important for us to face Chicago as we pray to Obama, our Dear Leader.  Spiritually we are all part of his body when we register as Democrats.  Spiritually we face the holy city of Chicago every day.”

Their seems to be no end in sight to the debate.  A group of breakaway Democrats has formed an organization dedicated to “bringing the Democratic Party back to its core principals.”

DNC Chairperson Tim Kaine has announced that breakaway groups have “lost all communion with the body of Obama and can no longer be called Democrats.”

The man at the center of the controversy, President Obama, is hoping to quell dissent within his body and is scheduled to speak to the nation tonight at 9:00 PM.  His speeech, entitled, “I”  will be fed into the teleprompter at 8:45.  The backup teleprompter is on standby.

“This is an important speech.  We don’t want any foul ups” said a spokesperson at the White House.

The First Ecumenical Council of the White House, a gathering of Democratic Senators and Congressmen, responding to the “needs of the times”, has declared Barack Hussein Obama, 44th President of the United States, infallible when pronouncing dogma Ex Cathedra Oval Office.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told assembled reporters that the doctrine of the infallibility of Obama is actually quite limited.

“I know the Republicans are trying to say we worship him but the truth is that this doctrine only relates to official Democratic dogma that is promulgated by the White House.  It does not mean that President Obama himself is infallible or sinless, though I have never known that amazing man to sin or be wrong in anything.”

The doctrine of the Infallibility of Obama has been discussed in Democratic circles since 2008 but was rejected due to opposition from conservative Democrats.  However, with widespread opposition to the recent health care overhaul it was decided that the time was ripe for the official unveiling of the dogma.

“It is hoped that with this pronouncement Americans will end their opposition to President Obama’s policies.  The man is truly remarkable.  Every time I talk to him I walk away enlightened.  He has the best interests of the working person at heart” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The Doctrine of Obama’s Infallibility has to meet the following conditions:

1. He must speak Ex Cathedra Oval Office (that is, when in discharge of his office as supreme teacher of the citizens of the World.)
2. The Democratic doctrine must concern faith, morals or sin.
3. The doctrine must be held by the entire Democratic Party.

With the possibility of the loss of many seats in the November elections, Democrats are hoping that this new doctrine will help protect President Obama from any possible repercussions. If however the Democrats lose a majority in the House come November the possibility of seeking asylum in Vermont has been discussed.

Representatives of the press who covered the announcement shouted “never” when the possibility of exile was discussed and pledged their “lives and sacred honor” to defend the President.  The only holdouts were those from Fox News.

“What do you expect” said Rahm Emanuel.  “Fox isn’t a real news organization.”

The union of the followers of Obama has been rent by a recent controversy regarding his body and blood.  Previously the approved formula for the body and blood of Obama had been called “Transubstantiation” whereby ordinary bread and wine is converted into the body and blood of Obama.  However, recently a breakaway group have promulgated the doctrine of “Consubstantiation” where the body and blood of Obama exists alongside ordinary bread and wine.

“It has destroyed the communion of the Blue States” according to one follower of Obama. “Fields have been burned.  People have been forced out of their homes.  The Trannies have killed the Connies. The Connies have killed the Trannies.  Chaos reigns supreme.”

It is estimated that 5000 have been killed in recent Blue State religious warfare.

The inspiration for all this fighting is a passage from the Gospel of Obama according to Robert Gibbs:

And whilst they were eating, Obama took bread; and blessing, broke, and gave to them, and said: Take ye.  This is my body.  And having taken the wine, respectable wine not redneck whiskey, giving thanks, he gave it to them.  And they all drank of it.  And he said to them:  This is my blood of the new testament, which shall go into unsustainable debt for many.

“It seems incongruous that the simple words of Obama could be misconstrued” according to one Transubstantiationist.  Those believing in Consubstantiation counter that their doctrine is more “modern” and in keeping with recent scientific findings.

Despite the fact that feelings between the competing groups run high and bitterness remains, a recently concluded conference in Boston holds hopes for peace.

The so-called “Peace of Boston” states that all citizens living in Blue States will have to follow the communion favored by their Governor.  Hence, if the Governor of Vermont favors Consubstantiation all Transubstationationists in that state will be forced to leave to a State favoring their communion or, Obama forbid, a Red State.

