What to get for that atheist on your list this Christmas? Or what about your goth niece? Or your gay friend? (Oh, come on! We all know he's gay! Some of us even wish his sister was too!) It's a head scratcher, that's for sure. But scratch no more! A one Andrew Shaffer, who is the owner of Order of St. Nick, has come up with various greeting card lines that offer something for everyone!
See, Andrew says that, "Nearly 15% of Americans identify themselves as ‘non-religious,' but surveys have consistently shown that 95% of Americans celebrate Christmas. Order of St. Nick seeks to bridge the gap between belief and observation. " Excellent. See, this is what has been needed for a while now. Instead of being like the yahoos out there who claim to be "offended" by the holiday (how in the world anyone can get offended over a day when it's a gift extravaganza is beyond me. Irritated? Sure. Frustrated? Oh, yeah. Annoyed at not being competent enough to pick out your own gifts? Every time. But offended? Nah.) and therefore have to wage their War Against Christmas, this guy decided to attempt to include them. It's like he said, "Dude, don't get your shorts all in a wad there. You can play too!" Only he decided to say it with cool greeting cards so that he could make a buck or two in the meantime.
He also said that, "Christmas is a national holiday in the United States. Everyone, regardless of religious beliefs, should be able to celebrate with family and friends at this time of year." That's right. Even you boneheads who just like to whine that you're offended when you're not really as offended as you are just whiny. He even throws in a little cautionary suggestion by saying, "We've tried to keep things light-hearted. It's not our intent to offend anyone (It's not usually anyone's intent. But again, some of the fake-offended just like to whine, so I wish him luck.). At the same time, we don't recommend sending atheist Christmas cards to your church-going grandparents unless you want to be demoted to the ‘kiddie-table' for Christmas day dinner." Good to know. Note to self....
Andrew has created humorous gems such as:
The Atheist Snowman Card
The Natural Selection / Darwin Card
The Skeptic Monkey Card
The Gothic / Severed Head Card
The Goth Girl Anti-Christmas Card
The Gay Apparel Card
...And many more!! A little something for everyone during this holiday season amidst troubled, troubled economic times.
Humor, apparently, evolves over time. And it's a good thing too, because at first they didn't quite have the hang of the whole humor-should-be-funny concept. Not at all.
The witty guy over there at Dave - The Home of Witty Banter (shocking that his name is Dave, I know) says that they "spent two months trawling the annals of history to produce the first report of its kind into the world's oldest recorded jokes." Now, while I don't doubt them for a minute, I have no idea how you would go about finding this sort of material. I mean, if it had it's own category, we could look it up on our own (provided we were actually bored enough to ponder something like this). So I'd have to guess that it's sort of dispersed throughout other accounts of history, but I still don't quite get how. Is there a break in the discussion about the causes of the Peloponnesian War where they throw in a couple of ancient "Knock-knock" jokes to lighten the load a bit? I don't get it.
But that's why I'm not Dave. He gets it. Or, at least, he got it. And I'm glad he did because if the ten oldest ones that he found are any indication of how the rest of the jokes in history turned out, it would be a horrible topic to research. But that's just mainly because if you're researching humor, you're going to expect things to be funny. It's just how it works. But when you find out that, aside from lacking the basic essentials that keep humans alive today (the Internet, porn, etc.) the ancient people had a different idea of what was "funny". That is to say, they found "not funny" to be hilarious.
The oldest joke comes from somewhere between 1900 BC and 1600 BC and was found in the Sumerian Proverb Collection 1.12-1.13 (that according to Dave. I have NO idea what that means.). The joke goes like this: "Something which has never occurred since time immemorial: a young woman did not fart in her husband's lap." That's it. It's over. Are you laughing? No? Dang. I was kind of hoping you were so that you could explain it to me. Not only is it not funny, it's nonsensical as well. (They really should have looked into that Internet thing a bit more.)
