About Me

My photo
Retired Info Tech Project Manager. Born in the British Empire. Educated in Physics. Worked inn Information Technology. Interests - Writing, Theater, Bicycling, Rowing.

Saturday, March 1, 2008

At Ease in the National Parks

Gun Rules May Be Eased in U.S. Parks

Jean Biergarten
Washington Pest

Visitors to some national parks would be able to start packing heat along with their tents and picnic baskets under a proposal being considered by the Interior Department that would ease restrictions on loaded firearms in the parks.
[The] action comes in response to two recent letters from 51 senators -- 44 Republicans and seven Democrats -- requesting that the National Park Service align its gun rules with state laws. If a state permits citizens to carry concealed weapons, the national parks in that state should, too, they argued.

"These inconsistencies in firearms regulations for public lands are confusing, burdensome and unnecessary," wrote the lawmakers, led by Sens. Michael D. Crapo (R-Idaho) and Max Baucus (D-Mont.). ". . . Such regulatory changes would respect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners, while providing a consistent application of state weapons laws across all land ownership boundaries."

Hmmm… it sounded like there was more to the story, so I contacted a straight shooting authority, the has-been actor, Snarlton Peston. He told me that this was only the first step in a well-thought out process to fully implement the Second Armament.

SP: As you know, Jean, the Constitution gives us the right to bear arms.
JB: I thought it was the right to wear short sleeves (“bare arms”)….
SP: Idiot! Go back and read the Second Armament to the Constipation.
JB: ???
SP: You know I’m an advocate of states’ rights.
JB: I figured that.
SP: But that’s only a start. I am very logical, so I extend states’ rights to local rights.
JB: What do you mean?
SP: Shoot, man! A county or township or other jurisdiction could have its own rules and regulations. I want the NPS to be consistent with those. In other words, if the local government allows you to carry a gun, the federal government has no business restricting that right.
JB: But wouldn’t that be a nightmare to enforce?
SP: Exactly!
JB: ?????
SP: Told you I’m logical. So I want all federal agencies to be consistent with each other.
JB: What? Are you smoking something illegal?
SP: If I smoke it, it can’t be illegal. Anyway, what I was saying – what was I saying?
JB: You fantasize that all federal agencies become consistent…
SP: Hey! Don’t say fantasize! Nothing wrong with my size, and I think only wholesome, family values type of thoughts – like shooting.
JB: ????
SP: So, all federal agencies should consistently allow you to carry a gun if the local government does.
JB: Have you run this past the DHS?
SP: If they try to run past me, I’ll shoot them.
JB: I mean, do you really expect to carry a concealed gun into every federal building in Virginia, for example?
SP: Why not? The constipation gives me that right.
JB: I see.
SP: Because I’m logical, I don’t stop at the county level; I would allow every zip code, may be every homeowner’s association, every street or every block, to enact its own gun control regulations; and require every federal agency to abide by those regulations.
JB: Don’t you think this would undermine national security?
SP: How? If we’re armed, we would be able to shoot all democrats – I mean, terrorists. Well, that’s it, Jean – I have to go to the shooting range now. Would you care to come along and hold a target for me?
JB: Normally, yes, Mr. Peston, but today I have a root canal scheduled.

Jean Biergarten can be reached at biergarten@pestwash.com

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Barack Hussein

McCain Supporter Ridicules Obama
By Michael D. Shear
Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, February 27, 2008; Page A06
CINCINNATI, Feb. 26 -- A supporter of
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) ridiculed Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in an introductory speech at a McCain rally here this morning, repeatedly using Obama's middle name, Hussein, and deriding him as a terrorist sympathizer.

I could not believe what I was reading. Sen. McCain is an honorable man, isn’t he? And, certainly, he is too swift to employ the Swift Boat Scheisskopfen.

But then – the alleged miscreant was identified as a conservative radio talk-show host. Ah, that explains it. A colleague of Lush Dimbaugh; nothing they say can be taken seriously, unless it is independently corroborated and notarized. After all, there are liars, damned liars and conservative radio talk-show hosts.

Still, just to get matters clarified, I got in touch with the speaker in question, and questioned him. Bill Cunnilingus came on the line after a few rings.

BC: Yeah?
EO: Bill, this is Edwin Oldman, from the Washington Pest. How are you today?
BC: What’s it to you?
EO: You sound upset; good.
BC: What?
EO: Never mind. Did you repeatedly refer to Senator Barack Obama as Barack Hussein Obama?
BC: Sure, I did. What of it?
EO: Why?
BC: Hell, there’s not much I can say to discredit him. He turns out to be a moderate and a pragmatist, not too different from McCain.
EO: So you wanted to discredit Sen. Obama by using his middle name? Were you implying that an Arabic name is synonymous with terrorism?
BC: Syn…hey, wait a minute; using them two dollar words is a sin all right. But you don’t understand, do you?
EO: Understand what?
BC: To be foreign is worse – make that much worse – than being a terrorist. Look at how much people talk about Osama and Al Qaeda; do you hear anyone talking about the Unabomber, or Timothy McVeigh?
EO: What do you mean?
BC: Look, you liberal nitwit, it don’t matter how bad a company is – like Enron or Exxon or Halliburton – nobody minds them doing business in the US of A. But if a company is foreign – like Dubai Ports World – nobody wants them here; and we don’t even care if they’re good, bad or indifferent.
EO: But Senator Obama is not foreign; he is 100% American.
BC: What do you mean? He’s a skinny black guy with a funny name who has lived in other countries.
EO: So what? Lush Dimbaugh is a fat white guy who should go live in some other country….
BC: Watch it, mister. You lobbies need to understand it is all tied up with 1925.
EO: 1925?
BC: The year of the Scopes trial.
EO: What of it?
BC: That was a very BIG year. You might call it a portal year.
EO: A portal --? You mean, a pivotal. Year?
BC: Whatever. But before 1925 and after 1925 makes a big difference.
EO: How do you mean?
BC: We need only science that was known in 1925, nothing that came in after that.
EO: How about technology?
BC: Oh, technology is all right.
EO: But you need science if you want technology.
BC: No, science evolves; but technology is a special creation. Just pray and you’ll get it. If you don’t know how to pray, ask Rev. Huggable; he’ll teach you.
EO: Anything else special about 1925?
BC: Illegal immigrants who came here before 1925 were all respectable and acceptable; immigrants who came after 1925, whether legal or illegal, are all despicable.
EO: Why so?
BC: Because it was a portal year.
EO: I don’t follow you.
BC: That means you are a liberal. Be careful. John Asscroft is watching you.

Sunday, February 24, 2008

Medecins Sans Diplômes

Medecins Sans Diplômes

The Economist recently reported on “India's fake doctors.” The story started thus:

“BAREFOOT labourers, skinny housewives and half-naked, snuffling toddlers wait outside a corrugated-iron and plywood shack in a Delhi slum to see “the Bengali doctor”. Noor Muhammed, the nattily dressed 30-something inside, is indeed Bengali, but, as he cheerfully admits, not a doctor. Yet as he makes quick temperature and blood-pressure checks and hands out tablets—many of them antibiotics—his patients nod respectfully, and pay.”

I had to look at that paragraph a couple of times to make sure it didn’t say “skinny, snuffling toddlers and half-naked housewives.” Well, duh! It's a British paper, isn't it?

OK. Can it really be? Our Help Desks are staffed by people whose healthcare is provided by quacks? How healthy can these people be? How confident can we be that we’re getting the right answers when we talk to a call center?

I asked the well known authority and former lawmaker, Dr. Bill Grist, for his comments. Here’s what he offered, looking the camera straight in the lens:

Dr. Grist: It is not accurate to term these undocumented physicians as quacks. They are properly referred to as Doctors Without Degrees, similar to, but not affiliated with, Doctors Without Borders. The official name of the organization, in French (of course), is Medecins Sans Diplômes.

