Sunday, June 30, 2019

Democratic Presidential Candidate Says He Supports Federally-Funded Trans Abortions


                The Democratic presidential candidates on the debate stage Wednesday night were asked if they were in favor of healthcare plans that provided public funding for abortion. Julian Castro, one of those candidates and former President Barack Obama’s Housing and Urban Development Secretary, said that not only does his plan include publicly funded abortions, it would cover the trans community as well.
                Castro, who I believe is no relation to Fidel or Raul, answered: “I don’t believe only in reproductive freedom, I believe in reproductive justice. (There was loud clapping and cheers from the audience at this point). And what that means is just because a woman, or let’s also not forget someone in the trans community—a trans female—is poor, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t exercise that right to choose. So, I absolutely would cover that right to have an abortion.”
                Note to Castro: There is no “right” to kill your unborn child. And “trans females,” poor or not, have absolutely no need to exercise their “right” to kill an unborn child……because it is impossible for men who wish to be women to get pregnant.
                Imagine someone just a generation ago saying, “I believe abortion should be legal in all circumstances up to the moment of birth.” Imagine that someone adding, “And maybe a little after. I support 4th trimester abortion!” (Huh?!). Now imagine that person saying they believe such late-term (after-birth) abortions should be publicly funded. And then adding: “And I think men should be able to choose to abort their babies, as well.” Nearly 50 years after the Kinks wrote, “Girls will be boys and boys will be girls, it’s a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world, their words have become truth. (Including Lola).
                Castro’s statement reminded me of the early Saturday Night Live skit wherein a radio talk-show host is trying to generate listener calls and failing badly. The topic is originally forced busing. No calls. He then says he supports federally-funded forced busing and awaits the torrent of outraged calls he is sure he will soon be receiving. No calls. This desperate escalation goes on for some time, and yet, the hyper-tolerant and/or hyper-somnambulant populace can’t be roused to call in to his show. The host finally states that he is staunchly in favor of “federally-funded forced busing of communists into your homes…to kill your puppies!” Nothing. No response.
                Federally-funded abortion……for men? WTF?! What will we be accepting a generation from now? Seriously.
   Democratic Presidential Candidate Says He SupportsChaos. And worse. Far worse.



Saturday, June 29, 2019

Biden Promises To Cure Cancer If Elected


                Candidate Obama promised to stop the rising of the oceans and heal the planet if he was elected president. Apparently, he was unsuccessful in that endeavor, to judge by the caterwauling of climate alarmists who are claiming Omaha could be permanently under water by the end of the century.
                And now Joe (“Gee, your hair smells terrific”) Biden recently stated, “That’s why I’ve worked so hard in my career to make sure that… I promise you if I’m elected president, you’re going to see the most important thing that changes America, we’re gonna cure cancer.” I’m sure Sleepy Joe will roll up his sleeves and hit the laboratory as soon as he is re-ensconced in the White House. Unfortunately, that might not be enough if one listens to experts like “The View” co-host Kill-Joy Behar, who recently remarked: “I would say that curing cancer is going to be much more difficult when there’s so much climate change and pollutants in the environment.” Well, there certainly is a lot of climate change “in the environment.”
                Tragically, climate change is making virtually all human progress impossible, a fact many of Biden’s competitors for the 2020 Democratic nomination seem to realize. Kamala Harris, for example, recently averred that she would end hunger “if it weren’t for global warming.” Beto O’Rourke assured several dozen folks at a rally last week that he would “eradicate the common cold as president, except for that damn climate change.” Pete Buttigieg promised to eliminate the “heartbreak of psoriasis” if elected—as long as “Republicans agreed to put an end to climate change.”
                Rising star Elizabeth Warren vowed to “get rid of clinical depression and flatulence” if she were to be elected, “provided that the world first dealt with climate change in a unified and substantive way.”
                Ever the odd man out, Bernie Sanders took a bit different take, pledging to end capitalism, inequality, and prosperity “if the people placed me in the White House…climate change or no climate change.”
                President Trump simply pleaded for an end to “fake news” and “bullshit.”



Elizabeth Warren Celebrates Birthday At Planned Parenthood Event


            Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) found the perfect place to celebrate her birthday: at an event sponsored by the world’s largest abortion provider. Warren, aka “Pocahontas,” observed the anniversary of her birth while attending a Planned Parenthood Action Fund event dedicated to expanding women’s “right” to kill their babies.
The soiree  was called “We Decide: 2020 Electoral Membership Forum,” and was described as “an event where Planned Parenthood Action Fund members and 20 presidential candidates will come together to take on tough questions about the candidates’ plans to protect and expand access to reproductive health care—including access to safe, legal abortion.”
I’m sure the questions were really tough, given the fact that they pertained to “reproductive health care.” Who is against health care? And given the fact that the event description only listed the candidates’ plans to “protect and expand access” to it. There were no candidates attending that were going to question Planned Parenthood and its mission in any way, shape or form. Group think has seized the Democratic Party in a vise-like grip.
Warren proclaimed to the attendees: “What better way to celebrate my birthday than right here with Planned Parenthood?”
Today’s Democrats are mind-bendingly stupid and/or staggeringly hypocritical and/or just plain evil. Period. I am a fervent believer in free speech, but that remark literally makes me sick.
You nailed it, Lizzie. What better way, indeed?
What better way to celebrate one’s wedding anniversary than at a law office specializing in divorce cases? What better way to celebrate abstinence than at an orgy? “What better way to celebrate Hanukkah than right here at Dachau?”
What better way to ruin the country than to elect Warren or one of the other 19 twisted morons attending Planned Parenthood’s “We Decide” forum?


Thursday, June 27, 2019

Florida Woman Stabs Herself, Blames Trump


                A Palmetto, Florida woman-- whose name was redacted from a police report posted by the Smoking Gun-- was discovered standing outside her apartment covered in blood recently. When police inquired as to what was wrong, she simply lifted up her shirt to show off three, count them, three-- stab wounds. The woman told the responding officers that she had repeatedly stabbed herself with a kitchen knife because: “I’m tired of living in Trump’s country. I’m tired of Trump being president.” The officers found “a large amount of blood on the floor of the residence in the kitchen, bathroom and living room.”
                The unidentified female, who Trump is sure to call “Ginsu Gertrude,” was taken to Blake Medical Center, where she was placed under a trauma alert. She has a history of hurting herself and has been involuntarily detained in the past under the Baker Act, otherwise known as the Florida Mental Health Act of 1971.
                Many Democrats immediately touted assisted-suicide laws they’ve passed and suggested the woman go to California where assisted-suicide is legal……and illegal aliens are, too. In fact, if Democrats have their druthers, illegal aliens (“undocumented immigrants”) may soon be able to perform the assisted suicides—and abortions, as well. Other Democrats called for a total, nation-wide ban on the manufacture and sale of all kitchen implements, while some called for the universal availability of assisted suicide and a ban on all kitchen implements.
                It would be nice—and beneficial to the republic for which I stand-- if every anti-Trumper would follow the Florida lady’s lead and attempt to voluntarily…and permanently…remove themselves from the voting ranks. Sadly, however, this is unlikely to occur.