The next oldest joke was from 1600 BC on the Westcar Papryus. (Yes! The Westcar Papryus! I could hardly believe it myself! Mainly because I have NO idea where or what that is, but there's a picture of it to the right here.) That joke goes: "How do you entertain a bored pharaoh? You sail a boatload of young women dressed only in fishing nets down the Nile and urge the pharaoh to go catch a fish." See what I mean? While better than the Sumerian Proverb above it, still not funny. Sensical, but dumb. Is that an improvement? Maybe, but it's not a very good one.
From 1200 BC we have what doesn't read so much like a joke as it does a weird math story problem. "Three ox drivers from Adab were thirsty: one owned the ox, the other owned the cow and the other owned the wagon's load. The owner of the ox refused to get water because he feared his ox would be eaten by a lion; the owner of the cow refused because he thought his cow might wander off into the desert; the owner of the wagon refused because he feared his load would be stolen. So they all went. In their absence the ox made love to the cow which gave birth to a calf which ate the wagon's load. Problem: Who owns the calf?!" Oh, the troubles of the folk in 1200 BC. They would have killed to have our modern day trivial dilemmas like nuclear war and world famine.
100 years later in 1100 BC over there in Egypt, they came up with this one: "A woman who was blind in one eye has been married to a man for 20 years. When he found another woman he said to her, "I shall divorce you because you are said to be blind in one eye." And she answered him: "Have you just discovered that after 20 years of marriage!?" And really? He probably had.
I'm skipping ahead a little here. Still in Egypt but this time we're joshing around in the Ptolemaic Period between 304 BC and 30 BC. This time, ancient wisdom tries to masquerade as humor. "Man is even more eager to copulate than a donkey - his purse is what restrains him." Well, if the man has a purse, that wouldn't really so much restrain him as it would deter others from wanting to copulate like said donkey with the man. Purses? Not very manly.
Now, around 300 AD - 400 AD is when the Philogelos finally start getting the hang of it. "Wishing to teach his donkey not to eat, a pedant did not offer him any food. When the donkey died of hunger, he said "I've had a great loss. Just when he had learned not to eat, he died." All right, I'll admit it, I find that amusing. It's one of those jokes that's just silly. So silly that it makes it funny. It's that component that compels me, even to this day, moments before I turn 40, to interject, "Then don't do that" after someone says, "It hurts when I do this." Then hilarity ensues. (Why, yes, I do enjoy Laffy Taffy.)
So they started off horrible, progressed to bad, then started to make sense, added a purse and then became funny. It's evolution right before your very eyes! And it's led us to where we are today! In a world where funny actually is funny. And I, for one, am thrilled that it is. If it weren't, I'd be looking for a new gig, that's for sure.
A while back, I did a post about Alec Baldwin and how I really liked the guy because he seemed like an intelligent guy who could convey what he was feeling or what was going on with him in a very articulate manner that was clear and effective and, at the same time, hil-arious. The man is speaking out again and like before, he does not disappoint.
For some reason, Baldwin was talking to the New York Post. (Yes, talking. Not screaming. I found it odd myself.) During that chat, he was asked why he has a "reputation for being a hothead?"
Now, before I get to Alec's answer, I'm going to surmise that possibly, just possibly, it has something to do with when he refers to his ex-wife's (the slightly insane, not as hot as she used to be Kim Basinger) attorney as one having the appearance of "a 300-pound homunculus with a face that is like a cross between a bulldog and a clenched fist." Or perhaps it is a result of his response to his ex-wife comparing him to Saddam Hussein when he said, "Do I hide myself in cramped underground quarters? Do I like to shoot firearms in a celebratory way? Did I execute whole villages of people and bulldoze their bodies into a pit? What are you saying? Explain this to me." A funny man who is well versed AND up to date with his current events. Excellent. Either of those or a number of other well versed, coherent phrases that make it difficult for most anyone (especially most anyone in the Hollywood scene) to have any sort of retort besides, "I know you are but what am I?" I mean, seriously. Do you think Kim Basinger didn't have to ask around for the definition of homunculus? I'm pretty sure she did.
So, Baldwin's response to the "Aren't you a hothead?" inquiry went like this: "Well, if you have four bad days in four straight years, then all four of them are depicted in the media, then yeah. The other 360 days of the year, when you're just handing out lollipops and riding unicorns through cotton-candy forests and everything's so magical, they don't report that." Yep. Pretty sure I'm in love with the guy.