Me: But – don’t doctors have to be duly licenses?

Dr. Grist: Whatever for? For centuries – nay, for millennia, doctors have practiced without any kind of licensing, except for the actions of the free market. You know, don’t you, that most doctors are Republicans and therefore devotees of the free market?

Me: Oh? I thought it was bundled with membership in the AMA…

Dr. Grist: Anyway, the free market is much better at allocating resources – including medical resources – than government.

Me: You mean, doctors don’t want Medicare payments?

Dr. Grist: I mean, we don’t need the government telling us who can, and who can’t, practice medicine.

Me: But, isn’t it the government’s duty to safeguard the health and well-being of its citizens?

Dr. Grist: You’re sounding like a liberal. No, the government should stay out of our sickrooms, as much as out of our bedrooms – may be even more.

Me: Oh? Why’s that?

Dr. Grist: Think about it, if you can. We don’t want to deprive poor people of all medical care just because they can’t afford to go to a high-priced, degreed and licensed, physician. Don’t you have any compassion?

Me: Yes, but –

Dr. Grist: What if some untutored but natural genius can diagnose and cure patients at a fraction of the cost of the formal healthcare sector? And, keep in mind, the practice of medicine is self-regulating.

Me: You mean, peer reviews?

Dr. Grist: What I mean is this. A medical practitioner who kills most of his patients will be chased out of town by next of kin. Over time, that tends to weed out the incompetent.

Me: But, in the meantime, innocent people may die!

Dr. Grist: Look, I am pro life but that doesn’t extend to non-fetuses.

The Times That Try My Soul

The Times That Try My Soul

Thomas Paine said, “These are the times that try men’s’ souls.” Senator John McCain could be forgiven for saying “These are the Times that try my soul”, following the publication of allegations regarding him and a female lobbyist.

But we don’t have any evidence that he uttered such a sentiment. Perhaps he is too civilized, and worldly-wise, to complain thus about the New Dork Times. So your correspondent raised the matter with the conservative icon, Lush Dimbaugh.

Edwin Oldman: Mr. Dimbaugh, how nice to see you again!

Lush Dimbaugh: Edwin, you old liberal nitwit, it is good to be here.

EO: What do you think of the NDT story on John McCain and the lobbyist?

LD: The attractive female lobbyist, you mean? Well, I’m not surprised.

EO: You mean, you knew something was going on?

LD: No, nothing went on. McCain is too old for that kind of shenanigan; that’s why he’s running for president.

EO: Then what do you mean, you’re not surprised?

LD: I have always told John, but he never listened to me. He’s always ignored conservatives.

EO: What have you always told him?

LD: Just that you can’t party with the liberals, even if it is a bi-partisan party. You can’t look across the isle, you can’t reach across the isle and you certainly can’t walk across the isle.

EO: You mean, you told Sen. McCain not to work with the Democrats under any circumstances? What about McCain-Feingold?

LD: I told you, he never listened to me; that’s why he’s in trouble now.

EO: Why do you think he ignores your comments?

LD: During his captivity in North Vietnam, he got used to listening to commie pinko leftists. So now he can’t even hear anyone who is right.

EO: You’re saying the Democrats are no different from the North Vietnamese?
LD: Look, John McCain needs to understand who his friends are, and who his constituency is. It’s not the liberals. They might legislate with him once in a while but, when it comes to a presidential election, they’re going to attack him mercilessly.

EO: I thought that’s what you are doing.

LD: Nah, I just criticize him. The New Dork Times is the one implying he had sex in the lobby.

EO: What? I don’t recall reading that…

LD: What do you think they implied? I mean, these lobbyists do everything in the lobby; that’s why we call them lobbyists.

EO: Really?

LD: What are you, stupid, or liberal, or both? Lobbyists meet lawmakers in the lobby; they talk to them in the lobby; they give them position papers in the lobby; they give them campaign contributions in the lobby; they wine them, though not dine them, in the lobby; they even have sex with them in the lobby.

EO: But what about all the other people in the lobby?

LD: What about them? They just wait their turn, that’s all. Remember, we are talking about high-net worth people here.

EO: You’re saying McCain and Isen

LD: I’m not saying anything; it’s the Times that’s saying things that try his soul.

EO: But why is the Times doing this?

LD: It is a desperate attempt to boost circulation, shore up their stock price and avoid a takeover by Rupert Murdoch. Well, Edwin, you liberal twit, it was nice talking to you. I have to get going now. I don’t want to be late for the Axis of Intolerance meeting this afternoon.

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Paranoia Shift

Paranoia Shift

Paranoid? Don't Worry; It's All Under Control

By Peter Carlson
Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, February 19, 2008; Page C01

Have you seen the latest issue of Paranoia magazine?
No? Well, that's not surprising, is it? There's a very good reason why you haven't seen it: They don't want you to see it. They know that Paranoia exposes them and their secret conspiracies to control every aspect of human life.
…..
Does that mean that Paranoia is . . . part of the conspiracy? Could Paranoia be printing false conspiracy theories to throw us all off the trail of the real conspiracies?
Oh, man, thinking about all this stuff makes my head hurt. I'm gonna stop now and go put another layer of tinfoil in my hat, just in case.

After reading Carlson’s article, my head hurt, too. So I turned to the one unshakeable source of support, the Rev. Rat Robberson. Here’s what he assured me:

It is prudent, not paranoid, to fear the unknown. One should always fear the unknown, unless an angel appears, saying “Fear not!”

The paranoid are all agnostics and/or atheists, unless they happen to be non-protestants. In any case, they are some variety of heathens and /or pagans, who are worried that Almighty God would find them out and punish them for their satanic ways.

They are right to be worried, but wrong to try to hide from Him. He knows who they are, what they are thinking and where they are hiding. They will rot in hell – unless they become my adherents and start a program of regular, substantial contributions to my church.

JFK was not killed by any conspiracy. He was killed for not knowing his place in society. Only Protestants, preferably Baptists, are allowed to become president of the United States.

The Rockefellers are shape-shifting satanic reptiles but not the Queen of England; she is a shape-shifting satanic amphibian. They are not the only ones; Osama bin Laden and Bill Clinton are also shape-shifting satanic anthropoids.

Global warming is not caused by burning fossil fuels and releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. It is a result of God’s wrath on mankind for teaching the satanic theory of evolution in schools. Note that global warming did not start until after the Scopes trial made the teaching of evolution standard practice in the United States.

Second Armament

Second Armament

Noted conservative commentator, Mean Mannity, visited our offices recently and spoke with your correspondent, Edwin Oldman. A transcript follows:

EO: Welcome, Mr. Mannity.

MM: Good to be here, Edwin.

EO: You look pensive, Mr. Mannity. Something on your mind today?

MM: Yeah. I can’t get over the editorial in the Washington Post today. It just goes to show that Liberals are unfit to write editorials.

EO: Which one, Mr. Mannity? Guantanamo, the HUD Secretary, or the Virginia Tech follow-up?

MM: The last one, of course. Democracks are crying wolf about mentally unstable people buying guns at gun shows. Can you believe it?

EO: Well, sure. Liberals tend to say things like that.

MM: But, I mean, really! Guns are not allowed on the Virginia Tech campus; that didn’t stop the killer. Do they think more useless regulation would have stopped him from buying a gun illegally, bringing it on campus illegally and killing people, also illegally?

EO: Yes, but – would you abolish all traffic regulation because people break speed limits and run red lights?

MM: You’re missing my point, Edwin. Regulation is not the way to regulate the conduct of people who don’t obey regulations. No matter what you regulate, the perpetrators will continue to perpetrate their perpetrations.


EO: So, how would you attack the problem?

MM: That’s the spirit.

EO: Huh?