Wednesday, June 26, 2019

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Wore $600 Watch To Examine Border Crisis


                 Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has caused a stir again, as is her wont. Photos taken last year outside of a “tent city” in Tornillo, Texas (that was temporarily housing migrant children) show her hunched over and “crying” into her hands. The photos, taken just days before she won her Congressional race, were obviously carefully staged to show the depth and intensity of her emotion and compassion. They also showed her dressed in a sharp white outfit with bright red lipstick and sporting a $600 watch.
                 Twitterverse denizens have been mocking AOC for wearing the ensemble during what was supposed to be a protest. Sherlock Holmes types investigated and found that the watch was a Mavado Museum Classic, a time piece which sells for $595. “The Boss” was likely trying to look good in the presence of numerous celebrities who showed up to wallow in press coverage of the event.
                As Fernando Lamas might say, “It’s much better to look good when you feel bad, then to look bad when you feel good!” Right?
                I think Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez should come out with her own line of clothing and accessories. Crisis-wear as it were. She could also give advice to aspiring leftists who aren’t yet sure how to be seen as the immensely sensitive and caring people they are, while at the same time making certain they are seen. For example, what blouse says the wearer “is so concerned about others” while simultaneously making it clear she is a cut above those pathetic rubes in fly-over country? What pantsuit fairly screams “the rich should pay their fair share” concurrent with announcing that the person clad in it is doing quite well, thank you? What do I wear to a “border crisis?” And how does one accessorize during a drought or famine? 
                Virtue-signaling is an art. It’s time we treated it like one. If you want to save the world by telling others what to do, what to think, and how to feel, you need to dress the part.


Tuesday, June 25, 2019

Canadian Grocery Store Eco-Shames Its Own Customers


              The East West Market, an independent Canadian grocery store, claims to be sick and tired of its customers using plastic bags to carry home their comestibles. The supermarket has long been pushing its patrons to use reusable bags as part of its #JoinTheEarthMovement, going so far as to charge its customers 5 cents per plastic bag. This ploy didn’t work, so now it’s going even further. The store has decided to try to shame its patrons into reducing their eco-footprint by putting embarrassing logos on both sides of their synthetic bags. The logos include “Colon Care Co-Op,” and “Into the Weird Adult Video Emporium.” Ads for “Wart Ointment” grace other bags.

              The store posted a video for the bogus bags on its Facebook page, accompanied by the following virtue-signaling message: “Over 1 million plastic bags are used every minute, most of which are filled once, then discarded. So, we redesigned our bags to stop people from taking them, helping customers remember a reusable bag and think twice about single-use plastic.”     
                David Lee Kwen, East West Market’s owner, told VancouverIsAwesome.com: "So many people own reusable bags but forget to bring them. We want to help customers remember their reusable bags in a way that will really stick with them.” Kwen also opined, in a statement obtained by Fox-10: "We hope that by creating discussions, we can minimize the use of plastics in general. This is a small step, but we hope it eventually can have a great impact.” (One small step for East West shoppers……one giant leap for mankind human beings).
   Bullshit.

                If the store’s primary concern was eliminating the use of plastic bags, it wouldn’t provide them. There wouldn’t be any inside the store. The outlet would be promoting its cloth bags (and E coli infections). Moreover, the store provides artificial bags in its produce and bakery departments, as well-- bags that haven’t been designed to mold the behavior of its customers.
                Kwen added of the store’s efforts: “And we do it all with fun.” Yes! What fun! It’s always amusing to hector, surcharge and shame one’s customers! No “The customer is always right” for the East West Market! That’s so yesteryear! So…unwoke!
                I can see people turning the ploy around on East West market and wanting to collect all the bags. Ironically, one day the whole set, in mint condition, will probably be worth lots of Loonies.

                “Hey, Bob, I see you’ve got the ‘Charmin Outlet Store’ bag there. Do you have the one that says ‘Dental Dams ‘R’ Us?’ I’d be willing to trade you a ‘Pedophile Place’ bag for it.”

                Someday soon, the store will likely realize its artificial ardor for eco-friendly sacks isn’t fooling anyone. When it does, it will bag the idea of shaming its own customers. 

Monday, June 24, 2019

Chick-fil-A Faces Intolerance


                  San Mateo County, California, is trying to prevent Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant in Redwood City. The cities of San Antonio, Texas, and Buffalo, New York, have already successfully prevented the profitable purveyor of particularly tasty chicken comestibles from opening outlets in their respective airports, in the mistaken belief that the company poses a threat to the LGBTQIIA+ community.
            San Mateo County supervisor David Canepa plans to send a letter to Chick-fil-A to discourage the company from opening a store in Redwood City, explaining that he is hoping for demonstrations and protests. He says his “goal” is that “they withdraw their permit and do not do business in San Mateo County.” In other words, “Dykes and gays or Chick-fil-As.” Canepa is apparently doing a twisted and demented imitation of an Old West lawman, telling the restaurant chain, “This town ain’t big enough for the both of us.” Not welcoming. Not tolerant. Not inclusive. Not cool.
            Canepa told local television station KPIX-5: “When people think of the Chick-fil-A logo—what they think of is anti-LGBTQ.” No, what they think of is delicious chicken sandwiches, dumb-ass, which is why the chain’s food is so popular, despite the fact the restaurants aren’t open on Sundays.
            The truth is, Chick-fil-A doesn’t pose a threat to the LGBTQ community. The LGBTQ community does, however—demonstrably-- pose a threat to Chick-fil-A. It doesn’t like the fact that the company dares to possess and observe Christian values, apparently including those pertaining to sex and marriage.