Of course he was referring to the highly inappropriate and loathsome (and also regretful) voice mail message that he left for his 11-year old daughter where he repeatedly ripped her a new one and called her, well, let's just say it wasn't good. It wasn't even close to good. And it was beyond wrong. And he knows this and he knew this. He appears to have a deep regret for what he did and, like he said when he was on 60 Minutes with the surprisingly still alive Morley Safer, he was angry and frustrated and said something he shouldn't have and he's never going to do it again. And he hasn't. (I am dying to hear a voice mail message that he has left for his daughter since then, however. Only because he told Morley that if he ever had to leave another message, you could bet that, after that incident, it was going to be a charming song. "How..are you...today? My little darling?!" That would be hil-arious.)
Alec is working on a book about "parental alienation" that arises out of ugly divorce proceedings (working title is "A Promise to Ourselves: Fatherhood, Divorce and Family Law.") I am not married, I don't plan on being married (sorry, Gavin), I don't know why anyone would want children, and as for fatherhood, well, that's never happening either. Therefore, my need to read such a book for it's content is almost none. But my desire to read such a book that was written from a guy with such an accurate and humorous opinion of things is huge.
And Baldwin is great on "30 Rock". Absolutely hil-arious. The man can deadpan a line probably better than any current actor or actress right now. But it sounds as if he might be thinking about leaving "30 Rock". "I've done this now for a long time and I've enjoyed it, and the TV show is the greatest job I've ever had. But I just feel like there's other things I want to do. I'm tired. The business has changed. You turn around one day, like me -- I'm 50 and I don't want to work as much. I used to be all about work, and now I'm burnt out. I really don't like working." Yeah, that doesn't sound like he's going to be sticking around much longer, does it? Sadness, indeed. But not for long! The guy hints at maybe running for some sort of office. YES!
Before I go further into that thought, if he does run for something, and I'm hoping Senator, C-SPAN should really throw all of their backing behind him because their ratings will SOAR. The "C" in C-SPAN will stand for "Comedy" with him speaking. And it will also stand for "Correct" as I have yet to hear him voice his opinions on situations that are whack-a-do or wrong. So he's funny, he's articulate, he's intelligent AND he's reasonable. Where do I vote for this guy for anything?
Don't believe me? The clip below exemplifies the man's comedic genius. Imagine him in the Senate. Changing seats with everyone. Talking in their voice. Even bringing in the annoying neighbors who always tell you to "Keep it down!" I'm telling you, C-SPAN should make him their poster child for life if he becomes a Senator.
Here's an example of how he sees the Presidential race. And keep in mind, this guy is a "lifelong Democrat and leans toward the liberal side. (And when I say "leans toward", it means that he's leaning over to the liberal side so far that his ear is almost touching the ground.) "This country needs a change, but I'm not sure if a man named Obama can get it. It's like marketing, like buying laundry soap, soda or corn chips. Will they buy McCain or Obama? What sounds right? A critical mass of Americans don't think beyond that. They do indeed choose presidents like they do laundry soap." Yep. I DO love him.
"A critical mass of Americans don't think beyond that." Thank YOU! Does this sound like someone who is in touch with how things work in this country? It sounds like it to me. He knows that, in the end, it's not about who is the better choice. It's not about who has been built up to be the better choice. He knows that it's going to be about what Americans feel comfortable with. (By the way, Alec, since I know you're reading this, you're going to have to step the vocabulary down just a bit for that "critical mass of Americans" you mention. Either that or start leaving dictionaries in hotel rooms like those Giddeon folks do with the Bibles. They're all going to have to look up homunculus.)
So let me tell you, I don't feel comfortable with EITHER guy we have to choose from right now. We have the guy from the hardware store that makes the keys (that description compliments of David Letterman) and, what is the other guy? Irish? O'Bama, right? So we have a senior citizen key maker and an Irishman to choose from and I don't know that either one is qualified to do much. (I heard Perot is back somewhere and he brought his charts with him! Where is he when we need him?) So Baldwin is right. The two camps have to market their product just like as if it were an advertising campaigns for laundry detergent. Though in the end, I highly doubt that any of us are going to feel squeaky clean. Too much politics and I feel like I need a shower.