MM: You need to attack the problem. Just think, if all the students at Virginia Tech, or NIU, had been armed, they could have killed a shooter as soon as he opened fire on one of them. That would have limited the killing to no more than two.

EO: You want to arm all students?
MM: Exactly! That is the free market approach to solving the problem of campus violence. It keeps the government out of our lives and lets the market allocate the deaths the most efficient way.

EO: Really!

MM: In the same way, if the TSA arms all passengers as they pass through security –

EO: What!

MM: Kindly don’t interpret me. As I was saying, if only the TSA had the intelligence to arm all passengers before they board the air craft, we won’t need air marshals.

EO: Why not?

MM: How can anyone hijack an airplane full of armed passengers? Unless they can all agree on a destination? Unlikely.

EO: Hmmm…But what about jihadis – you know, suicide hijackers, like suicide bombers? They don’t care if they die, as long as they kill the rest of us.

MM: Oh, Edwin – don’t you see that is a self-correcting problem, with built-in negative feedback? Sooner or later, all suicide attackers will have committed suicide.

EO: But how many people will die in the meantime?

MM: So? You want to bring in Big Government? You sound like a Democrack. Let me assure you, the American people don’t want that.

EO: Oh, you have heard from the American people on this issue?

MM: Sure, I have heard from Lush Dimbaugh, Ann Falter, Snarlton Peston and many others, including Dick “Chuck Yourself” Feney. Well, Edwin, I’m afraid I have to move on. This has been a pleasure but I need to attend a meeting of the local chapter of Noxious Rebellious Assassins.

Saturday, February 16, 2008

Size Matters

Size Matters

Conservative personality Lush Dimbaugh recently dropped by our offices for a chat with your correspondent, Edwin Oldman.

Oldman: “Welcome, Mr. Dimbaugh. Please have a seat over there – that couch should be sturdy enough. Can I get you anything?”

Dimbaugh: “No, thank you Edwin. I am completely fed up.”

Oldman: “Ah – you mean the presidential primaries?”

Dimbaugh: “No, those are secondary to my burning concern today.”

Oldman: “The primaries are secondary? Even though Senator McGain has gained at the expense of your team?”

Dimbaugh: “Well, that is a sore subject with me. Even Meter Omni (All Things to Al People, According to the Applause Meter) has endorsed him.”

Oldman: “But Governor Huggable is hanging in there, just like a tough conservative ought to”.

Dimbaugh: “So is Wrong Paul, but you and I know who the nominee is going to be.”

Oldman: “If McGain is nominated, are you really going to vote for the Senator from New York?”

Dimbaugh: “Nah, I was just mad – madder’n a hoot owl – when I said that. Seriously, I can’t see voting for Senator Hailmary. Nor for the other Senator – Yakyak Ohmama. I would probably just stay home on election day – sort of a real absentee ballot, if you follow me.”

Oldman: “So what’s on your mind, if it is not the election?”

Dimbaugh: “I am mad about all the poor conservatives who have conserved a little fat on their bodies – well, OK, a lot of fat – and now the liberal media are jumping all over them for obesity!”

Oldman: “Mr. Dimbaugh, are you objecting to cultural discrimination against the obese?“


Dimbaugh: “Culture, my aspect! I am talking about real, hard core discrimination. The Mississippi legislature has a bill that would prohibit restaurants from serving food to obese people. Can you believe that?”

Oldman: “Really?”
Dimbaugh: “You know I have always ranted and railed against Big Government; but now I find that governance of the Big by the Skinny is worse.”
Oldman: “Huh?”

Dimbaugh: “Skinny fitness fiends trying to tell hard working, God fearing, right thinking Americans how to live – just because we saved some fat on our bodies.”

Oldman: “Where are you going with this, Mr. Dimbaugh?”

Dimbaugh: “Skinny people burn up their body fat but guess what that does? It adds to the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere; may be even contributes to global warming. We obese people, on the other hand, store the fat in our bodies, and save the atmosphere, acting like carbon sinks. So the government should tax skinny people and subsidize fat people.”

Oldman: “Are you serious?”

Dimbaugh: “That’s why Fatrick Loosecannon would make a better president than anyone running this year; I would be even better, if you could talk me into taking the job.”

Oldman: “We can’t?”

Dimbaugh: “Why should I take a pay cut? No, Governor Huggable is the best of the lot the voters got this year. And definitely not that skinny Senator Ohmama.”

Valentines Say

Valentines Say

The Rockville (MD) Gazette, a suburban newspaper, recently reported on a number of long-married couples in the area.

Bess and Jacob have been married 70 years. Dan and Sylvia were married nearly 68 years ago. Imagine that! They have been married longer than I (and probably you) have been alive.

More striking than the longevity were some of the attitudes these seniors expressed. Perhaps that's why they have had such enduring marriages. For instance -

Recalling her first impression of her husband, Bess said she just liked him. Sounds like she still does. Can't say anyone has ever liked me, let alone said it out loud....But then, consider that Bess liked traveling - she said "I never found a place I disliked. It was all beautiful." Well, may be someone that open minded, would be able to like even me....

Not to be outdone, Jacob explained that there were no tricks to a lasting marriage. "If you love each other, that's enough." What? Love is enough to overcome the slings and arrows of overdue bills, kids falling sick, day care problems, nosy neighbors, obnoxious in-laws, layoffs, not keeping up with the Joneses,...?

Dan met Sylvia when both were 15. He said "She was my type." That's always a good indication but -- at 15, how many of us really know ourselves, let alone recognize our type?
He added that he appreciates her general outlook. Hmmm...My wife too has a general outlook. We get along well because I have a private outlook. Early on, I had a sergeant outlook, but it was quickly demoted.

For her part, Sylvia noted, "The chemistry has stayed over all these years." The chemistry is generally OK; the physics is where the problem comes in. The dimensions change, the mass gets redistributed, the momentum is lost...

On second thoughts, I don't buy these statements; do you? After all, these are senior citizens. God knows I have trouble remembering people's names. How much better can their memories be? I mean, come on! After you have been married for eons, it is only natural to forget the bad and highlight the good. Selective memory is probably a pre-requisite for a long marriage.

It also helps if the wife is near sighted and the husband hard of hearing.

I realize all of the foregoing is about a marriage between one man and one woman. That's not a political statement; this is all I know about. May be in my next life....

Sunday, February 10, 2008

Happiness of Pursuit

Happiness of Pursuit
Take a look at the following two news stories, both from Washington Post dated Sunday, February 10, 2008.

FRENCHWOMEN (D'UN CERTAIN AGE)
French Women Don't Get Fat and Do Get Lucky
By Pamela Druckerman
Sunday, February 10, 2008; Page B02
PARIS
If I have to get old, I want to do it in Paris.

It's not because of the dank weather, the constant personal snubs or a fetish for unpasteurized cheese. It's because, quite frankly, I'd like to keep having sex.
In the United States, my odds would be grim. Through our 40s, we American women manage to arrange romps on a fairly regular basis. But the latest national statistics show that by our 50s, a third of us haven't had sex in the last year. By our 60s, nearly half have gone sexless in the previous year. Once we hit our 70s, most of us might as well hang up an "out of business" sign. (Needless to say, men fare much better.)

So much for the gym-bodied baby boomers who promised to make 60 the new 40, using Botox as an aphrodisiac. Among today's 50-plus women, the problem of sexlessness is as bad or worse than it was for older women two decades ago.

But not in France. Frenchwomen simply don't suffer from the same dramatic, post-40s slide into sexual obsolescence. Just 15 percent of Frenchwomen in their 50s and 27 percent in their 60s haven't had any sex in the past year, according to a 2004 national survey by France's Regional Health Observatory. Another national survey being released next month will report that cohabiting Frenchwomen over 50 are having more sex now than they did in the early 1990s.

Try not to hate them: Frenchwomen don't get fat, and they do get lucky.

