I'm curious what the intent of this article is. If it's not sem-sarcastic, it's a piece of obvious political dick-suckery, just one more reason why 'we' should like that guy in the big white house protecting our 'freedom.' Look at the language "They feel like the rough surface of your favorite baseball" come on now. I'll leave on a slightly more humorous note.
I enjoyed it. Would you be completely unimpressed to meet the President? Regardless of who he was and whether you agreed with his politics? I would be impressed. I know he is a man (or could be a woman) just like you or I, but I couldn't help but be a little in awe of this person and the power that he holds. I mean, you call it "obvious political dick-suckery" and I ask: 1) What does the author have to earn from this "dick-suckery"? I posit: nothing 2) The author also talks about how easy it is to ignore Obama; that does not seem indicative of "dick-suckery." I think the purpose of this article is to share a potentially odd or interesting experience that most people have not had. Plus he got to eavesdrop on a Presidential meeting; again, it was in a public cafe and what was discussed was not really that important, but that's a rare opportunity and pretty cool. I'd definitely eavesdrop on a Presidential meeting regardless of where and topic - even if it was in a McDonald's. Plus also, c'mon, you clicked and read it. To get callous that's the point of the article. People find it or its title interesting."They feel like the rough surface of your favorite baseball" come on now.
It doesn't, nor will it ever, get any better than Phil Hartman. His Clinton was spot on. Daryl Hammond's Clinton was far more "realistic" but Phil's had a touch of absurdity to it that made it far more enjoyable to watch. This absurd quality is something that Will Farrel took to the extreme with his GW impersonation. -A throw back to Chevy's "Ford." Thanks for posting, that was a good laugh.