And for his own marketing campaign to sell "Baldwin! The Smart Talkin', Good Lookin', Brain Thinkin', Change Makin' Candidate You Can Trust!"? Baldwin addresses that by saying, "I would, but only in the sense that I would say to people: 'Assume I've done everything. I want you to assume I've had sex with animals, that I've imbibed every kind of drink, that I've poured absinthe on my corn flakes during a period of time. I've done every debauched, filthy, insidious .. everything. Just assume that for the argument, and now -- next question.' " Halle-e-freaking lu-llah, honey, I'm home!
Perfect. Find out all of the crap you can about him, know that it's there, then once you've had that morbid curiosity sated, then you can focus on everything else. Once you know about the drink imbibing, the absinthe flakes in the morning, the bestiality (with real beasts), the debauchery, the filthy, the insidiousness of it all, once you know all of that, you pretty much have to assume the closet is empty and the guy has nothing to hide. What's left to focus on? What he has to say. Exactly.
And although his marriage ended, um, not well, he's open for a change. He said, "I've been single for seven years and as I get older, I think all I want is to be loved. The world becomes a place where you think, let everyone else have it. Let them all fight over jobs and money ... You want things in life that are lovely." A wise man, that Alec Baldwin. Now, I don't know if I'd be Alec Baldwin's "type". (Apparently, it's very important that someone be someone's "type". Without that, apparently, it's pointless. If you're not that "type", well, some people are unable to move past that and pay attention to everything else that IS their "type". So you must be their "type". "Type", very important to some. So find out at the beginning if you're the other person's "type" so you're not wasting time.) But if I weren't, I'm sure that he could see past that (some people can; other people, not so much, apparently) and realize that I would be an excellent addition to his existence. (I'm probably more suited for the role of "campaign manager" as opposed to "one to frolic with" in the case of Alec Baldwin, but I'd still really, really like the job.)
Whenever you're ready, Alec, I'm ready too. This blog publicly announces that it supports Alec Baldwin in anything he does.
You know, I've said it before, there's some stuff that you can't make up because you wouldn't even think to make up something so ridiculous. This is one of those things. And I'm not making it up. I swear. (I kind of wish I was, though.) Clay Aiken is going to be a father. Wait. The mother of the child is 50 years old. Wait. She is Jaymes Foster and she is Clay Aiken's record producer. Wait. And the baby is due in August. For cryin' out loud, I said WAIT!!!
Finally. Geez. Now, what?
Correct. Clay Aiken, who seems to be as gay as the day is long (not that there's anything wrong with that), has generously donated a portion of his spermatazoal fluid to Ms. Foster for the purpose of spawning another human being, aka, a child. When I first heard this, I thought, "Hey, way to go, Clay! Nice job dinking, I mean, thinking inside, I mean, outside her box. The box! THE box! Nice job thinking outside the box! (Wow. That was trickier than I thought.) But as it turns out, there was no heterosexual coital activity between Clay and Jaymes, as she was artificially inseminated (translation: turkey baster).
What very little information that her publicist has released (his publicist hasn't said anything yet, but that's not all that surprising to me. The publicist is probably still recovering from the shock of the news. Come on, you still are, aren't you? Well, then...I'm just saying.) tells us that Clay will be involved in the raising of the child. (And it's just a sad statement of affairs that something like that needs to be clarified.) Also, in case you were wondering, Foster was married once before to someone named Lou Leeds Levy, aka "The ol' L-Cubed" and their divorce was finalized last year. Neither they, nor any of their poultry moistening devices, have any children.
Why am I having flashbacks of the whole Michael Jackson-Debbie Rowe debacle of yore? You remember the D.R. publicity stunt, right? She, the nurse of the dermatologist of Michael Jackson, marries Jacko in 1996 (did I mention that the best man was an 8-year old boy? He was. Shocker, eh?) and bears him 2 children, the conception of which no one believes occurred through the "traditional" method, only to receive a rather substantial monetary compensation in 1999 for divorcing him. You know, the typical "nurse-of-dermatologist-meets-and-marries-international-freakazoid-pop-singer-with-an-unhealthy-penchant-for-the-company-of-small-children" fairy tale of yore. Ugh. Look, I'm all for non-traditional living arrangements, but that's a bit much for all of us.