DEPT. OF COCK-EYED OPTIMISTS
Why Republicans Are So Darn Happy
By Eric Weiner
Saturday, February 9, 2008; 6:50 PM
After virtually ignoring happiness for more than 100 years, social scientists are making up for lost time. They're churning out hundreds of research papers on the subject each year. There are happiness conferences, a Journal of Happiness Studies, a World Database of Happiness. Happy, you might say, is the new sad.

All of this cogitating about contentment has revealed much about who's supposedly happy and who isn't. Most studies show that wealthy people are marginally happier than poor ones. People with pets or children are no happier than those without. People with active sex lives are -- surprise! -- happier than those without. No single morsel of happiness data, though, is more intriguing than this: Republicans are happier than Democrats.


Can you believe it?

What to make of these two articles? I mean, here is what they told us -

People with active sex lives are -- surprise! -- happier than those without. No single morsel of happiness data, though, is more intriguing than this: Republicans are happier than Democrats.
Do you infer, as I did, that Republicans have more active sex lives than Democrats? Well, I just hope it is always between one man and one woman, as God ordained. If not, happy or not, they will be shunned – at least by card carrying Republicans.

So, a word to the wise – or at least to unmarried Republicans. Try not to look happy.
Did you also get that Democrats are not doing such bang up job, sexwise. Otherwise, why wouldn’t they be happier? But the real question is, why ever not? How come liberals are not closer to libertines?

What else can we infer? Well, there are no Republicans in France. I mean, they have the Republique, but it’s not the same thing. I mean, the French are somewhere to the left of Hubert Humphrey politically. So, if they can have an active sex life and be happy, even in late middle age, how come our Democrats cannot, even in youth? Mind you, this is in spite of the better care today’s middle agers take to stay in shape.

So much for the gym-bodied baby boomers who promised to make 60 the new 40, using Botox as an aphrodisiac. Among today's 50-plus women, the problem of sexlessness is as bad or worse than it was for older women two decades ago.

We know also that French women don’t drive themselves crazy with work outs and diets like American women do. In spite of that, they have more sex and are happier in middle age than at least half of American women – I mean the Democrats. Why is that?
We certainly don’t want all Democrats moving to France. That would end up painting the whole of our country red. And France is not a kind destination for those of us who don’t care to eat snails, drink wine for breakfast, or watch book discussions on TV during prime time.

Confused by all these thoughts, I turned to the one source I was sure could answer my questions – Dr. Albert Eigenstein, Scientific Advisor to the President (SAP). As expected, Eigenstein put my mind at ease.

He told me about a recent study by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) that all love – the Republican kind between only one man and one woman, as well the Democratic kind among x humans, where x is an integer – goes through the following phases:

Pursuit – this is where someone captures your interest and you woo that person with all your charm, wit and resources.

Steady State – your feelings are reciprocated and you settle in to a series of loving exchanges.

Break up – Familiarity breeds contempt, you can’t stand each other, start seeing other people – at first sneakily, then openly – and break up with each other.
I told the SAP that I was familiar with all this, having gone around the cycle a few times already. Eigenstein interrupted me and explained that, out of the three phases, we were happy only in phase one. We were, at best, bored in phase 2; and actively unhappy in phase 3. He cautioned me that these findings applied to Americans; not enough research had been done on the French, or other foreigners, to draw any meaningful conclusions.

In other words, Americans can only be happy during the Pursuit. No matter how much sex they have during Steady State, they are not happy. So, Ms. Druckeman – forget about moving to Paris.

Now, that made sense to me. After all, we value the Pursuit of Happiness, right up there, along with Life and Liberty. So, the Happiness of Pursuit is all that matters to us.

I thanked the SAP. He said he had to get going – he was seeing someone new and didn’t want to be late.

War on Error

The Five Front War: The Better Way to Fight Global Jihad
Daniel Byman
Wiley, Hardcover 320 pages US $25.95
A comprehensive look at the War on Terror and the best way to a safer future

Reviewed by Jonathan Inchley, Washington Pest

In his new book The Five Front War, Dr. Daniel Byman shows us yet another way to look at the war on terror. This book attempts to present the big picture, in terms that are comprehensible to the average citizen.

Dr. Byman is a scholar, not a politician. He faults the main approaches to combating terrorism, offered by our political leaders - military intervention and attempts to spread democracy in societies that tend to commit terrorism, especially against us. He urges us to pursue two other fronts, instead – hit them hard with counter terrorism operations and pressure our allies to enact reforms that give their citizens more ownership in the respective countries.

Daniel Byman (Washington, DC) directs the Security Studies Program and the Center for Peace and Security Studies at Georgetown University. He is a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution and also served on the 9/11 Commission. He regularly writes about terrorism and the Middle East for the "Washington Post", "Slate", and other publications.

Some of his arguments are well founded. After all, there is no basis for believing democracy to be an effective antidote to terrorism. In fact, it has not even been demonstrated that democracy is incompatible with terrorism. After all, President George Bush was democratically elected, at least in 2004.

Secondly, if the people in a society are consumed by mass hysteria – such as a political “ism” or a religious militancy – the spread of democracy in that society will only server to empower the latent terrorist impulses of such a people. Freed from grievances against their own government, the people would be free to direct all their attention, resources and suicide bombers against the United States.

The book does not stress what is obvious to this reviewer, and perhaps to you, Dear Reader. We need to disrupt a terror-generating society in such a way as to render it impotent; and then withdraw. Nation-building is for the birds; nation-demolition, for nations that act against us, is all we should be concerned about.

True, Dr. Byman does have a point regarding counter-terrorism operations. Knocking off the leaders of the terrorist groups can be helpful – if done consistently and comprehensively. We may need to “neutralize” ten percent or more of the membership of a terrorist group – in order to be sure the targets include all those capable of leading the group effectively – before we see an appreciable reduction in acts of terrorism. But, are we capable of such an effort, especially on a sustained basis?

The first thing that usually torpedoes our counter-terrorism efforts is that somewhere some group of civilians are hit, either in addition to, or even in place of, the intended targets of terrorist. This is just a case of collateral damage; it should not deter us from persisting in our operations until we see the desired results. Instead, we apologize, look for the guilty and set about hobbling ourselves. After all, the civilians provide food, shelter, money and other resources to support the terrorists. There is nothing wrong in taking action to reduce the sources of support for any group that acts against us.

The author is right to urge that we form strong alliances in our fight against terror. But the allies we need are not the governing classes, but the criminal classes. Think about it. If the terror-generator society gets addicted to debilitating drug use, that can only help us; the more of their young men, and women, are zombied out, the fewer there will be who are capable of committing terrorism.

Similarly, we should encourage the young men and women of such societies to freely engage in wild orgies, discarding all inhibitions. This would provide a number of benefits. “Make love, not war” – implemented in this manner – is a very viable solution.

Longer term, such behavior weakens the authority of traditional authorities – be they religious, political or cultural. Since the terrorism usually owes much of its sponsorship to traditional authorities, weakening their grip on young men and women can be the first step in our war on terror.

In the absence of such steps, ours can only be a war on error. It is a pity that this well-written book does not follow an enlightening analysis with such brilliant solutions.


Jonathan Incley’s e-mail address is inchleyj@wahingtonpest.com

Mardi Grand

Mardi Grand

The day after Governor Meter Omni (All Things to All People, According to the Applause Meter) announced his withdrawal from contention for the Richbuttlican presidential nomination, your correspondent caught up with him. Actually, your correspondent ran into the former Governor at a Boston fish market.

Correspondent: “Fancy meeting you here, Governor!”

Omni: “Edwin Oldman! What brings you here, strictly speaking?”

C: “I came to get Scrod.”

O: “Ah, I know all about it. I got scrod last Tuesday.”

C: “You did?”

