Friday Funny

Number 116 of a series

They want me to purchase their product. I might consider that, but I would not hire their advertising department.

Advertisements

People Unclear

This is number 43 of a long series

This series is dedicated to the few who continue to have trouble with some of basic facts.

One thing I like about Facebook is the way it daily brings me snippets of news as well as some opposing views. One thing I do not like about Facebook is the way it mangles conversations, making them difficult to follow and to continue. My way of dealing with the problem is to snapshot the conversation and lay it out for analysis in a blog post. This is one.

It started off when Dan posted the following:

June 11 at 1:27pm ·

It’s so sad to me that people like Maher, “Stewart*,” Madcow, Matthews, etc have such sway with the REAL “bitter clingers,” those of the left (collecto-fascist) bent.

(* not his real last name – his family members are big on Wall St. & he didn’t want that associated with his TV persona)

Here on FB, I’m in touch with people I knew when we were kids.Those who were the angriest, most bitter, and most snooty (and snotty) are all rabid leftists. One used to be shy and gently, but here she is just as angry and bitingly sarcastic… and irrationally Trump-hating.

More puzzling is that several of them grew up in millionaire-plus households. Several of them married into big money as well. I itch to ask them: “WTH do YOU have to be angry about?”

I don’t mind if someone doesn’t like this or that policy or comment from Trump. There’s plenty of that to go around. But why wishing his family a fiery death? Why fly off the handle at someone who disagrees?

Maybe one of you therapists out there can figure it out. I can’t.

Some analysis is in order. Start with Dan’s first sentence.

It’s so sad to me that people like Maher, “Stewart*,” Madcow, Matthews, etc have such sway with the REAL “bitter clingers,” those of the left (collecto-fascist) bent.

Maher is, of course, comedian Bill Maher, and Stewart is comedian Jon Stewart. I am supposing “Madcow” stands in for Rachel Maddow, who does commentary on MSNBC. Matthews is Chris Matthews, who has a talk show on MSNBC. Past this point Dan loses me with terms like “bitter clingers” and “collecto-fascists.” Clarification requested.

Dan is correct that Stewart was not his original surname, he being from an east European family. Anyhow, there is more to the conversation. After some back and forth, Dan issues forth with this, responding to Robert.

Robert: I see that as a justification only for doing away with the evil, violent, confiscatory, deadly gangs called ‘govenment” and turning to voluntary, competitive organizations to accomplish the few things that need done by large organizations.

Illustrating one of the reasons I look forward to posts by Dan. Spellings and grammar are from the original. I copy and paste from Facebook. More from Dan.

Ricky: I think that’s what mystifies me. We’ve had presidents who have raped women IN the White House, caused murders from assassinations to genocide, and have foisted awful programs upon this country’s children.

Another quality of Facebook postings. Scandalous statements without qualification, elaboration, justification, or corroboration. Plus more in the same vein. But the “… here she is just as angry and bitingly sarcastic… and irrationally Trump-hating” bit caught my attention. I (belatedly) weighed in with a heavy dose of sarcasm:

John Blanton I object to all these people pointing fingers at Trump and running him down. That’s my job.
https://skeptic78240.wordpress.com/…/the-golden-shower-33/Manage

Adding a link to a previous blog post. I will give Dan’s response and explain his references to the blog post.

  1. You make some good points, e.g. the political tool used by both iaginary parties: “Whataboutism.”
  2. It’s ironic that you hold Clapper up as an icon of truth. He was CAUGHT publicly lying to us and Congress about the NSA spying on us.
  3. Not to worry, since it’s just one party, neither Clapper, nor Hillary, nor (convicted) Holder, nor (caught) Menendez, nor (admitted) Comey and Lynch will be charged, let alone indicted, let alone tried, let alone convicted.
  4. Being among the elites, all those listed MUST go through those steps to do prison time, unlike us mundanes, who merely need suspicion by a member of the ruling class to be captured, bound, hooded and jetted off to Gitmo… or worse… never to be heard from again.
  5. I did get a kick out of your “focused skepticism,” which ignored that the supposed “Russian hacking” of the DNC was most iikely a huge leak to Wikileaks.
  6. Even in your analysis, none of the contents of those emails is questioned. Not even whether there’s one stick of evidence of Russian hacking, let alone “collusion” (which is not a crime).
  7. The DNC has never disavowed the veracity of those leaked emails’ contents, they just questioned where they came from.