I know that his 'sexuality' has been in question ever since the first time he said, "I don't discuss my sexuality." (Translation: Oh, come on, you can figure that one out on your own!) But, really, if you're trying to, perhaps, sway people into leaning toward your sitting on the straighter side of the fence, couldn't you just start lifting weights or something? Do you have to be getting your sperm all involved in it? (That sounds kind of wrong, but yet it is accurate. Hmm.) But, hey, at least we know that the melding of the celebrity names will be good. After all, we've had to put up with "Brangelina" and "Tomkat" for way too long, so it's about time we got a name that was a) extremely amusing and b) descriptively correct. Come on, you can noodle it through, can't you? Jaymes Foster. Clay Aiken. That's correct. Faiken.
Today's blurb would more fit in the category of "General Musings" than in the "Sarcastic Interpretations Of The World As I See It." But even so, the general musings will still be sarcastic interpretations of the world as I see it. They just won't center around a particular news item or bizarre story. That will return. (Come on! How long do you think I can be quiet about the woman with the 18th child on the way? Not much longer, I'll tell you that.) But you're pretty bright, I think you'll catch on as to why catharsis seemed to be appropriate for today (and at the very least, seemingly necessary).
There's a way to tell which TV sitcoms will be able to stand above the rest. The good TV sitcoms are able to take real life occurrences and explain them in comedic detail in such a way that the end result is a factual depiction of how things actually are. The more depressing and depraved topics will result in extremely amusing shows if done correctly. I think that's probably because that which is depressing and depraved has more than one element of humor to it which is often overlooked in favor of the depression and depravity. Today's depressing topic handled by great TV sitcoms is the demise of once promising relationships.
Apparently, when one person wants to end a relationship it is usually unbeknownst to the other individual beforehand. The person ending the relationship will somehow have come to the conclusion that the best way to end the relationship is indirectly. Actually, they come to the conclusion it's the second best way to end the relationship. The BEST way to end it is just to have the other person figure it out and never call again. But that rarely happens, so the individual is forced to go with option number two.
The other main characteristic of the relationship termination is that it must not be done immediately. No, the person who wants to end the relationship is seemingly required to mull over it in their own head (again, unbeknownst to the other individual) and eventually form the conclusion which they desire (ie, This isn't working. I should end this. Someday.) When they have fully convinced themselves that the relationship is over, then they will feel better about springing it on the other individual. This seems to serve the purpose of a) Feeling very sure about what you're doing because you've told yourself it's the right thing to do for at LEAST 4-5 weeks now, and b) You will have convinced yourself to the point that it doesn't matter what the other person says, you're done. You've BEEN done. (It's a bit unfortunate that, although you may have been working on this for quite some time that the other person has to play catch-up, but it's not about them now, is it?) And you are SO done that by the time you finally let the other person in on your little secret, you know it's just a matter of a very short amount of time before they're gone. Miserable in real life? True. But hil-arious on the small screen. Trust me. (On both counts.)
It's hard to say what purpose either of these two angles serves either individual. If you can't be direct (and direct is going to include "concrete" and "specific" for the purposes of this illustration) you're not doing anyone any favors. If you're the dumper, you're just prolonging the inevitable. Either that or hoping that the condition of "spineless" will be cured sooner rather than later. If you're not the dumper, then that means you're the dumpee and as the dumpee you're going to want the dumper to explain why it is that you are inadequate and insufficient enough to be further assimilated into their life (especially when they're the ones that invited you there in the first place) . Without a concrete or a specific answer, all that does is leave the dumpee thinking that they can figure things out and make things better. (Side note: Succeeding at this is, apparently, rarely the case. It's definitely not recently the case, that's for sure.)
