Okay, there was a guy standing at the urinal talking on his cellphone via a bluetooth earpiece. Sounded like he was talking to his wife.
When it’s just me and another guy in the restroom, and I hear the other guy say “honey,” I get very nervous.
The Birthday Racket
As part of the parasitic 47%, I signed up for the Birthday Club at various restaurant websites. My birthday is next week. I currently have received, by email, certificates for:
- Free medium concrete mixer at Culver’s.
- Free bowl at Flattop Grill. (Must buy a 2nd.)
- Free dessert at Biaggi’s.
- Free dessert at Smokey Bones.
- Free “Creation” at Cold Stone Creamery. (Must buy a 2nd.)
- Free meal at Wings Etc.
- Free burger at Red Robin.
Most expire on October 30, which doesn’t give me much time. If I truly wanted to take advantage of the system, I would give each restaurant a different birthday, to scatter them throughout the year. But that’s just one more thing for which I would have to answer in heaven, and my list is long enough.
The Art of the Smackdown
Last night on NBC News, I heard one of the best political put-downs ever. It came from John McCain. It was so understated and so brilliantly delivered that I almost missed it. But when I replayed it in my head, I laughed out loud.
During a speech at the Values Voters Summit last week, Congressman Louise Gohmert, a Republican from Texas, insinuated that McCain was an Al Qaeda supporter. Brian Williams asked McCain about that.
McCain responded in a very even, casual tone: “On that particular issue, sometimes comments like that are made out of malice. But if someone has no intelligence, I don’t view it as being a malicious statement. You can’t respond to that kind of thing.”
It was brilliant. Zing!
The Senseless Trucker Shutdown
Can anyone explain the purpose of the “Truckers Ride for the Constitution” thing in Washington DC? Truckers want to circle the beltway for three days, slowing down traffic and angering tens of thousands of local people. The publicly state their goal as “shutting down Washington.” They want to tie up traffic for the citizenry.
Isn’t that called anarchy?
Okay, “anarchy” is a stretch, I admit. Though anarchy does involve purposely creating disorder and confusion.
How does this rally support for the Constitution? How does this further their goal of ending Obamacare? If truckers came to Fort Wayne to do this, I can guarantee that plenty of Tea Party supporters trying to get to work would be upset.
I just don’t see the point of this protest. As reported in the Washington Post: “At one point, according to the Virginia State Police, four commercial vehicles slowed traffic to 15 mph after the drivers rode side-by-side across all four northbound lanes of I-495 in Virginia.”
That’s not taking a stand for the Constitution. It’s just irritating people of all political stripes who have places to go. Senseless tactics.
Do they really think Obama will say, “Oh, truckers are blocking all lanes of the Beltway. Can’t have that. I guess I’ll just have to repeal my healthcare program.”
Be Careful, Employee, What You Write
Six employees of a sheriff’s office in Virginia lost their jobs for liking and commenting on the Facebook page of their boss’s opponent. The US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in their favor, saying a “Like” on Facebook is protected free speech. A lower court judge had differentiated between hitting the “Like” button and posting a full comment.
What if I “Like” a page of some organization whose values don’t agree with those of the denomination I work for? What if some of my constituents made a stink about it?
I once interviewed Paul Rees, an evangelical leader, who mentioned that he subscribed to a liberal Protestant publication. When I raised my eyebrows at the mention of that publication, he told me, “I don’t agree with them, but I want to know what they’re saying.” Could he have been blackballed because of that subscription?
I’ve read books by atheists, to better understand how they view my faith. Could I be labeled as guilty by association? The political punditocracy certainly majors on this, drawing obscure connections and decreeing, “Guilty!”
Suppose I “Liked” an LGBT Facebook page. My intent might be innocent enough–just trying to keep abreast of what they are saying. But suppose I also posted on that LGBT page positive comments about LGBT lifestyles. Okay, that could get me in big trouble with my church constituency. Could it get me fired? Possibly.
Could I win a court challenge, claiming free speech? Possibly…but I would hope not. A Christian organization should be able to enforce its beliefs.
Just some musings from the intersection of technology and free speech.
The Plural Curse
“Tootsie Roll’s.” I saw it written that way on TV this morning. I don’t like starting my day in a grumpy mood, but sometimes I am overtaken by forces beyond my control.
Columbus Day Appropriate
How to celebrate Columbus Day: walk into somebody else’s house and tell them you live there now.
(Yes, I stole that from somebody else.)
When Helmets Collide
Football players wear helmets. In violent collisions–which is pretty much the essence of football–helmets sometimes touch. And when helmets touch, defenders get blamed.
When defenders get blamed, they get fined.
So here’s what the NFL needs to do, and where things are probably headed. I present two options:
- Institute flag football rules for quarterbacks. Hang little flags on their hips. When a defender pulls a flag, the quarterback is “sacked.”
- Institute touch football rules for quarterbacks. If a defender touches the quarterback with both hands, he’s tackled. This would have taken away the Giants’ first Super Bowl win, when Eli Manning escaped from a bunch of defenders, but hey, safety first.
The Hastert Rule and Government Gridlock
I really despise the Hastert Rule, also known as the “majority of the majority” rule. It’s named after former Republican House Speaker Dennis Hastert, but Newt Gingrich started it during the 1990s.
The Hastert Rule basically means that unless a majority of the Republican Congressmen favor something, it won’t come up for vote. That prevents bipartisan bills, whereby a group of Congressmen from both parties cobble together a majority of Congressmen to get something passed.
So, let’s say 100% of Democratic Congressmen favor something, and 49% of the Republicans favor it. That means, potentially, that 75% of Congressmen favor the bill. Theoretically, they represent 75% of the American people.
BUT, they need 51% of Republicans for the bill to come to a vote. So, even though Congressmen overwhelmingly favor the bill, John Boehner won’t bring it to a vote. Complicating the situation currently are other dynamics, whereby, within the majority, you seemingly need a majority of the Tea Party Congressmen to pass something. I don’t quite understand why the Tea Party members have so much power.
Nancy Pelosi, the only Democratic Speaker since the 1990s, didn’t follow the Hastert Rule. John Boehner himself has violated it several times. But for the most part, it rules the day. And it helps make government even more dysfunctional. Thank you, Republican Party, for this wonderful contribution to American politics.
Writing Class: the Simple Sentence Structure
Today, class, let’s talk about sentence structure.
I could have written, “Sentence structure is the subject I’d like us to talk about.” But that’s not nearly as straightforward as, “Let’s talk about sentence structure.”
Subject-verb-object. Or subject-predicate, since a sentence can consist of only a subject and verb (“You rock!”). Either way, it’s called the simple sentence structure.
“Christians love potlucks.” That’s as clear as it gets.
Yoda would say, “Love potlucks Christians do.” Cute, but not as clear.
Don’t use the simple sentence structure all the time, or your writing will feel choppy. I’ve come across folks who did that. As an editor, I had to mess up their relentlessly straightforward prose to inject rhythm and flow. You need rhythm and flow. But when you’ve got a key point to emphasize, something you want to make utterly understandable to readers, express it with subject-verb-object.
In emails, I always state a request using a simple sentence. Hanging phrases and clauses around the request, with multiple commas, just blurs the request. Likewise with important points in letters, on our websites, etc.
“I’d like to have lunch with you next week.”
Versus: “I don’t know what your schedule looks like, but if you’re interested and available, I would really appreciate the chance to have lunch with you sometime–say, next week?”
A request presented in a short, simple sentence is less likely to be overlooked. Rather, it’ll jump out at people.
Having said that, let me allow you, should you be so inclined, to leave. Or more directly: You are dismissed.
