The American Pledge of Appliance

Let’s face it, the American Pledge of Allegiance…Great idea, rotten execution. Yet, it sounds so good we like to say it anyway.

The problem is, every time we recite it we end up lying through our teeth. I’ve decided to solve this problem, so I’ve come up with a new pledge which I would like to introduce to you all today.

I give you, the American Pledge of Appliance.

I pledge allegiance when I feel like it,
To the flag which I may now burn.
Of the Two Nations of America that switch places every 4-8 years,
And to the Fake Democracy for which it never stood,
Two Nations;
We are gods;
Affectible;
With stupidity and tolerance for all.

Just a Little Detour

Scott Adams’s blog writings are kind of off-and-on, so every once in a while he nails it. This time, I gotta say that The Most Obscene Letter is brilliant. Who would’ve thought that the asterisk could be so **** evil?

Using asterisks is kind of like saying “dang” instead of “damn” and “heck” instead of “hell.” It means the same thing, you mean the same thing, yet somehow switching around a few letters makes it all so much more acceptable.

For example, if you’re still reading this, then you must be pretty damn bored because this post is just a half-ass excuse for me to bitch about random shit that nobody cares about. I don’t even know what the hell I’m talking about.

Did I offend you?

Now let’s try this: If you’re still reading this, then you must be pretty dang bored because this post is just a dumb excuse for me to whine about random crap that nobody cares about. I don’t even know what the heck I’m talking about.

How about now? Did I even say anything different?

Some things I just don’t understand. Then again, perhaps it’s best this way–it certainly is much funnier.

I’ve Conquered The Genies

You know how in Aladdin and all those other stories, genies only give you three wishes, but somehow it’s against the rules to wish for more wishes? Well, I’d like to get my hands on whoever made up that rule, because that has got to be the stupidest rule in the history of stupid rules.

Is this the genie’s doing, just making up extra rules knowing that any crack head stupid enough to rub a lamp would most certainly believe this crap? Or is there perhaps a Genie Union in which all professional genies take part, and they’ve decided to boycott this wish after experiencing too many nut jobs asking for unlimited wishes then accidentally killing themselves on the 4th wish?

Doesn’t matter though. Because you might not be able to wish for more wishes, but nobody ever said anything about more genies.

The Nature of Comedy

With the recent outcry over South Park’s latest episode in which apparently (I haven’t actually watched it) Steve Irwin attends Satan’s Halloween dress up party with a stingray sticking through him, I’ve been thinking about the nature of comedy. What is comedy, what makes it up, are there places that comedy shouldn’t be taken, are there ways that comedy shouldn’t be tackled, and are there answers to any of these questions?

While comedy is normally funny, it oftentimes gives insights and shows the holes in our society. Comedians such as George Carlin often attack subjects with a certain anger, yet worded and timed so perfectly nobody can help but to laugh (“But [God] loves you. He loves you, and He NEEDS MONEY! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good bullshit story. Ho-ly Shit!“). Meanwhile, Jerry Seinfeld attempts to show you the humor in everyday things (“Have you ever had milk the day after the date? Scares the hell out of you, doesn’t it? The spoon is trembling as it comes out of the bowl. ‘It’s after the day! I’m taking a big chance! I smelled it, you smelled it, what is it supposed to smell like?'”).

Are there places comedy shouldn’t go, and are there ways it shouldn’t be treated? While George Carlin is famous for his 7 Words routine and believes that comedy is about finding where the line is drawn then crossing it, Seinfeld says that while there are no subjects that he will not tackle, there are ways in which he will not tackle them. In Jerry Seinfeld On Comedy, he also calls heavy profanity the “great shortcut” of comedy and as such won’t use it. Are shortcuts be avoided, or should they be used when appropriate? Are they ever appropriate?

While I don’t mind a few choice words here and there to spice up the overall effect as someone like Demetri Martin will do, somebody like Dane Cook just gets annoying. After a few minutes you realize that he’s not actually saying anything funny, but it’s so laced with well-timed profanity that you’re tricked into believing that it actually is. You can only stand so much of that.

Is it the comedian’s job to filter out overly offensive material? Or should it just be saved for the right audience? Most comedy, on some level or another, is offensive to somebody. All comedy makes fun of something or somebody on some level, but are there levels that are too high?

And will I ever stop asking questions without providing answers?

Justice.

The word on our tongues, the 9/11 cry, the curse others deserve.