                  I hope that Chick-fil-A never succumbs to attacks by progressives. I pray that the chain holds tight to its beliefs and never chickens out.

On the other hand, perhaps Chick-fil-A should go over and above the call of duty to placate the LGBTQ community. Why not create an entirely new menu, aimed specifically towards militant gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders?
            I’m envisioning items such as the “Lesbian Chick-fil-A Sandwich,” “Gender Waffle Fries,” “Queer Strips,” the “They-fil-A” (for transgenders who are finicky about the pronouns used to refer to themselves), “Naughty Nuggets,” the “Three-way Sandwich,” and “Bigender Biscuits.” What a great Sunday menu that would be.

            Especially for a restaurant that isn’t open on Sundays.

Sunday, June 23, 2019

Trump's Turnabouts


                It’s summer, so it is the time for flip-flops. President Trump has waffled on tariffs, the border wall, and a government shutdown in recent months. More recently still, he has reversed his decision to end the U.S. Forest Service program that trains low-income students how to respond to emergencies, as well as his decision to close nine rural Job Corp centers.
                Trump also called off the previously announced air-strike on Iran, one that was to be in retaliation for that nation’s unprovoked downing of an American drone over international waters. And now he has called off the ICE raids that were to start this week and that would purportedly have led to “millions” of illegal aliens being sent back from whence they came.
                What’s next for the suddenly indecisive POTUS? Let’s take a sneak-peak at the week to come, shall we?
                Monday, 9 am: Trump announces he’s going golfing.
Monday, 9:45 am: he reverses his decision, saying, “I may yet go golfing in the coming days. Let’s see what happens.”
                Tuesday, 10:30 am: Trump announces he is seeking a divorce from Melania and asks, “Why do they call her the ‘First Lady’? She wasn’t my first! I mean, I don’t get it!”
Tuesday, 2:15 pm: Trump announces he never intended to seek a divorce and blames the media for trafficking in “fake news.”
                Wednesday, 10 pm: Trump says he is looking forward to taking a hot bath.
Wednesday, 10:10 pm: Trump decides against the bath, just before stepping in, saying: “I may well take one in the coming days, however.”
                Thursday: Trump shocks the world when he says: “I have decided not to seek re-election. I have spent a lot of time thinking about this. This is not a rash decision. I am no longer a candidate for 2020.”
                Friday: Trump says: “I am looking forward to four more years in the White House. I am officially back in the race! Keep America Great!!”
                Saturday, 9 am: Trump tweets: “Looking forward to celebrating the birth of our great nation! Love the 4th of July! I want to see lots of fireworks! Lots of apple pies!”
   Saturday, 1:12 pm: “I have decided, after much reflection, to call off the 4th of July. I hate to do it, but it’s just not worth the risk! My advisors tell me that more than 150 people get hurt every 4th of July-- some from fireworks, some from sunburn, some from drinking too much, bug bites, you name it! #StaySafe”
   Saturday, 5:44 pm: Trump tweets: “I have decided to REINSTATE the 4th of July! So important to our great nation! I want to see massive celebrations all across the country! Parades, explosions!! This will be the best 4th of July our nation HAS EVER HAD, this I can tell you!!!”
               


Saturday, June 22, 2019

Concentration Camp......Camp


                Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) recently referred to American immigration detention centers as “Concentration camps,” a remark akin to calling a squirt gun a “firearm.” Conflating the two is stunningly offensive to victims of the Holocaust and is yet another example of AOC’s historical—and historic-- ignorance.
                Not surprisingly, her congressional buddy, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), defended Occasional-Cortex’s remark, saying: “There are camps and people are being concentrated. This is very simple.” She added: “I don’t even know why this is a controversial thing for her to say.” One doesn’t know whether to laugh or cry.
                If AOC said a political opponent lived in a “slaughter-house,” Omar would say, “It’s a house. The Slaughter family lives there. This is very simple.” If she accused that person of promoting assault and battery, Omar would state: “Cleary this is true. As you can plainly see, there’s his salt-shaker and there’s a 9-volt Energizer just inches away. This is very simple.” If The Ditzy One accused someone of “hi-jacking,” Rep. Omar would opine: “Did he not recently say, ‘Hi, Jack,’ to his son…Jack? This is cut and dried. Whaddaya mean it’s not the same?”
                You know if Rep. Ocasio-Cortez accused President Trump of money laundering, Omar the Vile would point out: “The White House staff told me they found a quarter in his pocket once when washing his clothes. Money. Laundry. Very simple. Duh!”
                It is clear that both Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and Rep. Omar are anti-Semitic.

   Now we know they are anti-semantic, as well.
               



Friday, June 21, 2019

NARAL Tweets Happy Father's Day Message


                A recent post of mine was titled “People Are Getting Dumber,” the veracity of which is sadly being proven every day. Case in point: NARAL Pro-Choice America tweeted a Happy Father’s Day message directed at “all the pro-choice dads out there.” The tweet noted that such men “support equality and value bodily autonomy—and that makes them great role models!” Beam me up, Scotty.
                Yet, even this level of hypocrisy and irony wasn’t preposterous enough for the National Abortion Rights Action League. NARAL also posted a “Men for Choice Father’s Day Letter,” signed by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Fla.), urging dads to vote for President Trump’s opponent next fall and calling Trump a “bully” who “said that a woman who exercises her constitutional right to control her own life should be punished.” The letter added: “We need a president who will fight for reproductive freedom so our entire families can get ahead.” Clearly, this raises the question, “WTF?!!”
                It makes perfect sense to bid “Happy Father’s Day” to men who choose to off their own offspring rather than deal with fatherhood, does it not? Such men “support equality and value bodily autonomy?” Not for their children they don’t. They support murder…of the most innocent. This does not make them “great role models!” Great role models for whom? The next generation…that they are preventing from being born?
                “Pro-Choice dad” is akin to “Catholic abortionist,” “pro-Jewish Nazi,” or “intelligent Socialist.” It is an oxymoron. Emphasis on moron.
                Trump is a “bully” for being Pro-Life, but parents who created their child by engaging in an act for their own pleasure and who wish to end its life for their own convenience are lauded? This is not simply irrationality and unreason…it is evil. A woman has the right to control her own life, not end the lives of others. “Reproductive freedom” should mean one has the choice of whether or not to engage in sexual intercourse. It does not mean one can do whatever one wants and then avoid the consequences of their actions by snuffing out the life of the baby those actions created.