“I don’t want to move to a Red State” said one frightened resident of Oregon.  “I hear they don’t even have Starbucks.  Those people are savages!”

With the results of the Presidential election of 2008 giving the followers of Obama the room to practice their religion without fear, many theologians are now turning to defining their faith in the Obama.

“There are many questions still unresolved as to the nature of Obama.  We now have a historic opportunity to define our faith” said one theologian.

Perhaps the biggest mystery is the nature of the hypostatic union of Obama.   The two natures of Obama, the human and the divine, are they one essence or are they separate entities?  Does the human nature of Obama exist independently of the divine or was it absorbed by the divinity? Mainstream opinion holds that Obama exists in two natures and is in fact true God and true Man.

“This is the Orthodox position.” said a Bishop of MSNBC at the First Ecumenical Council of Obama.  “What we worship is the union of two natures.  Our Obama is truly man and truly God.  He feels with a human will.  He grieves with a human will.  His flesh is true human flesh.  Yet our Obama is also God.  He can lower sea levels.  He commands the elements.  He is the second person in the Divine Trinity of the Father, Obama and the Holy Ghost.”

This Orthodox position is in direct opposition to the Monophysites, who maintain that there is only one nature in Obama - the Divine.  According to the Monophysites, Obama’s humanity was absorbed by the Deity.  Currently the Monophysites are confined to the extreme East of the Obama Empire.

“They are very strong in France and Germany” according to a theologian.

If the Orthodox positions holds then Obama’s mother can be rightly referred to as the Theotokos, the “Mother of God.”  Already the Feast of the Assumption of Obama’s Mother, where her body and soul were assumed into Heaven, while not officially promulgated as Dogma, is celebrated by many of the followers of Obama.  This Feast is of course not celebrated by the Monophysites.

Regardless of theological differences the followers of Obama are urging unity.

“We must have charity in all theological matters.  Our true enemies are the pagans of Red State America who do not worship the Obama.  They are a danger to us and must be eliminated” said Rahm Emanuel, the “Pope” of the Obama religion.

Always on the front lines and proud of its cutting edge reputation, New York is the first state in the union to declare war on the dreaded enemy of mankind, the silent killer - sodium.  Assemblyman Felix Ortiz (D-Brooklyn) has introduced a bill that would ban all salt in the preparation and cooking of restaurant food.

“I think salt should be banned in restaurants.  If we let people eat salt, then the terrorists win” declared Ortiz.

The bill would lay a penalty of $1000 dollars upon restaurants for each individual addition of salt before, during or after preparation of food.

“I just want New Yorkers to live long, healthy lives.  The longer they live the more often they can vote for me and keep me in office.  I am proud of my antisodium credentials.  The Democratic Party is proud to be the party of no-choice when it comes to the dreaded enemy sodium.  My opponents, the Republicans, may be soft on salt but not me.”

Reaction to the proposed ban has been swift.  With a debt of 48 billion, on the verge of bankruptcy and with a lame duck, weak Governor, many are questioning if declaring war on salt is the right thing to do.

Brian Kolb (R-Canandaigua), Minority Leader of the Assembly told reporters that the War on Sodium is a waste of resources.

“Every right thinking New York knows that salt is not the enemy.   The enemy is pepper.  I plan to introduce a bill banning pepper within the limits of New York State.”

The partisan bickering over the salt and pepper divide has proven rancorous.  Republicans appearing on Sunday morning talk shows accused Democrats of wanting to turn New York into “A free-love zone.  A hippie Pepperland.”

Democrats for their part accused Republicans of having a “culture of sodium.”

Having a majority in the Assembly it appears that Ortiz’ antisodium bill will pass.   Already Ortiz and fellow Democrats have asked the Salt Monster, from first season Star Trek episode “The Man Trap” to come to New York.

“It’s not enough to eliminate salt from restaurants.  We want to eliminate it from the human body entirely.  This is where the Salt Monster comes in.  It will roam New York State sucking the sodium out of citizens.  This is for their own good” said Ortiz.

The fever to ban items that may be deleterious to health seems to be spreading beyond New York’s borders.  Georgia is mulling a coffee ban while Oregon is reportedly considering banning Idaho.  Not potatoes from Idaho but the state itself.