Let them have it; just don’t touch me.
Free the oppressed; but find somebody else to do it.
Feed the poor; but somebody else pay for it. I can’t–I’m still paying for my HDTV.
Convict the criminals; just keep away from BitTorrent and my radar detector.
Let Bono fix the African kids; I don’t have the time.

I can’t afford to help out my neighbor; it wouldn’t be fair to me.
I don’t have time for your justice; I’m too busy with mine.

Lawyers, Judges, Senators.
Money, Political Agendas, Power.
Hell for you, fair for me.

May you be brought to justice. Perhaps then the damn thing will steer clear of me.

To the oppressed, the poor, the AIDS-inflicted, the bums of the street:
Don’t worry, I’ll help you out once it’s fair for me.

The Cost of Honesty (Or, “Why I Never Lie and Why the Truth is Overrated”)

Lately I’ve come to realize that in our society, the worst possible thing that I can do for myself is tell somebody what I really think. Most of us understand this. We’re masters of creative distortion, persuasive evasion, and selective truthfulness. But we never lie–no, we’d never steep as low as that–we’re just not honest.

See, lies are way too fragile. It takes a George Costanza to really pull those off. Hell, even Clinton had trouble eventually. However, with selective truthfulness, even amateurs can fool the polygraph. It’s simple: We tell the truth but leave out the parts we’d like to live without.

I’m sure you already know how to do it. Without this technique, most of us would be dead by now.

For example, say somebody shows you some of their artwork:

“So, what do you think?”

What is it? Looks like a train wreck. “Very interesting…Really makes the mind wonder.”

Told absolute truth. How they interpret this truth is completely up to them. As Costanza himself would say, “Jerry, just remember: It’s not a lie… if you believe it.” That’s why this works so well. You get out of trouble, don’t have to lie (guilt free!), and even better…it’s so easy.

Picture the scene. Somebody important invites you over for dinner; this is your big chance.

“So, did you like the dinner?”

Holy crap…I’m not sure I’ll be able to keep this down for the next hour. Or if I do, I’m definitely going to die.
“I’ve never had anything like it! That meat was really interesting.”
I didn’t even know there was such a thing as blue pork…

Tricks like these can save lives. Not just vague, other-side-of-the-world, somebody else “lives,” either…we’re talking yours and mine.

“Does this make me look fat?”

Hey, it’s not the clothes’ fault. “No, nothing makes you look fat.”

But in order to use this technique, there is a certain pride issue that one has to get over. Namely, one needs to convince him or herself that their personal thoughts and opinions 1) aren’t worth telling and 2) aren’t funny.

But this I just cannot do. They’re good, and I don’t aim to waste them. Which is also why I don’t have a girlfriend yet two moderately successful blogs.

With Liberty and Tolerance For All

Today’s tolerance is fashionable and considerate, the mark of a truly educated person. Being fashionable, considerate, and educated myself, I believe in tolerance to the highest degree.

America, Land of the Free and Home of the Brave, has given me a wonderful example of what tolerance looks like. As we relentlessly tell everyone everywhere, America is a deeply tolerant country. Our citizens have the freedom to burn the American flag because we tolerate all of us who stand against us. We fought a hard battle to remove the 10 Commandments from court rooms because we must be tolerant towards those of us who are offended by fools.

That’s how we keep our country so tolerant. It works extraordinarily well, and no true, educated American would dare offend another person or organization–our lawyers make sure of that. Those jackasses are too into their religion to take the 10 Commandments down? Throw ’em in the slammer. That’s tolerance for you.

Our foreign policy lacks tolerance, however. If tolerance is truly all it’s cracked up to be (and they tell me it is), then surely that’s the answer to all of our problems.

We just need to be more tolerant of terrorists.

Surely that would solve things. After all, it’s what any educated person would do. We simply must realize that Al Qaeda just wants Heaven too, and North Korea…Well, who knows.

Besides, I haven’t seen good fireworks in quite some time.

It’s not my fault I’m a pessimist.

Americans have always been impressed by professional-sounding terms. Some of us like them so much that we invent multiple terms for the same thing then attempt to trick you into believing that they’re actually different.

The whole profession of doctorism (how’s that for a professional term) revolves around this exact system. After all, if doctors are going to charge so much, they’d better look like they actually know something we don’t.

How many times have you gone to the doctor to hear him say, “You hurt your leg”? Probably not very many. They’re much more likely to say something like, “You have a fracture of the femur,” which sounds much more professional.