Thursday, June 20, 2019

R-Rated Star Trek Installment Coming...For Some Reason


                Reports out of Hollywood indicate that filmmaker Quentin Tarantino pitched a new Star Trek project to Paramount Pictures recently, and that writers are already working on the dialogue. Tarantino, who is finishing up work on his ninth film, Once Upon A Time In Hollywood, once stated “violence is one of the most fun things to watch.” He said his take on the iconic Star Trek saga would be an “R-rated” one replete with prodigious amounts of profanity. Just what we need. I guess the “art” needs to fit the times.
                The original Star Trek was rated “PG,” while later installments have been designated “PG-14.” None have contained much in the way of swearing. Until now. But, hey, it’s time some of the series’ famous quotes were updated. Who isn’t itching to hear the new opening line: “To boldly go where no man has ever effing gone before?” And who among us isn’t looking forward to Dr. McCoy saying, “I’m a doctor, not a f*ckin’ physicist?” Or to Scotty telling Kirk, “I’m givin’ her all she’s bleepin’ got captain?”
                “Holy-shit, beam me up Scotty,” “Any attempt at c*cksucking resistance is futile,” and “Set phasers to mother*cking stun, goddammit!” are all quotes that would be enhanced versions of the milquetoast originals.
   There are a few people who apparently are not pleased by Tarantino’s promise to change the tone, but, what the f*ck, they must be “highly illogical” sons of bitches!
   It’s time we bring back other previously venerated shows in reworked R-rated formats to match the prevailing cultural norms. Imagine the possibilities:

 The Honeymooners Ralph Kramden: “Pow. To the effin’ moon, Alice!”

 Or this vignette from the updated version of I love Lucy: “Lucy, you got some mothereffing ‘splainin’ to do!” “Waaah! Waaah! Why do you have to be so f*cking mean, Ricky?” Much better than the original, no?

 I get a chill when I think of a profanity-enhanced Twilight Zone episode in which Rod Serling steps out from behind a wall and says, “F*cking lost in space and time. You’ve entered the effing Twilight Zone.”

Would we not all thrill to a modern-day, dialogue-enriched Leave it to Beaver? I can already hear June Cleaver saying, “A little rough on the f**king Beaver last night, weren’t you, Ward?” To which Ward would, of course, reply: “Eff off bitch, the Beaver got just what was deserved!”

Or Wally remarking: “Shit, Beav, why’d ya’ have to go and effing shoot Lumpy to death?”
Beaver: “I dunno, Wally. F*ck, sometimes bad shit just seems to happen to me.”

Does it get any better than that? And to think people naively used to believe the very purpose of art was to elevate and inspire. That’s so outrĂ©! We now know the point of it all is to push the effing envelope, to shock, scare, denigrate, demean, debase and repulse. We don’t need no bleepin’ prudes to lord their shit over us! Am I right?
The truly sad thing is, if these remakes actually existed, most people wouldn’t even notice. Of those that did, the majority would likely find the coarsened language cool…or funny.

Aw, f*ck it. Beam me up, Scotty.

Wednesday, June 19, 2019

"Pregnancy Kills. Abortion Saves Lives."


             Warren M. Hern, a late-term abortion provider, recently wrote an op-ed for The New York Times titled, “Pregnancy Kills. Abortion Saves lives.”

 Ponder that.

 Hern, who heads the Boulder Abortion Clinic in Colorado, wrote: “Pregnancy is a life-threatening condition. Women die from being pregnant.” That makes it sound analogous to cancer. And it makes Hern sound like the University of California-San Diego professor who termed babies a “legitimate parasite.”  Hern added, “Pregnancy always comes with some irreducible risk of death. We have known that for thousands of years.” (And, if it wasn’t for pregnancy, we wouldn’t have been around for thousands of years).
Life comes with an irreducible risk of death, moron. Pregnancy produces lives. Abortion takes them.
The mad doctor compared mortality rates among pregnant women with those of women who have had abortions and purported to show the death rate was far lower for the latter group. He forgot to mention that the death rate for aborted babies is virtually 100%.
Hern is aghast at new laws restricting abortion in states like Alabama. (Bad for business)! Yet that state’s law doesn’t prohibit abortion if there is a “reasonable medical judgment” that the pregnancy poses a “serious health risk” to the woman. (Or man, nowadays). Abortions can still be performed to avert the death of the mother or even to avert the “serious risk of substantial physical impairment of a major bodily function,” the very things Hern claims to be concerned about. Hern suggests the law is purposely vague because “vagueness and confusion are tools of tyranny.”


Hern avers that “a woman’s life and health are at risk from the moment that a pregnancy exists in her body, whether she wants to be pregnant or not.” A woman’s life and health are at risk from the moment she is born, so, to use Hern’s logic, she should never have been born herself, nor should her mother have been, etc., etc. A woman’s life and health are also at risk from the moment she gets behind the wheel of her car, climbs atop her bicycle or boards an airplane.
A woman’s life and health, then, are certainly at risk when she decides to have sex, especially from the moment a penis exists in her body. Perhaps a better strategy for the risk averse would be to abstain from having sex rather than killing the baby that could result from such an act. Talk about transferring the blame!
Researchers estimate that between 700 and 900 women in the U.S. die each year to causes related to childbirth or pregnancy. In 2015, precisely 638,169 legally induced abortions were reported to the CDC. That’s more than 1,700 a day. And this figure doesn’t even include all states. It is likely that there are around one million abortions performed annually in the U.S. alone, nearly 3,000 a day.
It would be far more accurate to state that “guns save lives” than that abortion does. But that fact is anathema to progressives. And they are just as sanguine about aborting truth as they are about aborting babies.

