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 -> "The Ballad Of Jeb's Brother"

Original Song Title:

"The Ballad Of Jed Clampett"

Original Performer:

Lester Flatt and Earl Skruggs

Parody Song Title:

"The Ballad Of Jeb's Brother"

Parody Written by:

Guy DiRito

The Lyrics

Give a listen to this story 'bout the brother of Jeb,
Who did volunteer to make sure the troops were fed.
Raghead's they, started shootin' at the food,
Tryin' very hard on Thanksgiving to be rude.

Broiled that is, true gold, hist-o-ry.

Now the liberals claim this chief he does not care,
Left folk said bread, be a factor there.
Said too much money for that trip way overseas,
So they'll drag him through the muck and flog him heavily.

Bills that is, left wing fools, act bizarre.

Too soon it was to say good-bye to old Jeb's next of kin.
And so the troops were really pleased he's joined their dinin' in.
Then they divided up again, dispersed locality,
I'll bet you that those left wing brats will show hostility.

Hill and Billy that is. Rant a spell. Shake your blues off. So hit the bricks now, y'hear?

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: 3.5
How Funny: 3.5
Overall Rating: 3.5

Total Votes: 8

Voting Breakdown

The following represent how many people voted for each category.

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

User Comments

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

Adagio - November 28, 2003 - Report this comment
That's a really good one!
Johnny D - November 28, 2003 - Report this comment
Internal rhyme nailed down as always, Guy - well done.
Jeff Reuben - November 28, 2003 - Report this comment
Are people really complaining about the money spent for Bush's trip overseas now? Unreal. I can think of twenty things off the top of my head where the Bush Administration has spent much more foolishly (and with much more money involved) to complain about =)
Guy - November 28, 2003 - Report this comment
Jeff - They screamed bloody murder when he landed on the deck of that aircraft carrier. They questioned the cost. Do you really think a leopard will change its spots? It's just a prediction. It is not only his right but his duty as commander in chief to review his troops any time and any where he chooses. I don't understand the reason for all the heartburn when he landed on the carrier. He will be called on this again I am sure.
Nicholas Hoag - November 28, 2003 - Report this comment
Call me P.C. but "raghead" is quite a racist term. sorry, not funny
dude - November 28, 2003 - Report this comment
his duty to inspect the troops? give me a break. This is called ELECTION YEAR CAMPAIGNING. I'm sure the democract hopefulls would love to have the tax payers spend money for their press ops. overseas in Iraq. Bush has only been succesful in spending money like a druken sailor, and it's only going to get worse as the election gets closer.
dude - November 28, 2003 - Report this comment
the real reason for Bush to pull this publicity stunt? Hillary was going to be there the next day... it's of course better to upstage her than actually do something useful.
Guy - November 28, 2003 - Report this comment
OK Dude then what do you call Hillary's trip to Iraq and Afghanistan. She is in country as I type this. And as far as predicitons about what the lefties will do and say about this, I rest my case. Thanks you made my day.
Guy - November 28, 2003 - Report this comment
Oh, so if she really likes the troops why didn't she arrive there yesterday and serve them some food? Yeah, right like she would even come close to lowering herself to doing something as thoughful as that.
dude - November 29, 2003 - Report this comment
puh-leaze... that is the most pathetic trolling I've ever seen. Are you actually saying Bush was lowering himself to the level of the troops by serving them food? Only if he spent more than twenty minutes mugging for the press corps he flew over with him. If spent 8 hours serving them food, than fine, otherwise it's just a shameless press junket at tax payer expense. I'm sure Hillary didn't have the taxpayers fund her trip.
Guy - November 29, 2003 - Report this comment
Well dude if you don't like what Bush did then you have the opportunity next November 2nd to try to do something about it. Until then I guess you are stuck with him. Thank God only New York is stuck with Hillary. To the good people of the state of NY, I offer my condolences.
Adagio - November 29, 2003 - Report this comment
I agree, Guy!!
dude - December 01, 2003 - Report this comment
what an even weaker comeback, you're even lamer than I thought. don't worry about Nov.2, once the economy tanks again after Christmas shopping is over, Bush will stand no chance come November, irregardless of how I happen to vote.
Robert J. Pagliaro - December 01, 2003 - Report this comment
On behalf of all New Yorkers (except those north of Albany), we love Hill and Bill. Guy, the country didn't vote this guy in - he got by with a little help from Jeb. Most Americans (read: those who voted for Gore) are worried that the GOP will steal the election again in November. Not a publicity stunt? Guy, come on, you know better than that. When was the last time you had Thanksgiving dinner at 6:00am? (that was local time in Iraq for the Bush publicity stunt). Mission accomplished. bob
Robert J. Pagliaro - December 01, 2003 - Report this comment
Guy, my mistake. I read 6:00am as the time for the publicity stunt in the Washington Post - you know, that great paper that took down King Richard I. Anyway, they had a factual error in their time line resulting in erroneously printing the 6:00am photo op; it was more like 6:00PM. So, I apologize for the error - but it was still a publicity stunt. (I think he also attended the Halliburton board meeting on behalf of Dick Cheney while in Baghdad.) Later, bob
Michael Pacholek - December 01, 2003 - Report this comment
Dude, how dare you suggest Bush is a drunken sailor! He's a drunken airman, dammit! Air National Guard, not Navy! And you're not the only one to think he went to Iraq because the wife of The Last President was already going. Guy, New York doesn't need your condolences. Except in baseball. We're just sorry your State of Texas has a couple of rocket scientists in Kay Hutchison and John Cornyn, still a big improvement over Phil Crypto-Gramm. Adagio agrees with Guy. There's a shock. Not just a little help from Jeb, Robert, but also from Katherine Harris, a few Cuban thugs in Miami and the Rehnquist Five.
Guy - December 01, 2003 - Report this comment
Hey Dude invest in a Funk and Wagnall. You'll learn from it that there is no such word as " irregardless".