Nice use of “golden shower,” to revitalize the debunked Russian hooker story about Trump!

As usual, the politicians and pundits, including of course supposed comedian John Oliver, don’t discuss real issues. Instead they waste OUR time on the real Pissing Contest.

Someday… I’m SURE I’ll see some unbiased skepticism from you. I have faith in you!

Ignoring Dan’s point number 1 — “2. It’s ironic that you hold Clapper up as an icon of truth. He was CAUGHT publicly lying to us and Congress about the NSA spying on us.”

I responded in a follow-up. When James Clapper’s statements first popped up on TV it was apparent what had happened. Senator Ron Wyden asked James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, a question that would have been difficult to answer in an unclassified briefing. Clapper knew about NSA’s collection of American telephonic meta data, which is records from phone companies about what number called what number and when and for how long. The fact the NSA was doing this was a secret matter, and Clapper would have been prosecuted for revealing it. However, what Wyden asked was whether NSA was collecting dossiers on American citizens. This the NSA was not doing, and that was the question that he answered. If he had declined to answer the question for reasons of national security, then that would be a revelation that NSA was monitoring phone traffic, again violating the laws concerning national secrets.

I previously treated this matter back when it surfaced, reminding readers that expectations of privacy are oversold.

Did I mention how much I enjoyed “you hold Clapper up as an icon of truth?” Creating a new definition for the term “icon of truth,” to  which I respond, “Really?” A review of of the post Dan refers to shows the James Clapper references comprise three excerpts from his recent book.

The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process.

Clapper, James R.. Facts and Fears: Hard Truths from a Life in Intelligence (p. 352). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

We knew now that the Russians had thousands of Twitter accounts and tens of thousands of bots that posted more than a million tweets. They posted more than a thousand videos on YouTube with days of streaming content. Facebook has said Russian content reached 126 million of its American users—an astonishing number, considering that only 139 million Americans voted.

Clapper, James R.. Facts and Fears: Hard Truths from a Life in Intelligence (p. 395). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

In April, Mr. Trump first used the phrase “lying, crooked Hillary” to refer to his likely opponent in the primary election. RT, Fox News, and paid and unpaid trolls across social media latched on to the moniker. Russia and the Trump campaign seemed to be quite in sync, but that didn’t necessarily mean they were colluding—coordinating their efforts behind closed doors. They may simply have had a lot in common: a strong dislike for both the Washington political establishment and Hillary Clinton personally; a proclivity for social media, particularly Twitter, which meant they’d end up sharing each other’s ideas on the internet [sic]; and a genuine delight in wallowing in conspiracy theories.

Clapper, James R.. Facts and Fears: Hard Truths from a Life in Intelligence (p. 334). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

An examination of the text reveals there is no need  to hold James Clapper up as an icon of truth, since the statements in the book are verifiably true, whether General Clapper made the statements or not. So much for icons of truth.

3. Not to worry, since it’s just one party, neither Clapper, nor Hillary, nor (convicted) Holder, nor (caught) Menendez, nor (admitted) Comey and Lynch will be charged, let alone indicted, let alone tried, let alone convicted.

That’s a bit to swallow. Passing over “Clapper” and “Hillary,” otherwise not elaborated, there is “nor (convicted) Holder,” which I am still trying to figure out. Is Dan implying former Attorney General Eric Holder has been convicted of something? I need Dan to clear this up for me.

