.JPG){kind=small}
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.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
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 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.
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.
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.
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.”
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....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