“This is for the good of all Oregonians” declared a member or Oregon’s House of Representatives.

Using the authority given to him under the Constitution, President Obama today visited a local elementary school playground to make a series of controversial recess appointments.

“The Republicans say I cannot do this.  But unlike me, the Republicans aren’t Constitutional scholars.  I clearly have the authority to make recess appointments and that is what I’m going to do.”

He then took his jacket off, rolled up his sleeves and called the schoolchildren over to him. 

“I am now appointing all of you circuit court judges.  I wish I didn’t have to do this but the Republicans have blocked all my nominations, making this day necessary.”

The children, mostly 3rd and 4th graders appeared confused.  Many asked what a circuit court was.  One of the children asked President Obama if being a judge will give him the power to “make girls take their clothes off.”

President Obama pulled out a cigarette,  lit it up and smoked it.

“That is an excellent question.  Being a judge gives you that power and more. And if perchance you contract a venereal disease from the girls taking their clothes off, my new comprehensive health care reform will pay for your treatment.”

A cheer went up through the playground as the new circuit court judges rounded up the girls and forced them to take their clothes off.  Many of the girls were crying.  Some wet their pants.  Those who refused were grabbed by Secret Service and arrested.

“That’s what I like to see” said the President.  “Activist judges.  Activist justice.”

A schoolteacher asked President Obama to put out his cigarette.

“Please.  It doesn’t set a good example for the children” she said.

“Children?  You mean my new Federal judges don’t you?  Judges, this woman has asked me to put out my cigarette. What is your ruling?”

“We rule against teacher” the children chanted.  “Teacher is a meanie.  Teacher is a meanie.  We rule she has to kiss the Principal.”

The Secret Service then led the offending teacher inside to comply with the terms of her sentence.  President Obama then gathered his new judges around him for a photo op before returning to the White House.

“President Obama, mmm….mmm…..mmmm.  Thank you.  This is the best recess we’ve ever had” said the children.

When reached for comment, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell shook his head sadly.

“I think the President misunderstands the meaning of recess appointments.  I just hope these children don’t do too much damage until Congress convenes again.”

In a related note, one of President Obama’s new appointees declared his Science teacher “a big doofus” and had him teach the entire class dressed as Donald Duck.

Recent events seem to have confirmed that taking our Constitution and flushing it down a toilet has become the the favorite pastime in Washington D.C.  Not wanting to appear unsophisticated in front of the more liberal citizens of New York City I decided to try my hand at it.

My only previous experience with document flushing was with the Koran and that was a disaster.   My toilet backed up, my shoes got wet and my cat got angry.  I did not feel like repeating that experience so I decided to seek help from experts.  I asked my congresswoman if she had any suggestions.  I am attaching her response in the hopes it will help my readers:

Dear Constituent.  Thank you for your interest in Constitution flushing.  As you are aware Congress recently conducted a rancorous debate involving health care.  Polls showed that the majority of Americans were opposed to our efforts.  Fortunately we bravely decided to ignore the will of the American people.  This disregard for the wishes of those who elected us forms the theoretical basis for Constitution flushing.  Remember also that the Constitution was written by white men of northern European origin to protect their property rights.  The document is silent on social justice and the redistribution of wealth.  Compare our Constitution to Iran, North Korea or Venezuela’s and all Americans should hold their head in shame.

Now onto practical matters:  The mode of flushing.  Many of my fellow congresspeople prefer the ‘all at once’ method of flushing whereby the entire Constitution is shoved into the toilet.  There are advantages to this method not the least of which is a bigger splash.  That is certainly more dramatic.  However your shoes may get wet and if you have a cat she may get angry.

I prefer ripping the Constitution apart and flushing the pages individually.  It takes longer of course but draws out the pleasure.  When flushing I usually start with Article 1 section 8 clause 18 - the necessary and proper clause which states that Congress shall have the power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers.  I’ve found that once that is disposed the rest of the Constitution is so much easier to flush down the toilet.  And your shoes will stay dry.

I hope this was able to help you.  I look forward to ignoring your wishes in the future.

While this is excellent advice I decided to go for the ‘all at once’ method.  My shoes got wet and my cat got angry.  But at least my fellow New Yorkers don’t think I’m unsophisticated anymore.