The other aspect of the relationship ending is the amount of time that it takes. You would think that you would just want to get something like that over with as quick as you possibly can and be done with it. Walk away with your head held high (and always looking over your shoulder because you know that the person you just left on their ass is not real happy with you). Quickly, concisely and clearly. The ol' QCC. What's wrong with that? (The acronymization of groups of words is extremely painful right now. But they're too funny to stop using them.) I don't know either, but it seems as if the relationship dismissal takes at least two attempts before it is successful or completed because the QCC is not employed from the start. Who is this helping? Hard to say, yet it keeps happening.
And the part where it "keeps happening" is perpetuated by the infamous "lines" that are used during the breaking up or the relationship ending. (I'm not overly certain that "relationship ending" is any different than "breaking up", but in situations where it's hard to classify people as having been "together", the "relationship ending" seems to be a term that would fit. If you don't know what I'm referring to, that's great! Because that means that either a) you're totally unfamiliar with such a situation and the perils that accompany it or b) you didn't just dump me. Either one, very, very good.) The thing about the "lines" is this: They are used in a way to say one thing and to seemingly imply one thing, yet what they really mean is the exact opposite of what is said. This is where the comedy usually comes in the strongest. And the irony. Oh, the ironing. (See what I did there? Good.)
Let's look at a few examples of this from Seinfeld, shall we?
"Breaking up is like knocking over a coke machine. You can't do it in one push, you've got to rock a while and then it goes over" (See? Employ the ol QCC and this doesn't happen.)
"I've been searching for someone a long time. Well, the search is over! And now the search for the right psychiatrist begins." (And if you can recommend one, shoot me a message.)
"Why is nice bad? What kind of a sick society are we living in when nice is bad?" (Yeah, nice is irrelevant.)
"I wanted to talk about how we had nothing to talk about." (This could be my motto.)
"I've never heard of a relationship being affected by punctuation." (Although this one might not make a lot of sense to all seven six of you reading this, I'm sure that it is applicable to a close to home situation somehow.)
"I've driven women to lesbianism before, but never a mental institution." (This could be A motto.)
"I'm in the unfortunate position of having to consider other people's feelings."
"I think she finds my stupidity charming." (At first, perhaps. Don't count on it lasting.)
"This woman is bending my mind into a pretzel." Thus, I'm off to soak my head in mustard.)
"Do? Do? Hey, I'm doing what I do. You know, I've always done what I do. I'm doing what I do, way I've always done and the way I'll always do it." (Death-to -relationship" thinking right here.)
"She thinks I'm a nice guy. Women always think I'm nice. But women don't want 'nice'" (Nope. Apparently they don't.)
"Sometimes the road less traveled is less traveled for a reason." (Indeed.)
"It's not you, it's me.... You're giving me the 'It's not you, it's me' routine? I invented 'It's not you, it's me.' Nobody tells me it's them, not me. If it's anybody, it's me." (And even if you didn't invent "It's not you, it's me" and even if you didn't directly hear, "It's not you, it's me", trust me. It's you.)
And those are just from "Seinfeld", the show about nothing. When I switch over to "Friends", the show about something, then they really start to hit home (especially if you're the type who really liked the show and saw the wisdom behind the comedy to the point that you can find a parallel between almost any dilemma in real life and an episode of "Friends").
"Fine! Judge all you want to but, married a lesbian, left a man at the altar, fell in love with a gay ice dancer, threw a girl’s wooden leg in a fire, live in a box!!" (Translation: Mock my relationships all you want, it's not like y'all are setting any examples of what TO do here.)
" 'You're such a nice guy' means 'I'm going to be dating leather-wearing alcoholics and complaining about them to you.' " (It also means, 'There's nothing wrong with you, but I need something to be wrong.')
"I figured after work, I'd pick up a bottle of wine, go over there, and try to...woo her." "Hey, you know what you should do? Take her back to the 1880's when that phrase was last used." (At this particular junction, I'm going to have to advise against wooing with wine. It's fun while it lasts, but when it's over you just have this aversion to wine, not to mention all the wooing.)
" ‘It's like dating language. 'It's not you, it's me' means, 'It is you.' " (This is the case even if that exact phrase isn't used. If this concept is used on you, it will likely take you a while before you a) figure this out, and b) figure out that they're not going to tell you that.)