The matter of “(caught) Menendez” is more clear. Democratic Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey without a doubt had questionably dealings, for which he came to face a federal indictment. Not convicted, he continues to hold office and is running for re-election this year.

Neither does Dan spell out the details of “nor (admitted) Comey and Lynch.” Real life issues with former Director of the FBI James Comey and Attorney General Loretta Lynch are newsworthy, but there is nothing in either case approaching criminal activity. A report released just recently faults Director Comey for bad judgment in his public handling of the investigation into the Hillary Clinton emails. Particularly, his missteps are credited for swinging the 2016 election to Donald Trump. Loretta Lynch’s fault was having a private conversation with President Bill Clinton during the time Mrs. Clinton was being investigated (emails). If Dan thinks these are indictable offenses, then both of us need to polish off our passports and head for Cape Verde, which does not have an extradition treaty with the United States.

4. Being among the elites, all those listed MUST go through those steps to do prison time, unlike us mundanes, who merely need suspicion by a member of the ruling class to be captured, bound, hooded and jetted off to Gitmo… or worse… never to be heard from again.

I will pass on that and give Dan an opportunity to provide additional thoughts.

5. I did get a kick out of your “focused skepticism,” which ignored that the supposed “Russian hacking” of the DNC was most iikely a huge leak to Wikileaks.

The presumption, based on how I read Dan’s comments, is that the Russian government was not behind the hacking of the DNC correspondence, which emails were later distributed by WikiLeaks. Were Dan to research the matter a bit deeper he would learn there is factual basis for Russian (government) involvement. For example:

The U.S. Intelligence Community concluded that some of the genuine leaks that Guccifer 2.0 has said were part of a series of cyberattacks on the DNC were committed by two Russian intelligence groups.[12][13][14][15][16][17] This conclusion is based on analyses conducted by various private sector cybersecurity individuals and firms, including CrowdStrike,[18][19] Fidelis Cybersecurity,[19][20] Fireeye‘s Mandiant,[19] SecureWorks,[21] ThreatConnect,[22] Trend Micro,[23] and the security editor for Ars Technica.[24] The Russian government denies involvement in the theft,[25] and “Guccifer 2.0” denied links to Russia.[26][27] WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said that multiple parties had access to DNC emails and that there was “no proof” that Russia was behind the attack.[28] According to various cybersecurity firms and U.S. government officials, Guccifer 2.0 is a persona that was created by Russian intelligence services to cover for their interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.[29][30] In March 2018, Special Counsel Robert Mueller took over investigation of Guccifer 2.0 from the FBI while it was reported that forensic determination had found the Guccifer 2.0 persona to be a “particular military intelligence directorate (GRU) officer working out of the agency’s headquarters on Grizodubovoy Street in Moscow”.[31]

The Wikipedia entry for Guccifer 2.0 provides links to its sources, which sources Dan may want to dive into were he to have real interest in whether the statements are factual.

Dan says that “Russian hacking of the DNC was most iikely [sic] a huge leak to Wikileaks [sic].” Apparently it was both. The DNC mail system was penetrated by outside agents, paid for by the Russian government. The load of emails was then given to WikiLeaks, which took some time to verify them, following which it released them to the world. It released them in a drip by drip manner to most embarrass the Democrats.

6. Even in your analysis, none of the contents of those emails is questioned. Not even whether there’s one stick of evidence of Russian hacking, let alone “collusion” (which is not a crime).

I will touch on the matter of the email contents next, addressing first the matter of collusion being a crime. Working with (collusion) the Russian government is not a crime. What would be a crime is for an American party to solicit and employ the force of a foreign government to further a campaign. Refer to 11 CFR 110.20:

11 CFR 110.20 – Prohibition on contributions, donations, expenditures, independent expenditures, and disbursements by foreign nationals (52 U.S.C. 30121, 36 U.S.C. 510).

The motivation behind this and related legal codes is that the American electoral process could be completely undone if foreign governments, even foreign nationals, were allowed to participate by providing material aid. An American political party might spend $500,000 and up to secure the election of a president. With the backing of the Russian national treasury, that amount could be easily swamped.

