Making fun of music, one song at a time. Since the year 2000.
Check out the two amIright misheard lyrics books including one book devoted to misheard lyrics of the 1980s.
(Toggle Right Side Navigation)

Song Parodies -> "Both Sides Now (US Left- And Right-Wing Follow-Up)"

Original Song Title:

"Both Sides Now"

Original Performer:

Judy Collins

Parody Song Title:

"Both Sides Now (US Left- And Right-Wing Follow-Up)"

Parody Written by:

Tommy Turtle

The Lyrics

Really don't think I could match last Friday's dissertation on the Left and Right Wings for a looong time, if ever, but this little spin-off sorta popped into mind, so... think of it as the "Cliff's Notes" for Friday's "textbook". OS lyrics here.

Pols propose for free health care
Pull bucks from a**hole, or thin air
And better housing ev'rywhere
They talk so loud that way

But now, the deficit's a ton
More pain; tax flow from ev'ryone
So many things they said'd be done
Dis'vowed, and walked away

I've looked at pols from both sides now
From Left and Right, and still, somehow
It's their delusions, I recall
With honor, not endowed
At all

Bush: "Iraq will soon be free"
"It might take one month; maybe three"
"We'll export our democracy"
I heard, above: him say

But now, it's end of Dubya's show
Still in Iraq; When will we go?
Timetable, dare? Both sides don't know
Just give us more dismay

I've looked at Gov from both sides now
Don't give, but take, while breaking vow
With vague allusions, they enthrall
I really don't trust Gov
At all

B. Obama thrilled the crowd
He said that Gitmo: not allowed!
Flip-flop, seems; to Saudi, bowed
"Believe for life"; now, sway

And now, Obama's acting strange
Speak Arab? Great! But gay? Mind changed! [1]
His Cab'net's tax forms, rearranged
I pay mine each payday

I've looked at strife from both sides now
From Left and Right, they fight, and how!
Don't find solutions; they just brawl
I really don't like them
At all

[1] The Daily Show of 14 May 2009 had a video clip from 10 Feb 2008 of Candidate Obama supporting the retention of valuable military personnel regardless of gender preference... followed by a clip from that (show's) day of CNN reporting that the White House has confirmed that it will *not* interfere in the firing of Dan Choi, a graduate of the West Point military academy and an Iraq War veteran *fluent in Arabic*, who was discharged after coming out as gay.

As Jon Stewart pointed out, what good is it if you waterboard someone until they finally talk, but all they can talk is Arabic, and you've fired the only Arabic speaker in the area for being gay? Sounds like a waste of perfectly good torture. (that last statement, was, of course, facetious in all regards, but not nearly as sick as the situation itself). Obama's worshipers must be disillusioned. I'm not one of them, but I too am disappointed: Candidate Obama was right on this issue then, and President Obama is wrong now. (A flip-flopper par Kerry-lence!) Sigh... more of the same.

© 2009 Tommy Turtle. All rights reserved. E-mail:

Your Vote & Comment Counts

The parody authors spend a lot of time writing parodies for the website and they appreciate feedback in the form of votes and comments. Please take some time to leave a comment below about this parody.

Place Your Vote

Matches Pace of
Original Song: 
How Funny: 
Overall Score: 

In order for your vote to count, you need to hit the 'Place Your Vote' button.

Voting Results

Pacing: 5.0
How Funny: 5.0
Overall Rating: 5.0

Total Votes: 11

Voting Breakdown

The following represent how many people voted for each category.

    Pacing How Funny Overall Rating
 1   0
 2   0
 3   0
 4   0
 5   11

User Comments

Comments are subject to review, and can be removed by the administration of the site at any time and for any reason.

John Barry - May 18, 2009 - Report this comment
Both sides blow.
Patrick - May 18, 2009 - Report this comment
Our disdain for Obama should never be interpreted as approval of George Bush. You captured the disillusion with both sides marvelously. Look into any government act, program, bill, ruling, etc, and you will find some sort of lie. Time to stop looking for a savior and start looking to ourselves. A great reworking of a great song.
Judi Jiulianiarrak - May 18, 2009 - Report this comment
I'm reluctant to say, "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED"!!!, but I do love the way you've (unshellfishly) explicated extemism's voible deceits! Right, er, 'centrist' on, brothah!
Invisible Boy - May 18, 2009 - Report this comment
Great idea for a reworking of the OS, title and all.
I recently included "Left-wing spenders…Right-wing whiners" in a parody about things I hate, so you know I'm with you on this one.
Mark Scotti - May 18, 2009 - Report this comment
All that "flip flopping" finally paid off in a balanced classic to all that is wrong. Wonderful, Tom!!
Leo Keough - May 18, 2009 - Report this comment
Ah, for the good old days of gridlock...555!!!
PMS - May 18, 2009 - Report this comment
Right and left on!
Timmy1000 - May 18, 2009 - Report this comment
TT - Inspired OS choice for this take on "both sides" and well written. I saw that Daily show on the ousting of the gay interpreter - very funny yet sad. The Daily show is the only place to get the reat news.
alvin - May 19, 2009 - Report this comment
my fave of the day
Tommy Turtle - May 19, 2009 - Report this comment
John Barry: Great title switch that would be, too! .. thanks for v/c, John.

Patrick: Well said, Sir! ... thanks for v/c, Patrick.