The rest of you whiners, I want to thank. I predicted that you all would make something out of this that it is not. Within two hours after the news broke on this story is when this was written and you all managed to prove my point. Again my most sincere thanks. to you all. Keep on slammin'.
dude - December 02, 2003 - Report this comment
hey dude, get a DICTIONARY (since a Funk and Wagnall is an encyclopedia):

what's really sad guy? there was hardly any negative press about this. a couple of anonymous people on a website don't count as a a huge newsbreak. liberal media suppressed all the outrage I suppose. you're really pathetic at arguements. just keep following the party line, and don't think for yourself, that's what Bush wants as he robs your children blind
Guy - December 02, 2003 - Report this comment
Oh, so I see, the word is described as being 'a blunder' as the link you provided tells me. Hmmm.

I think the reason some people throttle the current administation is the fact that they all want things to be like they were before 9/11. Guess what? This is unrealistic. Al Queda has upset the status quo. This is the real enemy.
Robert J. Pagliaro - December 02, 2003 - Report this comment
Guy, please tell me what Iraq has to do with 9/11? Let's recap here: while Osama is responsible for the events of 9/11, we can't find him (apparently the cellular customer has travelled out of range or is on another line), so we take out Iraq - a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 and was certainly no threat to us at all. We do this under the false statements that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. We can't find Saddam and we can't find WMD's. We've spent billions of dollars and innocent people have lost their lives - all in the name of Peace? So, our fearless leader then stages a photo op by having Thanksgiving dinner in Baghdad. I can't tell you how safe that makes this New Yorker feel. Wasn't it better when we had a Rhodes Scholar in the White House? Barring another election theft, your puppet is going down in November. Later, bob
dude - December 02, 2003 - Report this comment
your right, the status quo was upset after 9/11. the solution however isn't to attack countries that Bush has a personal grudge against ie. "They tried to kill my daddy", but to go after the terrorists. the terrorists were Saudi nationals that attacked the US. they were funded by Saudi oil tycoons. what that has to do with attacking Iraq, I have no idea. Afghanastan I understand, they were controlling the country. we have credible nuclear threats developing in Iran and North Korea, but no action is being taken against them, or even being considered, because we decided to take over Iraq. if North Korea is succesful in developing a nuclear weapon, Iraq is going to look like an even larger blunder.
dude - December 02, 2003 - Report this comment do a google search for miserable failure... what do you get?
Gary Main - December 02, 2003 - Report this comment
The sad part is the Democrats dont have a candidate that can win
Michael Pacholek - December 02, 2003 - Report this comment
That's what people thought in '91, Gary. And the guy they picked was a hell of a lot more flawed than John Kerry, or even Howard Dean, and had a far smarter opponent. And he was still ten times the President that Georgie is, and no, that's not "fuzzy math."

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 # 1407