" ‘We should do this again' loosely translated it means, ‘You will never see me naked.' " (Can also mean, "You will never see me naked again." Just depends on the context.)
"When he says we should see other people, it means, 'Ha ha, I already ‘am.' " ( While I find this to be extremely amusing, in all fairness, I cannot say that it relates or applies to anything I may or may not be referring to. It's just not the case and I can't imply that it is. But I can imply that this line is hil-arious. I might be currently bitter, but that doesn't mean I'm going to make stuff up.)
Clearly, I've had a disappointing day. Disappointment makes some (or me) do things that are apparently irritating. That was made abundantly clear. Oh, if only everything else could have been just as clear and straightforward. And as smarmy and sarcastic as that may sound, it's only because I'm hurting. And the hurt is just on top of the good stuff. (That's why it hurts. If it was bad, I wouldn't care.) And there was plenty of good stuff. That's why there's plenty of hurt. And I was right. I am going to miss you.
Why? Why? Why is it so difficult for seemingly all of the Presidential nominee candidates (and possibly the majority of politicians in general) to deliver a "line" without sounding like they're delivering a "line"? It's not that difficult, but whenever I hear these guys try and speak words that are scripted, I begin to wonder if there is some sort of intricacy to this process that I'm completely unaware of. They sound like they're reading from a card (which they are) and they sound like they don't care about what they're saying (which they don't) and they come across as idiotic (further assessment needed) and sometimes as if they're having a stroke (again, further assessment needed on all politicians except Sen. Byrd). And the worst part about it is that sometimes, if that stick up their butt hadn't affected their ability to speak like a human being instead of a constipated robot, it would have been a pretty funny bit that they did. But no.
And that's why I'm a little annoyed with Obama. (To make sure I'm clear, I'm only annoyed with Obama. I am NOT annoyed with Obama Girl. Totally different. I don't think it's possible for me to EVER get annoyed with Obama Girl. Ever. Him? Oh, sure.) Why? Because he "Baracked up" the Top Ten list on Letterman the other night. I love the Top Ten. And I'm not opposed to a Guest Top Ten Orator once in a while. But, dude, come on! Put a little feeling into it, would you? The whole list is about YOU! Act like you give a crap! Argh.
Here's Barack Obama on Letterman reading the Top Ten Surprising Facts About Barack Obama. It's pathetic.
Number 10: My first act as President will be to stop the fighting between Lauren and Heidi on "The Hills."
Number 9: In the Illinois Primary, I accidentally voted for Kucinich.
Number 8: When I tell my kids to clean their room, I finish with, "I'm Barack Obama and I approved this message."
Number 7: Throughout high school, I was consistently voted, "Barackiest."
Number 6: Earlier today I bowled a 39.
Number 5: I have canceled all my appearances the day the "Sex and the City" movie opens.
Number 4: It's the birthplace of Fred Astaire. (Sorry, that's a surprising fact about Omaha.)
Number 3: We are tirelessly working to get the endorsement of Kentucky Derby favorite Colonel John.
Number 2: This has nothing to do with the Top Ten, but what the heck is up with Paula Abdul?
And the Number One Surprising Fact About Barack Obama: I have not slept since October.
Yes, I know. It was painful to watch, but that's only because it looked painful to read! And a couple of those could have been pretty funny if the delivery had been better. Again, I'm not supporting any candidate in particular. I AM supporting good humor and the proper delivery of verbal amusement. But a particular candidate? Nah, I'm too annoyed with the butchering of the Top Ten to lend political support to anyone. Perhaps if I just put a picture of Obama Girl here for no reason at all it will end my annoyance.
Yeah, that really did help. I feel much better now.
What to get for that atheist on your list this Christmas? Or what about your goth niece? Or your gay friend? (Oh, come on! We all know he's gay! Some of us even wish his sister was too!) It's a head scratcher, that's for sure. But scratch no more! A one Andrew Shaffer, who is the owner of Order of St. Nick, has come up with various greeting card lines that offer something for everyone! 
Sphere: Related Content