Judi Jiulianiarrak : Thanks for your clever banner/banter! ... uh, "voible"? ... and lots of luck when Rudi sues ya lol! ... thanks for v/c, JJ.

Invisible Boy: Oh, go ahead and plug it! ... else sometime, I'll try to look it up. (I'm like the butcher who backed into the meat grinder and got a little behind in his work.) Thanks for v/c, IB.

Mark Scotti: And they make great sandals, too! ... thanks for v/c, Mark.

Leo Keough: YEAH BABY! "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe when Congress is in session." Mark Twain (?) .. gridlock = less gov = less interference and fewer problems. Thanks, Leo!

PMS: Or off! ... thanks for v/c, P.

Timmy1000: True (Leno is good too), and what does that tell us about CNN, MSNBC, Fox, etc? ... thanks for v/c, TimmyK.

alvin: honored esp. for a Monday with 50+ ... thanks much alvin.
John Jenkins - May 19, 2009 - Report this comment
TT, very good job. I, too, agree with Leo Keough and Mark Twain (my local newspaper – Orange County Register – has a libertarian orientation and printed Twain’s quote on the editorial page today).

I might take issue with the second line of the second verse. Since the top 50% of income earners pays 97% of federal income taxes (and their share of taxes will increase under Obama’s tax plans), taxes don’t flow from everyone. And as you point out in verse 8, taxes don’t always flow from Obama cabinet nominees. But higher taxes do hurt the economy and ultimately do hurt everyone.
Tommy Turtle - May 20, 2009 - Report this comment
John Jenkins: I too was "certain" it was Twain's quote, but surprisingly, the various web sources did not include it among his quotes (perhaps because they disagreed with his POV? Doesn't that hurt your credibility as a source?), and I like to be able to point to sources if needed.

The economy of language necessary for pacing purposes (and syllable-matching, to:

"They rain and snow on everyone")

) probably is what caused the ambiguity of the line in question. The intention was, "Everyone will experience more pain (as you said, economic damage hurts everyone), and more taxes will flow from everyone". IMHO, the middle classes will be facing income tax hikes too, despite the "soak the rich" rhetoric. When the income tax was finally successfully introduced in 1913 after first having been declared unconstitutional ( one of Democratic President Woodrow Wilson's major "achievements", along with introducing racial segregation in some Federal workplaces), its backers got the voters to support the Constitutional amendment legalizing it by promising that "the rate would never be increased from its 1% to 7% range, and would affect only the rich. The middle class and blue-collar workers will never pay it". The minimum income that was taxed was $3,000 for single persons and $4,000 for married couples, after exemptions and deductions. In today's dollars, that's over $64,000 for singles and $86,000 for married, again after exemptions and deductions. And considering how much lower other taxes were then, or those that did not exist, a net taxable income of $3-4000 back then probably made a person much more affluent than the above figures for today. So yes, it originally was passed by appealing to class warfare, greed, and envy, as applying only to the "rich". Not so today. There's progression, but we average slobs pay plenty.

The other point is that the income tax, while the most-discussed and visible, is hardly the only tax. Consider New York's recent levies and proposals on everything from candy to porn and a lap dance. Property taxes skyrocketed so much that your state was motivated to a citizens' referendum, Proposition 13, which led the way for other states to follow. (Thank you, Sir!) Sales taxes keep increasing; the Federal excise tax on rubber tires that was intended to discourage driving during WWII, as well as raise revenue, and was supposed to expire at the end of the War, didn't. What tax ever does? Rather than go on, I think the intention is clear: One way or another, *everyone* is going to be paying more in total taxes (where else will the funding come from? Sh*t it out our recta? Pull it from thin air?) And yes, in the long run, the economy will be further damaged, hurting *everyone*, as you said. Thanks for vote and the usual very thoughtful comment, John.
Krystal Balle, a/k/a Tommy Turtle - May 18, 2013 - Report this comment
From comment above:
"IMHO, the middle classes will be facing income tax hikes too, despite the 'soak the rich' rhetoric."
Already happened.
Patrick - May 18, 2013 - Report this comment
Found an old book "Rise of Empire" by Garet Garrett, an Old Right or Classical Liberal author who opposed Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal and foreign policy. This book, published in 1952, sounds as though it were written today. All powerful executive, declarations of war without a vote by an increasingly impotent congress. Garrett's 1920's novel "The Driver" has been cited as a possible source for certain plot elements of Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged". The principal character is named Henry Galt, and runs a railroad. "Secret of the League" by Ernest Bramah features a strike by the industrial class, led by a man named "Salt". In 1898 the feds imposed a tax on telephones to fund the war with Spain. No one cared because how many people had phones in 1898? The tax was still around over 100 years later. I wouldn't be surprised in the American Revolution Bicentennial Commission was still meeting somewhere and collecting salaries.
Tommy Turtle - May 19, 2013 - Report this comment
Garrett does indeed sound like he saw it all coming. History repeats itself, because we never learn from it. "The Driver" - inspiration, indeed, but the coincidences in character name -- naah, John Galt didn't run a railroad. The Taggarts did, but railroads were a much larger part of the economy in the 1920s-1950s than they are today. So it would be natural for the industrialists to include rail, steel, etc., before iPods became the economic engine. Thanks for following the comment, revisiting, and adding some interesting info.

The author of the parody has authorized comments, and wants YOUR feedback.

Link To This Page

The address of this page is: For help, see the examples of how to link to this page.

This is view # 1563