To be sure, the leaked emails were real. The Democratic Party leadership dealt harshly and some would say unfairly internally, and the leak of these doings did them great damage. The Russians did not want the Democrats (Clinton) to win the election, and they had great motivation to swing the election away from Clinton and eventually toward Trump once he became the nominee. Anybody finding fault with this analysis is invited to debate the issue with me, but they will need  to bring facts and not idle speculation.

7. The DNC has never disavowed the veracity of those leaked emails’ contents, they just questioned where they came from.

True. See above.

Dan concludes:

Nice use of “golden shower,” to revitalize the debunked Russian hooker story about Trump!

As usual, the politicians and pundits, including of course supposed comedian John Oliver, don’t discuss real issues. Instead they waste OUR time on the real Pissing Contest.

Someday… I’m SURE I’ll see some unbiased skepticism from you. I have faith in you!

Dan is correct in my use of the “Golden Shower.” This is a bit of tawdry gossip featured prominently in the Steele dossier, and I enjoy so much bringing it up that I have a series of postings, 33 and counting, of these. As I say, I keep bringing the matter up to throw in the face of those who voted for Donald Trump, hoping it will be their last vision as they lie dying. And no, it has not been debunked. If Dan wants to claim it has been, then he is invited to state his case. This appears to be an additional point on which he is unclear.

Regarding comedian John Oliver, yes he is funny, and, in case somebody asks, no he is not a certified authority on anything. However, the episode of his show, “Last Week Tonight,” which I cited in my Golden Shower posting, is based on verifiable fact. It consists largely of video clips showing people saying and doing the things Oliver says they said and did. Dan is invited to refute any of the statements made on the show. And yes, Oliver is discussing real issues. Fox Network is campaigning heavily for the Trump administration, their activities not being limited to issuing true statements. Oliver does not waste our time. He is funny, vulgar, and factual. You want something more?

Finally, regarding a “pissing contest,” Dan is unclear on this point. The definition of a pissing contest is where two people face each other and piss on each other. Nobody wins. This is not one of those cases. What we see is Oliver pissing on some people who are in no position to piss back.

And that’s my short analysis of Dan’s comments. Once again I show my generous nature. And may Jesus have mercy on my soul.

Bad Joke of the Week

One of a continuing series

So, this was a long time ago, and I met this women, and I went over to her apartment with the idea of taking her out to dinner. When I got there she was not quite ready to go, so I sat on the couch in the living room of her apartment.

She had this little dog there, and he wanted to play. I threw his ball across the room, and he would fetch it and bring it back to me. I did that a couple of times, and the ball bounced out the window. The little dog went right after it, five stories up.

I was sitting there, wondering how to break it to the woman, when she came out and said, “Let’s go.” She didn’t notice the dog was missing.

So, as we were getting in my car to go, I thought a bit, and I turned to her. I said, “I couldn’t help but notice that your little dog seemed very depressed.”

Bad Joke of the Week

One of a continuing series

Sam was the owner of a world-wide chain of stores and a multi-millionaire. When his daughter became engaged to a very religious young man, Sam called the prospective groom into his office for a chat.

“Tell me,” Sam asked the fiancée, “what are your plans for the future?”

“I plan on spending the remainder of my life studying the holy works,” the man replied.

“And, given this, how do you expect to support my daughter?” Sam continued.

“I am sure the Lord will provide,” was the answer.

“And what about your children? How do you expect to support them?” Sam persisted.

“The Lord will provide,” was the answer.

After the interview Sam met with his wife. “What do you think of your future son-in-law?” she asked.

“He’s just great,” responded Sam. I only met him, and already he thinks I’m the Lord.

Bad Joke of the Week

One of a continuing series

There was this guy at a bar. Just sitting there, staring at his drink. He’s been sitting there a half hour.

