A recent poll found that while “only” 59% of Americans support allowing homosexuals to serve in the military, fully 70% support allowing gay men and lesbians to serve.
Seriously. I’m not making this up. I wonder what the percentage would be for “faggots” or “queers.” I’d also be curious to see what percent would support allowing "heterosexuals" to serve. I seriously bet it would be under 80%.
I can just hear the slack-jawed old Deliverance-esque coot now: “I just don’t think ANY of them damn there sexuals needs-ta-be in the military anyhow!”
Another survey found that 23% of Republicans want their state to secede. My movement is gaining steam! Honestly folks, help me out here—I seriously think this is a “saleable” issue that would benefit both sides enormously (at least from a psychological standpoint).
Allow the country to peacefully and “planfully” (a word one of Kyle’s social workers used with me once and I was like, “Oh, ewwww, seriously? “) decide/vote on separating into “autonomous regions” or flat out separate countries, or a mish-mash even.
So the South can rise again—and of course immediately devolve into a third world country receiving tremendous amounts of “foreign” aid from the Countries of Texas (and perhaps Florida), the Pacific States, and New England. I mean, the folks in the South are already used to voting against their own best interests, anyway.
As for the rust belt, the great lakes region, the mountains, and the plains, they can do whatever; no one will really notice or care—well, except maybe to see where Colorado ends up (ooooh, it’s like NFL draft day: “We’ll take California!” “We’ll take Florida!” while North Dakota scuffs its shoe/big toe and says, “Aw, I’m gonna get picked last again!”).
In a perfect world, actually, there would be a Northern California and Southern California split and we could live off the water royalties from L.A. alone! See, EVERYBODY wins!
Talk it up people!
And while I’m making changes, can we get a law that won’t allow people to operate a moving vehicle larger than a motorcycle in San Francisco if they haven’t passed an “intensive” parallel parking course? And by “intensive” I mean “adequate.”
Excalibur’s Parking Space moved across the street tonight when a family (okay, I’ll say it, they were Asian) in a minivan hit gold with a space that was huge. HUGE. Even though there was a car in front and behind, the space was a good 8-10 feet longer than the minivan.
But, still, “mom” has to get out and help direct. Then, for some reason, even with all the space they had, the guy still backed up and backed up and backed up until he hit the effing car behind him! He wasn’t even trying to maneuver or turn the wheels; he just kept slowly backing up.
I couldn’t see the wife, of course, coz she was blocked by the minivan, but all I can imagine is her on the other side, looking behind the minivan, nodding, waving her hand, nodding, waving her hand, nodding, waving her hand, and then holding up her hand to “stop” after he’d rammed the car behind him.
So then (of course), he overcompensates and almost rams the car in front of him!
In the end, he parks with about 3-4 feet in front of him and about 4-5 feet behind; enough room, combined, for one of those scary “Smart” Cars. But do you think he even considered that? I’m guessing not. Or even the idea that, since the car behind him was at the corner and didn’t need to worry about getting blocked in, he should park as closely to them as possible to leave space in front? Space that, even if it wasn’t big enough then, might later allow for two spaces when one car leaves.
I bet not. I mean, am I the only one who thinks it that far through?
And BTW, can I please get off the effing subway car before you try to rush in to get a seat, you rude and selfish “human” being? I know you want to rush home to plop down in front of “American Idol” with your bag of Cheetos while texting/omging friends to mock the contestants, but isn’t that what your Tivo is for? Sheesh.
Oh, that reminds me, and I’d love to hear people’s response/votes on this. I was at my very favorite fast food “gourmet” Chinese take-out, Panda Express, last week (go ahead and comment, Sheri!). As is usual on a weekday during lunchtime, there was a line out the door (which isn’t as dramatic as it sounds considering three people in line are already holding the door open).
Anyway, picture it: double doors; one is propped open because it’s a nice day and to make it easier for the folks standing in line/waiting to get in & order. The closed door next to the open door is not locked and there’s no signage or anything to make people think they couldn’t use that door.
But I’ll give you 3 guesses which door people exiting the restaurant had to use: the one blocked by people standing in line to order, and hard to get through w/o squeezing? Or the other door that opens quite easily and provides a “wide berth” exit?
You guessed it. No matter how big the person, they felt the need to squeeze through the open door, jamming their grotesque, polyester-clad, hides against my own (encased, of course, in organic cotton and recycled plastic bottles) while I huffed in indignant outrage that they were either: a) too bovine to realize that a closed door can still be opened, or b) too lazy to be bothered with it even tho they know about it. And seriously, people, it takes more effort to grunt and squeeze past people through a doorway than it does to lean against a bar and have a whole other doorway to go through on your own!
Hmmm, maybe if they put the word “free” on the other door and scented it with grease and salt….
Now, granted, there was the occasional “brainiac” who did, indeed, simply glide on out through the other door, but that was, on average, about 1 out of 7-8 people.
So my question is, seriously, what do you think is going on here, people? I really wanna know!
No comments:
Post a Comment