O: “Ha ha. I was talking about my disappointing showing on Mardi Grand.”

C: “Mardi Grand? Oh, Super Tuesday? Governor, I believe the French just call it Super Mardi”.

O: “Shows how little they know.”

C: “So, Governor, what are your plans now that you’re out of the running?”

O: “Well, Ed, you know I am a conservative. So, right now, I am working on conserving – what’s left of my capital. We have a free market and a free press, but darn it – our campaigns are far from free. I had to pay through the nose.”

C: “I mean, what are your plans until 2012?”

O: “Perhaps go back to investment banking. Make money. There is a lot to be said for behaving like a real capitalist. After all, Karl Marx would have been a lot happier if, instead of writing about Das Kapital, he had focused on accumulating some.”

C: “Do you plan to run again for the 2012 nomination? “

O: “Yes, of course. I believe in staying the course. It’s just that I need enough resources for my own surge.”

C: “Do you think you are up to the stress and strain of another campaign?”

O: “Oh, sure. Especially if I don’t have the pains in the side I had this time.”

C: “Pains? In the side?”

O: “You know, Senator McGain was a constant thorn in my left side, and Reverend Huggable managed to land a few blows on my right side.”

C: “So what makes you think it would be better for you in 2012?”

O: “Well, the Senator should be four years older by then, and less able to withstand the rigors of the campaign. Plus, he would have alienated even more people. As for the Reverend, one never knows when a scandal might erupt involving him.”

C: “What scandal? What do you know that my readers don’t?”

O: “Oh, I don’t know anything, but the odds are in favor of a scandal. Just look at some other well known preachers – like Merry Swagger; or, look at other former governors of Arkansas, who may or may not have had sex with ‘that woman’, depending on your definition - of sex, had, and woman.”

C: “Why do you think you failed to win big in the South, in spite of your conservative credentials?”

O: “It’s you guys in the chattering classes. You keep harping on my Moreman faith, and worked against me in the South – especially with the lesser men you find there in abundance. They recognized the Reverend as one of their own, the SOBs.”

C: “Excuse me!”

O: “You know, the people living South of Baltimore.”

C: “It surprised many of us that you didn’t seek the support of another prominent conservative, ex-Senator George Fallen in Virginia.”

O: “I sought it all right, and even found it, but it wasn’t what I expected it to be. Every time he tried to say ‘Mike Huggable’, it came out sounding too much like ‘Macaca’. So I said, ‘George, this isn’t good news.’ He replied, ‘Good noose? Did I ever tell you about the good noose I had in my office?’ Then I told him, ‘George, I know you really want to help me. So why don’t you campaign for one of the Democracks?’ But he couldn’t bring himself to do it; he has always been a Richbuttlican, as have I.”

C: “You really asked Senator Fallen to campaign for a Democrack? Why?”

O: “If you know George, you would appreciate how much his support can mean – to the opponent of anyone he supports. But, if by some chance, he helped to turn 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue into a Broad House or a Black House for the next four years, that would only set the stage for me to come storming back in 2012.”

C: “How do you propose to convince the Richbuttlican base that you are conservative enough and, at the same time, convince the independents that you are centrist enough?”

O: “Ed, you’re talking about appealing to the Middle. Exactly what McGain has done. Well, I believe in eliminating the Middle Man. So I would just explain the facts of life to our base.”

C: “You don’t mean the birds and the bees? Don’t they already know that stuff?”

O: Oh, sure. That’s why they have good reproductivity, even if their productivity is pretty low. What I mean is this – look, supporting Gay Marriage is a Pro Life position. Very few gay couples, unlike straight couples, go in for an abortion. I’m sure our base would support me once they understand that. Plus, my position helps to send more Democracks to hell.”

C: “I see. Actually, I don’t see.”

O: “Let’s take another issue – my faith. I will explain to people that I am nominally Moreman; but the real faith I practiced for many years, and now intend to practice for the next three years, is the Mammon faith. To turn this country around, we need to all worship Mammon instead of God – at least until we hit the age of Social Security eligibility. Then we should strictly worship God – because only He can save the Social Security fund.”

Friday, February 8, 2008

President Warms to Climate Change

Reprinted by permission of The Washington Pest

President Warms to Climate Change
By Jean Biergarten
Friday, February 8, 2008

President George W. Tush announced today the establishment of a federal agency, called the National Institute of Complementary and Alternative Sciences (NICAS).

He said, “Like I told y’all in my State of the Onion address, my administration administers climate change very serially. Al Bore may have gotten no Bell prize for it but the proof is in the puddling; we’re actually doing something about it. NICAS will be responsible for monitutoring and mangling new or contraversarial sciences and technologies – like Special Creation, Special Cremation and Special Canceration. Now y’all know I am not a scientist but this gentleman is, so I am going to ask him to tell you all about it.” He then turned the podium over to Albert Eigenstein, Special Advisor to the President (SAP) on Complementary and Alternative Science, who is on leave from Satanford University.

The SAP described the organization chart, mission, vision and goals of NICAS in excruciating and soporific detail. At long last, he took questions from the reporters.

All Creep Journal: “Dr. Eigenstein, why is the Administration, at this late stage, adding another layer of bureaucracy to interfere in the working of the free market and hobble American competitiveness?”

SAP: “Ms. Spencer, you, of all people, should be well aware of the mounting danger of global warming caused by the accumulation of carbon dioxide, derived principally from the burning of fossil fuels and the concurrent depletion of carbon sinks, such as tropical forests, on our planet. Left unattended, this problem has the real potential to drastically impact all American economic activity. What would that do to our competitiveness? As for the free market, it had its chance to address the problem and blew it totally. That’s all behind us now that the Tush Administration has stepped in.”

Fright Wing Noose: “Mr. Advisor, this Administration has less than one year left in office. So, how can you be sure the next administration will continue the efforts that you are launching now with so much effort?”

SAP: “Mr. Hawk, our President knows how the game is played. We are executing reciprocal monitoring posts with the European Union, Japan, Brazil, Russia, India and China. That means, we send our engineers over there to measure carbon emissions and climate impact; their engineers come over here and do the same. Let the next administration – any administration – try to undo that set up and you’ll hear an uproar of international protest, I guarantee it.”

Wisconsin State Urnal: “Al, where will the foreign engineers be stationed in the United States?”

SAP: “ Atlantic City, Las Vegas and Hawaii are the initial locations. We may expand the program to Idaho, Wyoming and Montana in about six months.”

Washington Post: “What actions will NICAS be empowered to take?”

SAP: “Jane, NICAS has the responsibility, and the authority, to fully monitor the adverse effects of climate change, develop scenarios for their impact on the American economy – in five year increments – and propose mitigation strategies. Further, NICAS will oversee the procurement of pilot projects to implement the selected mitigation approaches. In view of the urgency of climate change, NICAS will be exempt from FAR and authorized to accomplish all its work via No Bid Sole Source contracts.”

The Economist: “Which sciences will be the focus of NICAS?”

SAP: “That is a very important question. I will turn it over to the President of the United States.”

POTUS: You may know there are a lot of smart people who advise me on science and technology. The Coastal Liberal Intellectuals may cling to old fashioned science, like Evolution, and harp on unproven pet theories, like Cigarettes Causing Lung Cancer. But my advisors know better and, from what they tell me, I know better.

Take Special Creation, for insistence. Liberals keep talking about Darwin, monkeys and evolution. But my advisors, and I, are smarter than monkeys. We will study life forms to demounstrate how God used Special Creation to create life forms that adapt to changes in their environment.

Another area of study will be Special Cremation. Again, Pointy Heads can keep talking all they want about carbon emissions causing global warming. My advisors, like Albert here, have shown me the warming is real but it comes from above; that is, from Divine Intervention, to really burn the countries and the people that are polluting too much.”