Tuesday, June 18, 2019

MasterCard To Allow Transgendered To Choose Their Name


                In a recent press release, MasterCard announced the roll-out of its “True Name” card policy, which will soon allow transgender and non-binary people to use names other than their legal name on their credit cards. According to Time magazine, Raj Seshadri, the president of U.S. issuers at MasterCard, stated: “What we’re introducing is a card that represents an individual as who they truly are.”
                Which is the opposite of the truth, of course. They are introducing a card that represents an individual as who they are pretending to be. The “True Name” policy is a sham…unless one believes that an individual’s true name is anything other than his or her legal one.
                Randall Tucker, Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer for MasterCard, said in a press release: “We are allies of the LGBTQIA+ community, which means if we see a need or if this community is not being served in the most inclusive way, we want to be a force for change to help address and alleviate unnecessary pain points. This translates not only for our MasterCard employee community but for our cardholders and the communities in which we operate more broadly. Our vision is that every card should be for everyone.” Every card should be for everyone? That might lead to confusion.
                Apparently, the ultra-woke credit card company started pondering the idea after its leadership learned of a 2015 study purporting to show that 32 percent of people who identified as transgender reported being harassed when attempting to use a form of ID that did not match either their name or their gender.
                What if I try to use an ID that doesn’t match my name or my gender? Will checkout clerks, police officers, rental car companies, and bouncers-- to name a few-- be cool with that?  Will they be tolerant and inclusive? Or will they “harass” me? If MasterCard is only planning to allow the transgendered and non-binary to get away with using whatever name they choose on their cards, that is highly discriminatory and non-inclusive.
    If I happen to be a 6’ 5” muscular man with a large Adam’s apple, protruding package, and loads of facial hair, and present a MasterCard and supporting ID showing my name as “Tina” and gender as female, I better not get any questioning looks or I’m going to sue.  “Master the possibilities” I always say.
   Having a penis and still being recognized as a female? Priceless. For this—and everything else-- there’s MasterCard.

Monday, June 17, 2019

"Special Person's Day"


                It’s getting dumber “down under.” Some in Australia’s loony left want to re-brand Father’s Day as “Special Person’s Day.” One of the daffiest “progressive” Aussies is Dr. Red Ruby Scarlet, a leader of the Social Justice in Early Childhood activist group. (Incredibly, that is her real name…and that is a real group). Dr. Scarlet (in the study with the lead pipe?) recently told a local media outlet that the change from the archaic “Father’s Day” to “Special Person’s Day” should be made so as not to make kids without fathers feel bad. She added that “shifting the language” to make labels more “inclusive” to children from “special communities” would be a win-win for everyone involved, traditional and non-traditional families alike.
                As you might have guessed, several Australian schools have already complied with Dr. Scarlet’s wishes and have replaced references to Father’s Day with the more modern Special Person’s Day. One school, Moonee Ponds West Primary, even proactively dispensed with references to Mother’s Day and Father’s Day in favor of acknowledging and celebrating the U.N. International Day of Families. Its principal remarked, “I believe celebrating International Day of Families is a more inclusive way of celebrating the richness, diversity and complexity of living and loving as a family in the modern world.” I don’t know if that statement scares you as much as it scares me, but there can be entirely too much “richness” and “complexity” when it comes to loving.
                Those who want to get rid of Father’s Day (and/or Mother’s Day) in favor of “Special Person’s Day” or the U.N.’s “International Day of Families” should immediately be frog-marched into The Outback and made to stay there until they return to their senses. Interesting, isn’t it, that progressives love identity politics when it comes to lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders, for example, but hate the idea of mother’s and fathers getting their day in the sun? (Happy PRIDE! month, by-the-way). And a U.N. “International Day of (anything)” should scare the crap out of any sentient, freedom-loving being. (Happy U.N. Peacekeepers “International Day of Childhood Sexual Abuse!”).
                If Father’s Day and Mother’s Day are to be replaced by Special Person’s Day, then Grandparent’s Day must go, too. We don’t want to make those without a grandparent feel bad, do we? All such currently recognized days should be eliminated by federal decree and replaced with Special Person’s Day. But that doesn’t go far enough. Congress should declare every day Special Person’s Day! How inclusive and loving would that be? Yay!!
   Moreover, Labor Day and Memorial Day have to be dispensed with, as well. What if someone doesn’t have a job or anyone to memorialize? How do you think they feel on these so-called “holidays?” And President’s Day must be abolished at once. What of those who prefer monarchies or banana republic style dictatorships? Surely President’s Day is offensive to them. Remember, it is incumbent upon us to be inclusive in all things.
   April Fool’s Day can stay, however. After all, each of us knows plenty of fools, do we not? Maybe we could make it more inclusive by renaming it Special Fool’s Day and celebrating—or at least acknowledging—it every day of the year. That would be progressive. Right, Ruby Red Scarlet?




Sunday, June 16, 2019

People Are Getting Dumber


                Turns out, my hunch was correct. People are, in fact, getting dumber. A wide range of studies using various well-established IQ tests and metrics have resulted in declining scores in many advanced nations. After rising through much of the 20th-century, scores across Scandinavia, Great Britain, Germany, France and Australia, among other places, have markedly declined. Apparently, scores in the United States haven’t yet declined apace, though you’d never know it listening to the likes of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez speak about “Green New Deals” and garbage disposals. (“What is that thing?”).
                Naturally, details vary from study to study and from place to place, but there is no doubt that many of the most economically advanced nations have experienced falling IQ levels since around the turn of the 21st-century.
                Given that decades of research have clearly shown individual IQ scores are closely tied to educational achievement and longevity, and a country’s average IQ score is linked to economic growth and scientific innovation, this trend is worrisome indeed. This could well lead to a generally diminished outlook for our collective future, and, assuming the trend will show up in the U.S. soon, as seems likely, many more years of ABC’s “The View.”
                The unexpected declines in cognitive functioning have experts speculating as to the reason or reasons behind this “global dumbing,” to coin a term. Could it be that lower-IQ families are having more children, whereas higher IQ ones are having fewer? Could the torrent of immigrants from outside these areas be less intelligent, on average, than the people in the countries to which they are emigrating? Possibly, but apart from the “unwokeness” of these ideas, a 2018 study in Norway showed that IQs are falling within families as well, proving that (hereditary) children of high-IQ parents are losing ground, too. Therefore, experts say, some environmental factor or factors are responsible for the drop in IQ scores.
                One popular theory is that the prevalence of lower-skill service jobs has made work less intellectually demanding, leading to underutilized brains and atrophying IQs. Some believe global warming has made food less nutritious, leading to the decline. I argue that if you believe that, you are already too dumb to be taken seriously. (In my view, “man-caused global warming” is a symptom—not a cause—of declining intellect and cognitive ability).
    Another theory is that information-age devices such as smart phones are sapping our ability to focus. I share that belief. Between video games, smart phones, computers, social media, Snap-Chat, Tinder, and a million other apps, our brains are being permanently degraded and rewired. Many Millennials have the attention span of a gnat.
   I posit that it is precisely because we are so advanced that we have become soft, weak, addled…and unable to perform certain functions on our own. Perhaps high-tech ultimately equals low-IQ. Machines do everything for us now. How often have we bought something at a store and noticed that the clerk can’t count change back from a purchase. They have to look at what the till or computer digitally tells them is the correct change. Some schools in England have removed the standard-issue round analog wall clocks from classrooms and hallways because the kids can no longer read them. Many of our youth are unfamiliar with cursive writing due to their reliance on keyboards.
  What will we do as robots replace us in the workplace and artificial intelligence potentially threatens our own?
  Let’s hope that when that time comes we aren’t too stupid to figure it out.