Then a big trucker, a trouble maker, comes over. He sits down next to the man, picks up the man’s drink, and downs it with one gulp.

The man starts crying. The trouble maker say, “Come on, twerp. I was just joking. I’ll buy you another drink. Tell me what’s bothering you.”

The man tells his story. “It’s the worst day of my life. I oversleep and get into work late. The boss fires me.When I get out to where I parked my car, it’s been stolen. The police tell me there’s nothing they can do right now, so I take a cab home. When I get out I realize I left my wallet in the cab as it drives away. When I go inside I discover my wife in bed with the gardener.”

“That’s bad says the trucker.”

“So I decide to end my life, and I come here to this bar. That doesn’t work out either. You come up and drink my poison.”

 

 

Bad Joke of the Week

One of a continuing series

The original Hollywood Squares debuted in 1966 and featured a panel of stars in a larger-than-life tic-tac-toe game. Rose Marie was one of the longest comedians on the show and appeared in the first and last network episodes.

Rose Marie, like most of the panelists, adopted her own unique schtick when answering questions. She played a love-lorn personality similar to her husband-hunting character Sally Rogers from The Dick Van Dyke Show.

While some of the panelists received behind-the-scenes help, Rose Marie wasn’t given the show’s questions in advance so her punchlines were made up on the spot. Here are some laugh-worthy zingers that Rose Marie delivered.

Question: According to Dear Abby, is there a law that can force a man to marry a woman?

Rose Marie: Yes, and I think it’s called a mother-in-law.

Question: Which is the most valuable gem now on the market?
Rose Marie: Men.

Question: Does your face look more wrinkled when you get up in the morning or go to bed at night?
Rose Marie: I imagine it’d be more wrinkled at night. It’s been out longer.

Question: According to beauty experts, put some egg white on your face, leave it on for two minutes, and then rinse with cool water. If you’ve been successful, what’s gone?
Rose Marie: The egg white.

Question: Can a mink coat be considered a necessity in real life?

Rose Marie: Yeah, I think it is to another mink.

Question: According to Billy Graham, there is only thing that can satisfy your deepest longings?
Rose Marie: Do you want names?

Question: Can intense pleasure bring on a heart attack?
Rose Marie: How would I know?

Question: What is “John Brown’s Body?”
Rose Marie: I found it to be very warm and wonderful.

Question: According to a nationwide poll, whom do more Americans say they trust more – garbage collectors or doctors?

Rose Marie: How can you put those two together? I guess because they both remove things.

Question: The great sphinx of Egypt has a human’s head and who’s body?
Rose Marie: Milton Berle’s.

Question: True or False. It is now possible to hire a wife for 500 dollars a month.
Rose Marie: I’ll take 450 and bus fare.

Question: What is the scientific term for the study of man?
Rose Marie: Cruising the boulevard.

Question: According to the National Safety Council, if your clothes catch on fire, will running help?

Rose Marie: No, but it’s great for the legs.

Question: Ann Landers advises that when someone phones you and says “I called you last night, and you weren’t home. Where were you,” you should reply by saying what?
Rose Marie: Peter [Marshall], if you called I was home.

Question: According to Vogue, what flower has traditionally represented innocence and purity?
Rose Marie: Well, it’s not the rose.
Peter Marshall: Not the Rose we know anyway.

Question: A famous television personality has written a novel titled Everything a Man Could Want. Who wrote it?
Rose Marie: I did. It’s my autobiography. And it’s not selling, Peter.

Question: How far does a horse run in a Kentucky Derby?
Rose Marie: As long as he can go.

Question: As you grow older, do you tend to gesture more or less with your hands while you are talking?
Rose Marie: You ask me one more growing older question, Peter, and I’ll give you a gesture you’ll never forget!

Question: In bowling, what’s a perfect score?
Rose Marie: Ralph, the pin boy.

Question: During a tornado, are you safer in the bedroom or in the closet?

Rose Marie: Unfortunately, Peter, I’m always safe in the bedroom.