Dr. Sunjoy Gupta: “Mr. Pesident, you mentioned a third area of complementary and alternative science at the beginning; something like Special Canceration. What did you mean by that?”

POTUS: “Doc, you know me. I say what I mean and I mean what I say, unlike the Eggheads. And I am very mean in this matter. I have never believed the Democrat propaganda about cigarettes causing lung cancer. That is just a vicious attack on hard working tobacco companies that provide good jobs to a lot of middle Americans. Now, my advisors have convinced me that people who smoke a lot of cigarettes for a long time usually have stress issues, relationship issues, and personality issues. All these issues make them less likely to go to church regularly. So the lung cancer is God’s way of punishing them for their behavior.”

SAP: “This concludes the press conference. You can pick up a hard copy of the President’s announcement in the hall as you exit.”

Jean Biergarten’s e-mail address is jbiergarten@washingtonpest.com

Tuesday, February 5, 2008

Irrelevant Conservatives Can't Stop McCain

So Lush Dumbaugh is waging a campaign against Senator John McCain? Who is going to buy into this? Dumbaugh's opposition should be worth a few additional points for McCain when the votes are tallied tonight. Personally, I would be extremely skeptical of any candidate endorsed by a Big Fat Idiot.

John McCain is a proven patriot, with decades of public service and a strong appeal to voters across our political spectrum. On the other hand, who exactly is Lush Dumbaugh? A member of the Axis of Intolerance, along with Mean Mannity and Ass Falter. That Evil Troika will be the Axis of Irrelevance after Super Tuesday. After all, if you came across a coyote howling at the moon, wouldn't you be tempted to shoot the coyote and enjoy the moonlight?

Didn't Lush Dumbaugh support Fatrick Pukeannan against Bush the Elder? Who won that round? Fatrick Pukeannan? The rectum rectorum of American politics?

What exactly do these "conservatives" conserve? Here is my list.

They don't care about hard working, law abiding, tax paying, God fearing Americans losing their jobs, homes and health insurance because their economic and legal systems allow, may be encourage, fat cat robber barons add to their ill gotten gains by sending jobs overseas. They will say the government has no business interfering in the working of the free market. What they mean is that the government has no business impacting the fortunes of their contributors. Why not consider measures to discourage the loss of jobs - say, disallowing tax deductions for expenses associated with outsourced jobs? May be go a little further and actively levy a penalty on said expenses (e.g., salaries and other expenses incurred overseas) and/or double the tax rate on income derived from offshore operations? No, they cannot stomach such thoughts, for these "con men" are a lesser breed without compassion, or even a conscience. All they conserve is their subhuman stunted emotional maturity and their affinity to chimpanzees.

They don't care about the unemployed, the underemployed and formerly employed (see Outsourcing above) losing their health insurance, often in the face of health problems, and facing painful choices about caring for seriously ill family members. All other developed nations have a better health insurance policy in place; but our conservatives don't want any measures that would tend to inconvenience Big Pharma, Big Bad Insurance. All the chumpanzee conservatives are conserving are the pocketbooks of their cronies among the Thief Executive Officers who benefit from working people's misery.

They don't care about desperate men and women who flee war, pestilence, inhuman living conditions and undertake a life-threatening trek across dangerous terrain just to work at transient jobs in America for a minimum wage. Not that they are capable of really sealing our borders; they just want to go through the motions and, in the process, siphon humongous amounts of funds to their crony companies for building ineffective and inoperable systems at outrage prices. Why not allow our neighbors to come over and work here, filling jobs our people don't seem to want to do? Make it easy for them to work here legally and get them to pay income and social security taxes, thus helping our economy. If they don't want that, are they willing to put the squeeze on employers, who knowingly or uncaringly, employ illegal immigrants? No, that would be government interference in the free market.

While we are at it, why not make it easier for our retirees to live in Mexico and Central America, and visit their families and friends in CONUS as easily as the retirees now living in Florida and Arizona? Perhaps the lower cost of living in those countries would help to slow down the increase in Social Security payments and ease the crunch on its funds. Nah- that would be too humane. These guys have never cared an iota about anyone but themselves. All the chumpanzees can conserve is laissez faire idiocy.

The Axis of Intolerance can't stop Senator McCain's Straight Talk Express. It is going to ride right over them. If they don't like the effect, they can always move to Iran, Iraq or North Korea.

Friday, February 1, 2008

Many Wives, Many Mistresses -- Book Review

Reproduced by permission of the Washington Pest

Reviewed By Jonathan Inchley

Many Wives, Many Mistresses
The Story of Postlife Therapy
By Brain Schwarz, D.Sc.

Visigoth. 219 pp. $10.45

Dr. Brain Schwarz was astonished and skeptical when one of his patients began recounting post-life traumas that she planned to inflict on her philandering and bigamous husband. He quickly became a believer, when, immediately after her funeral, said husband started suffering a series of inexplicable accidents and injuries that ultimately put him in a wheelchair for life.

Dr. Schwarz tried all traditional psychiatric methods to treat Kathleen, who came to him on the brink of a nervous breakdown. She related incident after incident of husband animalry. Her husband of seven years was a serial, and serious, adulterer. Not a month went by that he did not seduce a new woman, only to abandon her on the first of the following month. Being the elder in an obscure religious community in a backwoods small town gave him ample opportunity to indulge his appetites. Kathleen and her co-wife, Caitlin, had threatened, pleaded, cajoled and tried every other means of persuasion known to them, but all to no avail. Brigham just continued his ways unperturbed.

Giving up on the traditional, Schwarz tried a few experimental therapies, including those popularized by the New Age guru, Sheepak Dogra. In particular, he thought they were making progress with Acurapuncture and Primal Icecream Therapy; but, after an initial spurt, Kathleen regressed badly and ended up worse than before. Ultimately, Schwarz watched helplessly as his patient sank into a deep depression, then drove her minivan into a deep depression in West Virginia. By the time he went to Kathleen's funeral, he was more than a little depressed himself - after all, well heeled patients who pay their bills promptly don't exactly grow on trees.

What happened after the funeral proved eye opening.

Schwarz saw Brigham at the funeral, playing to the hilt the role of the mourning husband. The hypocrisy was more than the doctor could bear; he walked out without offering condolences to the "grieving" husband, in apparent violation of his Hippocratic oath. Brigham left soon afterwards, accelerating as he moved out of sight of the cemetery. Schwarz had pulled over to fill gas in his Jag and had a clear view of Brigham roaring past in his SUV, chatting on this cell phone. What happened next was totally unexpected. Brigham dropped the cell phone, took his eyes off the road to look for it, and ran right into an 18 wheeler. By the time Schwarz got to the scene of the accident, the paramedics were rolling Brigham into the ambulance. Schwarz followed them to the emergency room and learned that Brigham was paralyzed from the neck down. As he walked out of the hospital, Schwarz thought he heard Kathleen's laughter in the background. He looked around but did not see her.

So Schwarz was ready when Maureen came to him, contemplating suicide because of a truck driver husband who had a "wife" at each truck stop. He did not waste any time on unpromising therapies. Instead, he put Maureen under hypnosis, helped her to plan her suicide and encouraged her talk about how her ghost would wreak vengeance on her husband. Needless to say, Maureen died as planned (after paying Schwarz's fee in full); her husband Joseph, on the other hand, celebrated heartily with a new sweetheart, rode his motorcycle under the influence, crashed into a tree and suffered irreparable brain damage.
Using post-life therapy, Schwarz has been able to treat several other patients and embark on a new, and enriching, phase of his own career.


Jonathan Inchley's e-mail address is inchleyj@washingtonpest.com.

Bumbling Babblings of a Bubblehead

There's something about the word "disembowel." Or "depravity," or "disfigurement" -- about so many words that begin with the letter "d." Divorce, destitution, doubt, drugs, dirt, dwindle. So many of them are on our lips just now -- though not "disembowel," and we should be thankful for that much. Once more, as a nation, we have entered Sector D. -- "Entering Sector D" by Henry Allen, Washington Post, January 31, 2008.