We all know they just look it up on the internet when our back is turned. This is the only reason that I can think of for always having such crappy wallpaper–good distraction while they look it up (Hey, is that a BUTTERFLY on there?). But even so, they still like to pretend that they are actually smarter than us. So, they use these big words in order to prove they deserve the white coat:

“After much googling research I have come to the conclusion that the fetor comes from extensive feces.”

“What?”

“Your shit stinks.”

One more thing. How come I always end up with the practicing doctors? Just once, can’t I get a good one? I think that’s something my health insurance forgot to mention.

Big words aren’t just reserved to wealthy googlers doctors, however. Take the words optimism and pessimism. We like to define these with the oh-so-popular “half-full” and “half-empty” illustrations. People love to ask you that. Do you see your glass as half empty, or half full?

I hear this is one of psychiatrists’ favorite questions, which is also why I believe that psychiatrists are people who wanted to be doctors, but couldn’t learn how to use Google fast enough so settled for making up stuff on the spot.

I don’t need a psychiatrist to tell me whether I’m an optimist or a pessimist though, because there’s not too much difference. The only real difference between optimists and pessimists is that the half-full people tell you that “if life hands you a lemon, make lemonade,” while the half-empty people hate lemonade.

Sports for the Al Qaeda World

It’s obvious that the Muslim extremists hate us, you needn’t to tell me that. What I want to know, though, is why.

Is it just because we’re Americans? Couldn’t be. How could somebody hate a country that has hamburgers, baseball, and more nukes than you can imagine? It’s impossible.

Or could it be because there are so many Christians in America? I say no. Think about it from a terrorist’s perspective: If your whole point in killing people is so that you can get to Heaven and have a chance at those 72 virgins, wouldn’t it be smarter to kill people who are more likely to turn terrorist? Better chances for yourself that way.

I think the real reason they’re always so angry is because of the lack of radical Islamic sports. They just need a creative path to channel all of that hatred to. If we can give them a way to blow off all that steam in a safe-for-us manner, they’d be much happier.

Baseball isn’t going to do it, they’re too smart for that. Where’s the violence?

Boxing’s no good–no uniforms. Everybody knows that Al Qaeda loves uniforms.

So, I think they need their own special sport–it could even be something like a reality show. Here’s one option that I can think of:

Scary video contest. Much like our American Idol, contestants would go for months without taking a shower or shaving, then would stand in front of blank walls holding AK47s and say scary things. You get extra points if you’re already dead by the time the video is shown, and Osama Bin Laden would judge. The loser gets shot (what good is a sport without a little bit of risk, I say). The only problem with this one is that if you’re dead before the video is shown and you loose, they can’t really shoot you.

Any other ideas?

The Truth About Sports

I used to do sports. When I was 7 I played baseball; did that for about 6 years. Did soccer a couple of times.

I remember those first few years, t-ball, hot dogs…confusion. I also remember quite clearly what the coaches would constantly tell us:

It’s just a game!

We didn’t believe them, of course. They won’t tell us the score? Then we’ll keep track ourselves.

But this is what they wanted.

Because the next season, everything is suddenly backwards. The coaches are yelling and swearing, meanwhile the players are telling the coaches, “It’s just a game!”

To many, this whole ordeal would probably be a confusing thing. However, I’ve been able to figure it all out. The first couple of years, you know, the ones where it’s “just a game”–those are there to get you hooked. If you continue playing for a couple of years, then they figure that you’re ready for the truth.

But they don’t really tell you the truth. Or the whole truth, anyway. You think it’s the truth, you believe it’s the truth. Most people, in fact, still do believe that this is the truth. The whole US Government still believes this, as does Japan’s. What they tell you is that it’s not really a game, it’s your life. You need this, your future depends upon it. That even you can be a winner.

This, of course, is bullshit. There are no real “winners” in sports. Actually, let me take that back. There are winners in sports, but most people would never guess them. But I’ll tell you who they are: Drug dealers, and the countries that don’t participate.

Those are your real winners.

Drug dealers, pretty self explanatory. I think that they are actually the ones that started this whole “sports” thing and came up with the confusing introduction to the game. I mean they are masters of addiction, are they not? So what would be better than to create an addiction that will start another addiction that they can sell products to feed? It’s complicated, it’s confusing, it’s genius. Who would’ve guessed?

The non-participants are also winners. Why? Because they’re several billion dollars richer and several times smarter. You see, while we’re plunking millions into training somebody to kick a plastic ball, they can use this money to do much more important things. Like say, build nukes.