Saturday, June 15, 2019

Recent News Stories


*The U.S. women’s national soccer team headed to France earlier this month in search of its fourth FIFA World Cup trophy. The side stopped off in The Big Apple for some media exposure recently, where Fox Sports gave the team a unique new foosball table. (Did the men’s team get its own table? No? Must be sexism). Each mini-molded player controlled by the chrome bars was said to be a spot-on replica of one of the squad members…in their respective jerseys. I want to know just how realistic the figures are, however. Can they tear off their jerseys and wildly celebrate after they score a goal? Can they kneel during the national anthem?

*House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) recently appeared on CNN where “Situation Room” anchor Wolf Blitzer asked him if he now thought impeaching President Trump might be “worthwhile.” Hoyer replied, “Wolf, I know you and other reporters keep asking and they want us to say we’re for impeachment,” adding, “What we are for is continuing our investigations, making sure that the administration gives us the information we are constitutionally authorized to receive.” Think about that: a top Democrat acknowledging that it is the supposedly objective and unbiased media — the all-important free press—that is driving the push for impeaching a duly-elected president. Sadly, Trump is right when he calls them “the enemy of the people.”

* Reporting on Louisiana’s new abortion law recently, the New York Times managed to simultaneously achieve an all-time “journalistic” low and euphemistic apex when reporter Alan Binder wrote: “The measure would require an ultrasound test for any woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, and forbid abortion if the test detects embryonic pulsing— which can occur before many women know they are pregnant.” Seriously? “Embryonic pulsing?!” I guess we can’t use “baby’s heartbeat” now, or even “fetal heartbeat.” Even the Devil has to be laughing at the preposterous attempts by leftists to mask evil. “Embryonic pulsing?” So, we have: “Pro-choice,” “terminating a pregnancy,” “Non-viable tissue-mass,” and now, “Embryonic pulsing.” What will the “red-fluid-leaking body-pumps” (bleeding hearts) come up with next?



Friday, June 14, 2019

Trump Administration Denies Embassy Requests To Fly LGBT Flags


                Some are in a tizzy that the Trump administration rejected requests from U.S. embassies around the world to fly the “rainbow pride” flag on their flagpoles during LGBT Pride month this June, a reversal of the blanket approval the Obama administration had granted the embassies. Long-standing State Department policy dictates that embassies ask Washington for official permission to fly flags other than the American Flag.
                NBC News reported that embassies in Brazil, Germany, Israel and Latvia were among those denied permission to raise the LGBT banner, though it said the flag can—and is—being flown both inside embassies and on exterior walls. Those accusing the president of rank bigotry and intolerance need only look to his recent campaign to decriminalize homosexuality worldwide. And to his tweet in recognition of Pride month: “As we celebrate LGBT Pride Month and recognize the outstanding contributions LGBT people have made to our great Nation, let us also stand in solidarity with the many LGBT people who live in dozens of countries worldwide that punish, imprison, or even execute individuals on the basis of their sexual orientation.”
                ABC News reported that, since Secretary of State Mike Pompeo didn’t approve an official cable that is often returned with guidance on specifically how to mark LGBT Pride month and International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHT), embassies and consulates were free to mark both events however they wished, though they were still required to seek approval for the LGBT flags to be raised on their outside flag poles.
                This should be a non-story, a “nothing-burger” in today’s parlance. No flag other than the Star-Spangled Banner should be allowed to wave from flagpoles of the nation’s embassies. If the Pride flag goes up, why not a sequin-spangled banner representing only feminine gay males? Or the Pansexual Pride flag? Or the Two-Spirited flag? Or the Frotteurism Flag? Or a flag celebrating Armenian-American bisexual, mulatto transvestites who were born on Thursdays? Or a flag for Republicans of Polish descent who have erectile disfunction? Or…get the point?
                A country’s embassies are supposed to officially and soberly represent that nation as a whole to foreign lands, not serve as ad hoc billboards for special-interest groups and sexual adventurers.
                It is time America quit balkanizing itself. And advertising it. There are only two flags that should be allowed to fly on the flagpoles of our embassies: 1) the Flag of the United States of America and 2) The Gadsden flag with the clear message, “Don’t Tread On Me.”


Thursday, June 13, 2019

Millennials Say The Future Has Passed


            Reports indicate that many American Millennials aren’t saving for the future…because they don’t believe there will be one.in their lifetimes. A 2018 study by the American Psychological Association revealed that an astounding 72% of Millennials said their emotional well-being is affected by the inevitability of climate change, the highest of any age group. Why then isn’t the emotional well-being of 100% of Millennials affected by the inevitability of death? And another question for Millennials: can you name another time when the planet’s climate changed significantly? I can. Before there was one……until there was one. Planet or climate. Take your pick.