Begone, Blasted Buffoon! Behold the bumbling babblings of a bubblehead. Why branch out all the way to Sector D, bypassing the beautiful example of Sector B?

By the way, to B or not to B, that is the question. Browse the benighted B, for a moment. So near the top of the heap, but not of it. Bridesmaid but not the bride. Bitten, and never again bold.

It is far, far worse to be a runner up than to finish in the middle of the pack. Didn't you see Ana Ivanovic crying, with the runner-up's trophy, at the Australian Open?

By golly, the blood boils over the bewildering bad luck of the letter B. Babies are taught about Bad and Good, not about Dis and Dat – at least outside of Noo Joisy. Kids ride a Bike, play Ball, continually grow too Big for their Britches, learn about the Birds and the Bees; some go to B-School, a few make Big Bucks; others move on to Breaking & Entering, Burglary, Bodily harm; a few enter politics where they do Battle with Baseless allegations, Bickering, Bile, Blame trading and Backbiting so they can get elected and have the chance to indulge in Bribery, Budget manipulation, Back door legislation favoring Big Business – all in an effort to become Billionaires.

What was the Big Battle of this young century? Surely, none other than the Big Dad of Bagdad getting Bludgeoned by Bushie’s Bumbling jihadists.

In the English- (vs. American-) speaking world, Bother someone enough, and they tell the Bloody Bastards to Bugger off.

Budgets are the bugaboo of the average American family; that’s why they carry thousands of dollars in credit card debt. Congress is no better – billions and billions added bipartisanly to the national debt every biennium. Some of these guys and gals might be not just bipartisan, but even bisexual, bicultural or – dare I say it – bilingual! The mind boggles…

Memo to Congress - Enact AMT2 Now!

The good news is that the Government wants to take action to head off a Rece**ion (sorry, that's an expletive, even if not a four letter word; it can't be mentioned in a Respectable Blog).

The bad news is that they don't seem to have a clue about what to do. Not surprising -- the people in charge are all RB's (Rich Bast**ds, another expletive). They wouldn't know a cash flow crunch if it bit them in the assets. After all, the fundamental business of politicking is to raise, and to keep, funds - by playing mental games with the donors and the voters.

So they are talking about a tax rebate. Some sources say an average of $300 per tax payer, other say $800. No matter. It is still a drop in the bucket. Better that these clowns stop diddling with half way measures like that and kick the bucket.

I mean, how much is an $800 rebate going to stimulate the economy? For starters, many people would just use their rebate to pay down debts (does that make it a non-starter?); other, less red blooded, tax payers might actually (gasp!) save the rebate. Fat lot of good would that do for the economy. Will no one rid me of these thrifty tax payers? Is there no man on the Ways and Means?

Look, Robin Hood tried it, centuries ago. History shows us that it didn't do the job then; why should we expect it to do the job now? Robin Hood took from the rich and gave to the poor. The trouble is, it makes no sense to take from the rich -- there are only a few of them -- and give to the poor -- of whom there are too many. You will never give enough to any poor person to make a real difference to them, let alone to stimulate a major, world class economy like ours.

What we need is a Reverse Robin approach. No, not Round Robin - that just amounts to passing the buck. The Reverse Robin takes from the poor and gives to the rich. Now, if you take from the poor, even if it is only a little from each one -- after all, they don’t have much -- and distribute it among a handful of rich people, you can give enough to each to make them happy; and to get them to channel some of the money back into the economy to help it, and to give some it to your party as campaign contributions. The Robbing Hoods of the G. O. P. (Greedy Obnoxious Parasites) understand this all too well, but President Tush is not cooperating.

So, here is an urgent request to Congress, especially the members of the Richbuttlican party. Enact an Alternative Maximum Tax now. For clarity, it should be called AMT2. The original AMT was the Alternative Minimum Tax - just what you would expect from the commie pinko liberal libertines of the Democrack party. We need to minimize taxes, not to put a minimum on taxes! With the AM2, on the other (right) hand, we can cap the taxes at a reasonable amount. For discussion, I propose that the maximum tax be no more than 2 x the minimum tax.

And, to show we do learn from past mistakes, Congress should automagically index the AMT2 to the cost of loving -- I mean, the cost of living.

Now, if only they can do this quickly, before a Democrack enters the White House....

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

To marry, perchance to tarry

For adult children as well as friends, the breakup of a marriage late in life often comes as a tremendous jolt because they didn't see escalating conflict or flashes of anger.
Those outbursts simply weren't there in this woman's case. "We didn't have an outwardly fighting marriage," she says. "But it was quiet and empty."
Quiet and empty are the symptoms of marital burnout. In an era of longevity, burnout has become a major threat to couples. It's not so much the presence of conflict that kills a long-term relationship, but rather the absence of affection and involvement. - "
Even in a Burned-Out Marriage, The Spark Can Be Rekindled", Abigail Trafford, Washington Post, January 29, 2008.

Frankly, I am not surprised; are you? I mean, we all know (don't we?) that conflict doesn't kill a long term relationship. After all, there is only a marginal difference between marital relations and martial relations. It is also well known that marriage is a 50-50 type of deal, involving give and take. In my experience, that means the husband gives 50%; the wife takes the other 50%. Your mileage may vary.

That is why the wife is called the "Better Half". The husband is only the "Bitter Half".

But - don't tell my wife I was complaining about her. I am not worried about having to sleep in the dog house; we don't have a dog. What I am worried about is having to sleep in the back yard.

But seriously - I can't complain about my wife. When we got married, she told me "No matter how low you are at the office, you will be Number Two at home." That lasted until our daughter was born. I was promptly relegated to Number Three. That's why we don't have a dog, a cat or even a parakeet; I want to remain in the Top Three.

Anyway, we all know that it is not conflict that kills a long term relationship; it is the absence of involvement that does the Kevorkian thing to the relationship. Conflict is good because it keeps the couple involved with each other. When the kids grow up and leave home, the couple lose their common, outward, focus and start taking a hard look at each other; not liking what they see there, or perhaps not seeing anything they like there, they start disengaging from each other and drift apart. Hmmm...may be they should have a Disengagement Party to announce to all their friends "We're starting to break up. Now is the time to start taking sides."

Retirement just aggravates the problem. As long as they were working, the couple had someplace to go to get away from each other; and other people to struggle with, all day, so they could come home to each other in relief. Denied this outlet, it is small wonder that the marriage collapses rapidly.

Not to worry. In this, as in many other areas, the present Administration is looking out for our interests. How, you may ask. You don't? Never mind, I will tell you anyway.

First, they winked at brilliantly advanced financial shenanigans by the Big Boys, that ultimately blew up as the Subprime Crisis and the all the trailing collapses in the market. Home equity has been eroded and stock prices have crashed. Many people have no choice but to give up all dreams of retirement, and continue to slog it out in the workplace for several more years. That, by itself, should save a boatload of marriages.

The same slumping economy makes it harder for young people to land that first job. So a lot of them boomerang back home to live with Mom and Dad, until they can afford to live on their own. So Mom and Dad can continue to stay together, at least to present a united front against a common enemy - er, I mean, a common problem.

The Administration has also wisely refused the slightest move to reducing our oil addiction. Lots of people are stuck with SUVs and other gas guzzlers; they can't afford to buy a new hybrid, nor do they have the money to pay for gasoline without getting deeper in debt. So the people can get mad at the oil companies, the auto companies, the Fed, or just about anybody but each other. Think of what it does for the marriage!

Look, this President told us, way back at the beginning of his first term, that he was going to be a Uniter, not a Divider. And he has been exactly that. He has united humongous amounts the national wealth in the hands of the top 1% the people. They just happen to be the people who got him elected as president. You can't really blame a guy for doing exactly what he said he was going to, can you? Can you?

