Wonkette
Man, remember back in the Democratic primaries — which were still going on at this time last year — and all the terrible jokes and speculation about Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton having angry anger sex all the time? What was up with that, huh? It’s like the notion of having both a female and a male candidate for president was so novel that people could only put it in context by thinking about that other thing men and ladies like to do together, besides run for president. Fortunately, we’ve gotten over that terribly juvenile little hump, and now even the New York Times can admit that Clinton and Obama are definitely not fucking. (Thank you loqaciousmusic for the tip!) [New York Times]
Given a choice between tapping Hilsbot and Michelle, I’m with Barry. I’d rather tap Michelle.
Anyone figure out that Hilsbot is Sec State and unlike our previous Sec State, she’s kinda busy dealing with a lot of problems right now?
Is he pimping her out, though?
Not to brag, but that was my tip.
Do I get a free pair of Truck Nutz™ now?
heh heh, you said hump
And “gay” still means “joyful” at NYT. Especially if it’s your middle name.
Who knew that Hillary was a source of fresh water?
loquaciousmusic: heh heh, you said tip
Juvenile little hump? Oops, too late.
Also, I’d rather hit Hillsbot than Madeleine Albright. But only slightly. Either way, I’d just be using her to get to Chelsea.
The White House should learn from “Friends”. People only keep watching if there’s a “will they?” or “won’t they?” question about the co-stars getting together in the end. The New York Times just made the Obama Administration jump the shark.
loquaciousmusic: No, but you get a proper acknowledgment in the post!
All I know there is a lot of tapping going on: first it’s Larry’s Craig’s feet, then Barry taps Sebelius, and then he taps Hilbots ideas, but not actually her.
I’ll now tap some homemade brew and a fresh batch of hobo beans.
So wait, he told Clinton to go fuck herself?
loquaciousmusic: You get a date with Newell. Bon appetit!
Say honey, I’d sure like to tap your ideas…
Sara K. Smith: Yay! Acknow-whatever! That’s a big word for a LIBRUL!
I sort of miss the Bush-on-Condi (or was it the other way around?) action.
So, wait, how do you fuck an idea? Cause i’ve had my eye on that sexxy string theory for quite some time . . .
He tapped Geithner, he tapped Emanuel, but nah, he shant not tap a Clinton. Not even Chelsea. That secksist bastard.
Internally valid: You sound like the fun sort. You should come over some time an see my collection of Occam’s Razor porn.
I’m still waiting for Hopey/Bill Clinton angsty Resentment!Buttseks. Bill is such a total bottom.
shortsshortsshorts: Yeah and that Geithner thing is working out great.
Mind fuck!
frumious_bandersnatch: Rahm would never let him that close to Hopey.
I read the first three words and was horrified, as were the rest of you, and then I decided to just sit back and wait for the inevitable “I’d tap it” comments. Well?….
masterdebater: No inevitable “I’d tap it” comments because no one would. Also.
WadISay: It’s like we’re in an INXS song.
“Like pretty Kate has sex ornate”? Whatever are you implying?
If I see one more “So-and-so taps X headline…”
I guess I’ll laugh at it again.
Okay, funny headline, but the main point should be that it is a really fucking stupid article. Hillary Clinton is the Secretary of State, the United States’ chief diplomat, and she represents the entire country. She doesn’t get involved in domestic policy or partisan politics. That is SOP.