Why is this group so glum? Climate change, of course. Fully 88% of Millennials believe in man-caused global warming. 69% believe it will significantly impact them The number of young people reporting symptoms of serious depression increased by 52% from 2005 to 2017, according to a study published in the March issue of the Journal of Abnormal Psychology. Various other mental health issues also are afflicting youth at much higher rates than in the past. Some experts attribute this to the increased use of digital media, while others note the rise in “eco-anxiety.” I would cite the mass media, professors and the “higher educational” system in general for the recent breakdown in sanity. And, for-personal-profit-and-power scaremongers like the ditzy Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the repulsive Michael Moore.
The author of the afore-mentioned study said of young people: “There is a certain fatalism in this population relative to more recent generations. Psychologically, this population has had more shocks to expectations about their futures than past generations. From a perception point of view, I hear a lot of cynicism about the ability to build retirement savings or whether they will be able to retire at all.”
Say what?!
Yes, past generations had it easy, contending only with throwing off tyranny, the Civil War, World War I, the Stock Market Crash of 1929, the ensuing Great Depression, World War II, Viet Nam, potential nuclear annihilation, and Jimmy Carter. Whereas Millennials had to deal with the dot-com bubble bursting, the ensuing housing crisis, and the lack of universally available “all-gender” bathrooms.
Young folks are being fed a steady diet of fake news, science and weather. A 2016 study from something called NextGen Climate, a progressive organization dedicated to environmental advocacy, purported to show that a college graduate belonging to the class of 2015 will lose more than $126,000 in lifetime income directly due to climate-change-induced costs.
Millennials are living in the wealthiest time in history. Nearly all of them have smart phones, computers and (more than) enough to eat. Capitalism has lifted much of the world out of abject poverty and into relative ease, despite the Earth’s growing population and the past predictions of “experts” who forecast massive starvation, dire energy shortages, and global cooling, among other catastrophes that never came to pass. Yet many have soured on capitalism, the very goose that laid the golden egg. Many believe capitalism is in its final stages. 68% of Millennials viewed capitalism positively in 2010, yet only 45% did in 2017, seven years later. Many say “the system doesn’t work.”
Ironically, in today’s world, unlike in days of yore, the most educated people are often the least informed. Ancient humans witnessed eclipses, meteors and other celestial (and weather-related) phenomena and believed them to be omens or warnings from the gods. Modern progressives witness a hurricane, tornado or fluctuating temperatures and essentially scream that the sky is falling and we are all going to die. And they blame people. Maybe not themselves, but others.
Look around you Millennials. Then take a good, hard look at what’s happening in Venezuela. Maybe travel to Cuba or North Korea. Put down your phone and start reading 1984, A Brave New World, Animal Farm, Atlas Shrugged or The Gulag Archipelago.
There have been alternating ice ages and periods of great warmth since time immemorial. Floods, biblical and otherwise, have been occurring for as long as droughts have been around. Storms rage and calm returns. To everything there is a season. “Change” is the easiest thing to predict.
The next easiest thing to predict is what would happen to the United States under socialist government. Millennials—and everyone else-- would be guaranteed a future of economic, political, personal…and, yes, environmental…degradation and despair.



Wednesday, June 12, 2019

Jewelry Store Snubs Deputy


                A North Carolina sheriff’s deputy was recently informed by Kay Jewelers in Statesville that the engagement ring he had purchased there had been sized and was ready for pickup. The deputy was buoyed by the news. He could now propose to his beloved! Unfortunately, when he showed up at the retail outlet while on lunch break, the store manager met him at the door and told him he couldn’t enter the premises while carrying his service firearm.
                The Iredell County Sheriff’s Office later revealed on Facebook that: “The deputy informed the manager he was in uniform and his marked patrol car was in the parking lot, and it would be a violation of policy for him to remove his service weapon while in uniform.” The post explained that the policy requiring deputies to be and remain armed “is in place for not only the safety of the deputy, but the general public as well.” One would think that would be obvious, but apparently it is not.
                The store’s manager informed the deputy that he “could return to the store at a different time, when he was not armed.” That was certainly gracious. The deputy dutifully left without the ring…and without telling the store’s manager, “I hope you never get robbed, but good luck if you do.” The sheriff’s office added, “The reaction our deputy encountered is very difficult for us to comprehend, and we earnestly hope situations such as these are few and are diminishing.” Don’t count on it. The opposite is true.
                Though Sheriff Darren Campbell attempted to contact Kay Jewelers’ corporate office on numerous occasions, he never has been graced with a reply. Kay Jewelers did, however, respond to a request for comment from WSOC-TV: “Kay Jewelers is reaching out to the customer and the Iredell County Sheriff’s Office to sincerely apologize for the mishandling of this matter. We have tremendous respect for law enforcement, and we thank the Office for bringing this to our attention. We will be sure to reinforce store training regarding our firearm policy with specific regard to uniformed law enforcement.”
                In the meantime, I propose a new motto for the jeweler: “Every Diss Begins with Kay.”  

                You have to admit, it has a certain ring to it.
               

Tuesday, June 11, 2019

Boston Boasts Porn Literacy Program


                Boston’s WBZ-TV recently aired a segment touting the Boston Public Health Commission’s “Porn Literacy” program that aims to teach teens how to interpret X-rated internet content. The program’s goal is-- ostensibly—to instruct the kids as to what is real and what is unrealistic when it comes to adult relationships.
                According to The Blaze, WBZ noted that studies show the vast majority of kids see pornographic material before they turn eighteen, and hailed parent-approved classes that could teach adolescents “how to decipher such role-plays with a realistic lens.” The Porn Literacy course is taught through BPHC’s Start Strong program and is the brainchild of a Boston University professor. (Imagine that).
“Start Strong” seems to me a bit of an ironic label for a program teaching a course on pornography to our kids. Just sayin’.
But, apparently, I shouldn’t be concerned, as The Blaze reports “the curriculum has now been pared down to be ‘palatable for our younger audience.’” Yay! Pare the porn down! For the younger audiences! The younger, the better!
The Blaze also noted that the New York Times Magazine recently reported on the course and “teens’ thoughts on pornographic footage with great detail,” noting that “Student participants shared their anxiety over measuring up to the adult performances played out on a screen.” That’s great. It is comforting to know that any given 15-year old boy may be told that he doesn’t have to “measure up” to “Long Dong Silver,” “Johnny the Wad Holmes” or “Dirk Diggler.”
And this exceptionally beneficent program isn’t only limited to porn studies. It also teaches students about “healthy relationships, dating violence, and LGBT issues, often through group discussions, role-playing and other exercises.” Role-playing? “Other exercises?” I’m not sure I want to know.
When a society eschews historical literacy, economic literacy, governmental literacy, Biblical literacy, and English/language literacy in favor of Porn Literacy…it looks a lot like this one.

And it is in its final days.

Monday, June 10, 2019

This Bud's For You...And You...And You...And You...