Sunday, January 27, 2008

Clear Out!

"Two of Washington's airports -- Dulles and Reagan National -- will soon be part of the federal government's Registered Traveler program, which offers passengers the happy prospect of getting through security lines faster, swifter, better. (Ninety thousand of them and counting have enrolled.) All you need do is pay an annual fee -- $100 to start, plus a $28 shakedown so the government can make sure you're, you know, okay. Next you submit all sorts of personal information, fingerprints and, because the future is now, an eyeball scan.
Then you are all clear. " Washington Post, January 27, 2008.

Hank Stuever, a Washington Post Staff Writer, goes on to describe the people who sign up for the Clear Card. He labels them "Clears" and pokes fun at their un-American approach to saving time by paying an extra fee.

Hank Stuever sounds like a Gunk. That's the opposite of Clear -- the people who don't know where they are going, or how they are going to get there and, in their hesitant, stumbling, bumbling way, gunk up the works for those trapped behind them.

Clears may not be any safer than the Gunks; after all, Holesome Security has made sure our security is riddled with holes -- like omitting the scanning of most checked luggage. Clears may end up saving only a minute amount of time - compared to the hours they (along with everyone else) are forced to waste by a laissez faire air traffic system that imposes little or no accountability on the airlines. But, believe me, most Clears would gladly pay a $100 and fill out personal information on an application to get a Clear card that lets them skip ahead of at least a few of the maddening and saddening multitude of Gunks who seem to infect daily life in ever increasing numbers.

Before you take issue with me, ask yourself honestly -- aren't you just a little more Clear than you admit? It is all very well to scoff at "un-American" Lexus Lanes; but remember, Fat Cats and Robber Barons are as American as Apple Pie (gourmet variety), Chevrolet (Corvette) and Baseball (seen from the luxury suite). Not that you need to be a particularly obese feline to fork over a mere $100 for a Clear card...

How do you feel when you are in a hurry but stuck behind a Gunk in a line -- any line, grocery line, bank line, whatever -- and see precious seconds slipping away while the Gunk conducts an archaeological expedition in her purse for an ID / credit card / coupon? How do you like the Gunk in front of you drive up to the ATM, find that the car was too close to or too far from the ATM, then back up, drive over again, roll down the window, realize that the distance is still wrong, open the door and lean out precariously to insert the ATM card -- first in the wrong slot, then in the correct slot which is clearly labeled to begin with, start signing checks, interrupt that to talk on the cell phone, fumble with the deposit tube, make another cell phone call, fumble with the deposit tube again, audit the printed receipts and the change with a thoroughness that would put the IRS to shame, close the door, roll up the window, adjust her lipstick and then finally move out of the way?

Have you ever had to drive in slow motion behind a Gunk who could not decide which lane to take, or turned in the exact opposite direction to that indicated by the turn signal of his car, or waited at the intersection long past the point when the light changed to green -- in order to complete a higher priority conversation to a companion or over the cell phone?

Have you had to wait in a grocery line behind a Gunk who counts her change, puts away her receipt and coupons and re balances her grocery cart with more deliberation than you spend in re balancing your portfolio, all while blocking the narrow space where you need to wheel in your own cart to allow the checker to load your two bags on your cart so you can get home before the second half of the game starts?

Clearly, Gunks are evidence of Special Creation. It is hard to believe that Natural Selection, if it was the rule, would not have brought about their extinction long ago.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Well, shoot!

"Gun-control advocates, including survivors of the April 16 shooting rampage that took the lives of 32 victims at Virginia Tech, poured into a Senate committee meeting to support a bill that would require background checks for all gun-show sales. They then staged a "lie-in," lying on their backs outside the Capitol to draw attention to gun deaths in Virginia last year." - Washington Post, January 22, 2008.

Eric Severehead, spokesman for the Plato Institute, dismissed the significance of the event. "This is nothing new," he pointed out. "People have been lying inside and outside the Capitol for decades now, may be centuries."

Barflick Loosecannon, the conservative columnist, took issue with the liars - er, the lie-in'ers. "Guns don't kill people. Bullets kill people," he asserted. "All these gun-control advocates would be better off advocating bullet-control."

Your reporter inquired why bullet-control would be more effective than gun-control. Loose cannon replied testily, "Try filling out a background check for every round of ammunition and you'll see."

Jeff Sniper, of the Wacko Institute, weighed in with, "They have more than enough laws on the books, if only they choose to enforce them. We don't need more laws! A good starting place would be with tightening immigration, to keep out all people who have, or are likely to give birth to people with, mental illness."

Shayne Lemorte of the Noxious Rural Assassins emphatically rejected the protesters' demands for background checks at gun shows. "We need more guns, not fewer," he explained. "If Virginia Tech had imposed mandatory gun ownership on all students, Cho would have been shot dead long before he killed 32 of his fell0w students. Archie Bunker taught us a long time that the best way to prevent a hijacking was to arm all the passengers. Just imagine, we could have averted the 9/11 tragedy if the passengers had had a shootout with the hijackers!"

Andrew Moss, a historian, told the protesters there had never been a Scond Amendment right to gun ownership. "It was all a spelling error. Remember, the Philadelphia Convention did not have the benefit of air conditioning. All the Founding Fathers wanted was the freedom to wear short sleeve shirts -- i.e., the right to bare arms."

Beverage Industry Finds Regulation Hard to Swallow

"After more than 30 years of deliberation, federal regulators have proposed requiring the alcoholic-beverage industry to put nutrition and alcohol-content labels on their containers, setting off the equivalent of a barroom brawl among makers of beer, wine and liquor. " - Washington Post, January 22, 2008.

Hmmm...Thirty years? Did they take vacation, or at least breaks, during those years? Perhaps they should have gulped a couple of stiff ones before sitting down to deliberate? Anyway, no need to worry about legislating in haste. The regulations will take effect three years after they are published, or the last regulator sobers up - whichever is later.

Max Beerbum, lobbyist for the Braumeisters of Mittel America, told your reporter that his membership welcome proposed labeling requirements. "Beer has a gut deal of nutrition, unlike liquor," he asserted. When asked about the impact of the labeling on carb-conscious consumers, he was unconcerned. "Eferyone's talking about carbon footprint these days. Ve vill make it clear that our product does not increase your footprint; it is all waisted."

Rocco Vinicelli, publisher of American Vintner, was more guarded in his assessment. "Our membership is taking a wait and drink attitude," he explained. "Announcements so far state that the labels would be required to show carbohydrates, protein, fat and calories. They have not decided on disclosing alcohol content. But, most importantly, there has been no mention of reservatrol, flavonoids, or other healthful ingredients in wine. Where is the level playing field?" he complained.

Vinicelli pointed out that vintners are rightly concerned about the cost of testing wines in a laboratory. "We already spend enough on taste testing; now they want us to lab test, too? Fuggeddaboutit!" he yelled, hitting his desk with paper knife. When your reporter persisted, he reluctantly conceded that they could modify the taste test to spit the wine into test tubes set on a conveyor belt that would take them (the test tubes, not the vintners) directly to the lab, thus saving time and money.

Jack Beam, representing the Confederated Bourbonmakers, was even more vehement in his opposition. "Traditionally, beer is sold in 12 ounce bottles or cans; wine is sold in 750 mL bottles or by the glass, usually 5 ounces. But people can buy bourbon in any size drink, depending on the bar, the bartender and what goes into a particular drink. So how can you compare them? Them Revenooers are being unreasonable," he asserted.

Alcoholics Unanimous is trying to mediate, in an attempt to resolve the disputes. AU has invited the various industry leaders and regulators to a cocktail party; however, the Happy Hour does not start until the participants sign a common position paper.