Question: The Bible states that “your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see…” what?
Rose Marie: See me after the show.

Question: Dear Abby says that there is only one reason people lie. What reason is that?
Rose Marie: They want to get re-elected.

Bad Joke of the Week

One of a continuing series

Цифровая репродукция находится в интернет-музее Gallerix.ru

The maid asked her boss, the wife for a raise, and the wife was upset. The wife asked, “Now, Helen, why do you think you deserve a pay increase?”

Helen: “There are three reasons. The first is that I iron better than you.”

Wife: “Who said that?”

Helen: “Your husband.”

Wife: “Oh.”

Helen: “The second reason is that I am a better cook than you.”

Wife: “Who said that?”

Helen: “Your husband.”

Wife: “Oh.”

Helen: “The third reason is that I am better in bed than you.”

Wife: “Did my husband say that as well?”

Helen: “No, the gardener did.”

Wife: “So, how much do you want?”

Bad Joke of the Week

One of a continuing series

Sam died, and in his will he left $50,000 for his funeral. His friend bill came to the funeral, and he remarked to Sam’s widow how nice the flowers were. She told him about Sam’s will.

Bill looked around, and he appreciated what a nice funeral it was, but he could not see $50,000 worth. He asked the widow about it.

She explained the flowers were $5000, the casket was $7500, and the catering bill for the wake came to $8500. “What went for the remaining $40,000?” Bill asked.

She replied, “I spent the rest on memorial stone.”

“Bill was impressed. “That must be some stone. Just how big is it?”

“About 7.5 carats.”

Bad Joke of the Week

One of a continuing series

Comical song titles, inspired by a lunch conversation earlier this week

You’re the Reason Our Kids Are So Ugly

Thank God And Greyhound (She’s Gone)

If You Don’t Believe I Love You, Just Ask My Wife

You Take the Medicine (I’ll Take the Nurse)

I Wouldn’t Take Her to a Dog Fight (she might win)

Dogs Can Grow Beards All Over

I’ve Been Flushed From the Bathroom of Your Heart

All I Want From You (Is Away)

You Can’t Have Your Kate and Edith Too

If the Phone Doesn’t Ring, It’s Me

Drop Kick Me, Jesus (Through the Goal Post of Life)

Our Lawyer Made Us Change The Name Of This Song So We Wouldn’t Get Sued

If My Nose Was Running Money (I’d Blow It All On You)

I’ve Got Tears in My Ears From Lying on My Back in Bed While I Cry Over You

How Could You Believe Me When I Said I Loved You When You Know I’ve Been A Liar All My Life

I’d Rather Have a Bottle in Front of Me (Than a Frontal Lobotomy)

I Don’t Know Whether to Kill Myself or Go Bowling

Billy Broke My Heart at Walgreen’s (I Cried All the Way to Sears)

I have more of these, and I am going to post them unless Michael Cohen brings me a check for $130,000.

Bad Joke of the Week

One of a continuing series

This is an old one. I’m thinking I first heard it from high school, certainly from my time in the Navy. Could have been first published in Boys Life magazine.

Asked if a year in college had made a difference in his son, the farmer replied, “Well, he still good at plowing, but now instead of saying, “Whoa, Becky! Haw and git up!’ now he says, ‘Halt, Rebecca! Pivot and proceed!'”

Bad Joke of the Week

One of a continuing series

Two brothers, Timmy and Tommy, are badly misbehaving, and their parents send them to a religious reform school.

Almost immediately Timmy gets into trouble and is sent to the principal’s office.

The principal is a large man, and he looms over little Timmy. In a booming voice he demands, “Do you know where God is?” Timmy’s eyes grow large, but he doesn’t say a word.

The principal shouts even louder, “Do you know where God it?” Timmy runs from the room screaming.

Tommy finds his brother huddled in a corner and crying. He asks,”What’s wrong?”

Timmy responds, “They don’t know where God is, and they think I took him.”