                Budweiser UK recently came out with a series of nine different pint glasses, each depicting a different “Pride” flag, to kick off Pride Month. The giant brewer’s “Fly The Flag” campaign is in partnership with London Pride, and includes profiles of each glass explaining what each color on the respective flags means. On the morning of May 31st, Bud first tweeted: “Excited to reveal we are now proud sponsors of Pride in London! We are working closely with them and our charity partners to celebrate the diversity within the LGBT+ community and Fly the Flag for Everyone at the #PrideJubilee. A taste of what’s to come.” (Get it)? Below that was a picture of a tri-colored glass and the informational “Bi-Pride” message: “Magenta is for same gender attraction, blue is for attraction to genders other than your own, and lavender (a mix of the two) represents attraction to your own and other genders, though some interpret it differently.”
                But virtue-signaling in the Age of Intersectionality can be complicated and difficult, and it appears Budweiser kept adding posts—and glasses-- in an effort to avoid omitting—and therefore offending-- any fringe group whatsoever. Another tweet, eight minutes later, sported a glass with four colors and noted: “Black is for asexuals who don’t feel sexual attraction to anyone. Grey is for grey-asexuals, who sometimes feel sexual attraction, and demi-sexuals who only feel it if they know someone well. White nods to non-asexual allies, and purple represents the whole community.” There you have it.
                Seventeen minutes later Bud was back with two more tweet ads. One, touting “Intersex-Pride,” showed a glass featuring a purple circle on a yellow background and explained: “The circle symbolises wholeness and completeness, while purple and yellow were chosen as they don’t have male or female associations.” The other, a tribute to “Pan Pride,” had another tri-colored glass and stated: “Blue symbolises male attraction, pink female attraction, and yellow attraction to other genders.” Good to know.
                One minute after that, it was time for “Lesbian Pride.” This one averred: “While this flag is commonly used, it isn’t the only one. If you look around, you might see a version with a kiss in the corner, representing lipstick lesbians, or a purple flag with a double headed axe for labrys lesbian feminist pride.” Well then.

                60 seconds later, “Inclusive Pride” got its moment in the sun, with still another glass and the message: “In 2017 the city of Philadelphia added a black and brown stripe to the classic rainbow design, to better represent people of colour within the community. It has since been flown at Prides around the world.”
                Incredibly, Budweiser stepped it up a notch to finish with a three-tweet flurry. At 11:28 am, “Transgender-Pride” was saluted via a glass designed by Monica Helms and the statement: “Blue represents male, pink female, and white is for those transitioning or who consider themselves to have a neutral or undefined gender.”
                And then: “Yellow is for those whose gender exists outside of the gender binary. White is for people with many genders. Purple is for those who feel a mix of female and male, and black is for those who feel they are without gender entirely.” (Talk about being disenfranchised)! You got it, “Non-Binary Pride!”
                Last, but by no means least, gender-fluidity was toasted with a five-toned receptacle and the encomium: “Pink is for femininity, blue for masculinity, while purple represents a mix of the two. Black represents lack of gender, and white stands for all genders.”
                That’s one hell of a lot of glasses and colors to represent far less than 10% of the population. One might think, “When you say Budweiser, you’ve virtue-signaled them all!” But one would be mistaken. The “King of Queers” missed a few groups. They might have paid tribute to the LGBTQIIA Community, but they missed (those represented by) the “+” at the end.
                What about agalmatophiles? Those aroused by statues are deservedly PROUD! as well. How about we put a silver band on the glass to represent them? And batrachophiliacs are a marginalized population, too. It’s time those lusting after frogs were given their due, and brought into the broader LGBTQIIA+ Community, to PROUDLY! March for inclusion and tolerance. Give them an ochre colored band! And chasmophiles should be recognized, as well. Those, PROUDLY!, sexually aroused by cracks and crevices—and aren’t we all—should be celebrated and denoted by a gray band on a drinking vessel.
                The glory of dendrophilia certainly should be ever-so-PROUDLY! acknowledged in its own right. Dendrophiliacs aren’t just tree-huggers, if you know what I mean. They really love trees. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge. Say no more! Nothing sappy here. We should all branch out and try new things, right? A burnt-umber colored band for these folks, please. Let’s not short-change those in the Coprophiliac Community, either. Those who get excited by being covered in feces have every right to be just as damn PROUD! as they are. They deserve a tan colored ring on any chalice. Hybristophiliacs long to love serial killers in prison, and who can blame them? Instead, we should be (PROUDLY!) celebrating this group by adding a fuchsia colored ring around the beer cup.
                I bet you haven’t heard much about the Autoplushophiliacs in our midst, have you? These people are—PROUDLY!-- aroused by the image of their own selves in the forms of a plush-toy or anthropomorphized animal. And well they should be. A magenta band in honor of them is the least we can do. Prost!
                The Zoophiliac Community is already established in parts of Europe and is growing by leaps and bounds here in the U.S. They get a very PROUD! canary colored band on the old tumbler. Finally, necrophiliacs would be PROUDLY! served by a mauve colored band around most any goblet.
                Budweiser: ”The King of Queers.”
                “Prideful perverts, this Bud’s for you!”
               
               



Sunday, June 9, 2019

Colorado Lawmakers Kinda Think There Was Another Drug They Wanted To Legalize, But Can't Remember What It Was Now


Colorado Lawmakers Kinda Think There Was Another Drug They Wanted To Legalize, But Can’t Remember What It Was Now

                Legislators in Colorado legalized recreational marijuana use in 2014, and, more recently, did the same with “magic mushrooms.” Now they say they have been thinking about legalizing another hallucinogenic drug for some time but can’t remember which one it might have been. A couple of the state’s Democratic Representatives suggested the substance in question may be crack cocaine, while a Republican Representative told me, on the condition of anonymity, that he is of the opinion that it could have been heroine, or maybe ecstasy. But another Republican Representative disagreed with his fellow party member, saying that he was “probably 60 percent certain” the drug they’d strongly considered legalizing was LSD. Yet this didn’t jibe with what the Centennial State’s two senators thought, one of whom expressed a favorable opinion about legalizing amphetamines, while the other is stoutly pro-hashish.
                A special legislative session was held recently, in an effort to find some common ground. Fritos, Cheetos, peanuts, Pringles, Lunchables, Twinkies and other munchies were provided (at tax-payer expense) to the governing body to satisfy their munchies and grease the skids for a potentially historic bill to be put forward. Sadly, that never happened. An argument broke out over which snack was the best, with Democrats demanding that Lunchables be proclaimed the most inclusive and fulfilling snack, and Republicans arguing that the traditional peanut clearly has more merit.
                Suffice it to say, members of each party have since been clashing over just which narcotic to legalize next. A potential agreement now seems a long way off, tragically putting the hopes of countless junkies and weekend partiers alike in jeopardy.
   All the state’s lawmakers did agree, however, that the legal age to purchase cigarettes should be raised to 27, if the manufacture and sale of the despicable tobacco product cannot be banned altogether.