1/ Every week the great Frank Rich gives his take on the week's political news.....here he comments on the third debate, and our hopeless media.....
This week: Romney's hollow foreign policy, Obama's prickly memes, and why cars will be the story of the next two weeks.
The consensus, well summed up by the Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, was "Obama had a better debate, but Romney passed the commander-in-chief credibility test." Do you agree? That was the consensus, but it’s meaningless on several levels. This “Romney passed the commander-in-chief credibility test” is a Beltway cliché that means in this case that Romney didn’t duplicate the Gerald Ford, Sarah Palin calamity of garbling major facts (except those about his own previously stated positions) and that he regurgitated memorized boilerplate as if he were handing down wise revelations (e.g., “Assad must go” and “What’s happening in Pakistan is going to have a major impact on the success in Afghanistan”). Romney also showed “commander-in-chief credibility,” one assumes, because he retreated from his usual hawkishness: constantly invoking “peace,” tossing in a favorable citation of the U.N., and coming out for a firm withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2014 only two weeks after Paul Ryan said the reverse. Mitt even knocked the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and, speaking in general of the Middle East, said, “We can’t kill our way out of this mess.” Translation: Undecided voters have told campaign focus groups that Americans don’t want a saber-rattler in the White House right now, let alone the second coming of George W. Bush.
Of course, Romney means none of it, but for the rest of the campaign, we can assume that his retinue of neocon Bushies, from John Bolton to Dan Senor, will be locked in a closet. And yes, Obama had a better debate, by far — as the first polls indicate.
2/ Stephen Colbert mocks the Fox News coverage of the Libya 'crisis", and this is one of his best sequences ever......four minutes of delicious parody from one of our cleverest comedians......
Excellent, excellent......
3/ Land of the free, home of the brave? BS. America is a terrified nation, armed to the teeth but afraid of 16th century peasants in remote mountains. Excellent story of how we have become a nation of wimps, and read the first line and tell me this was not a well thought out plan by our oligarchs......
Frightened people obey orders and don't question authority.....no wonder this country has lurched to the right.....
A new study by researchers at the University of Illinois in Urbana, showing that young children who are fearful in childhood are likely to be conservative when they grow up got me to thinking.
It’s not just that a whole generation of kids who get regularly belted by their parents, who are warned that if they behave in a certain manner they’ll go to hell, or that their faces will freeze in some horrible contorted way, or that they will be thrown out of the house, are becoming Republicans. It’s that virtually the whole country is populated by adults who have been raised in a climate of fear by a media and a government that are hell-bent on scaring the shit out of everyone.
The result is that a nation that once, for better or worse, was full of people who could strike out for unknown regions to stake a claim on land when they didn’t even know how to farm (land admittedly belonging to native Americans who could understandably be expected to react with aggressive hostility to being expropriated), who could weather brutal winters with nothing to get them through but a musket and a store of root vegetables in the cellar, who could stand up to the mightiest military of its day and throw off a colonial yoke and boldly create a new country, now cowers in fear at the imagined threats of a landlocked group of uneducated and incredibly poor people living in a country that is a throwback to the 16th century.
America is supposedly the “Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave,” as our unsingable national anthem puts it at its most unsingable point, but to tell the truth, it is no longer either of those things. Don't believe me? Just try telling a cop who stops you for standing off the side of the road with your thumb out and says you are breaking the law against hitchhiking, that he is wrong and that the law does not in fact bar thumbing. For exercising your right of free speech, even if you were polite about it, he will in response threaten you with arrest.
4/ Remember a hit from the 60s "You Don't Own Me" by Lesley Gore?
Interesting song, especially relevant today.....watch this ladies, and pass it on to your friends.....
And anyone know where you can get a bumper sticker "Keep your rosaries off my ovaries? Mary wants one....
5/ Absolutely fascinating video titled "Doubt", of how the fossil fuel industry is using doubt as a weapon against climate change. This was done before, by the tobacco corporations.....
They don't have to disprove anything - all they have to do is keep a debate going, and create doubt......five minutes .......
6/ Jonathan Chait reviews two excellent books - the first is the story of how the Republican party purged itself of it's moderates.......and the second is a novel about a conservative with a conscience.....
The books seem to be interesting, but the review is better - a discussion of what happened to the conservative movement, and why there is no coherence to right wing commentators......
If you are interested in politics, this is good stuff......
- October 5, 2012 | 12:00 am
- 10 comments
Print
MORE FROM THIS AUTHOR
John McBride/Corbis
Rule And Ruin: The Downfall of Moderation and the Destruction of the Republican Party, from Eisenhower to the Tea PartyBy Geoffrey Kabaservice
(Oxford University Press, 482 pp., $29.95)
(Oxford University Press, 482 pp., $29.95)
PatriotsBy David Frum
(CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 484 pp., $16.99)
(CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 484 pp., $16.99)
MITT ROMNEY HAS BEEN running for president as the Republican nominee, de facto or de jure, for eight months now, and the grand historical joke of it has not yet worn off. A party that has set itself to frantically, fanatically expunge its moderates, quasi-moderates, suspected moderates, and fellow travelers of moderates chose as its standard bearer the lineal heir, biographically and genealogically, to its moderate tradition. It entrusted its holy crusade to repeal Barack Obama’s hated health-care law to the man who had inspired it and run, four years before, promising to do the same for the rest of America. The man and his historical moment could not be more incongruous. It was as if the Mongol tribes of the thirteenth century, setting out to pillage their way across the Asian steppe, had somehow chosen Mahatma Gandhi as their supreme khan.
Romney’s capture of the nomination required an incredible confluence of good fortune. Any one of several Republicans—Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan—could have outflanked Romney in both grassroots enthusiasm and establishment support but chose not to run. The one candidate with the standing and financial reach to challenge him who did grasp for the prize, Rick Perry, performed his duties with such comic, stammering ineptitude that his final oops-de-grace by that point was not even startling. What remained to challenge Romney was a gaggle of third-raters lacking the money or the rudimentary organization even to get their name on the ballot everywhere. Still, running even against the likes of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum (which is to say, running essentially unopposed), Romney still trudged laboriously to victory after endless weeks.
But there is another way to make at least some sense of the Romney nomination.
IT HAS TO DO WITH the strange and sad fate of Republican moderation. After all, moderates, or at least relative moderates, do continue to exist in the Republican Party. They merely do not exercise power in any meaningful, open way. They provide off-the-record quotations to reporters, expressing unease over whichever radical turn the party has taken at any given moment. They can be found in Washington and elsewhere rolling their eyes at their colleagues. The odd figure with nothing left to lose—say, a senator who has lost a primary challenge—may even deliver a forceful assault on the party’s uncompromising direction.
In this sense, Romney’s capture of the nomination is perfectly emblematic of the state of the party. Conservative activists spent months resisting Romney, sometimes furiously, despite the fact that he was defending no positions that they disagreed with. Across the entire ideological spectrum—in social, economic, and foreign policy—Romney stood shoulder to shoulder with his party’s reactionary wing. When Romney took on his hapless opponents, he assailed them from the right, as soft on immigration or anti-capitalist. The sole point of hesitation centered on conservatives’ suspicion that Romney did not actually believe what he was saying.
FIFTY YEARS AGO, the conservative movement, far from holding a monopoly on acceptable thought within the GOP, was merely one tribe vying for power within it, and not even the largest one. Geoffrey Kabaservice’s fine book tells the story of the slow extinction of the party’s moderate and liberal wings. The conservative movement, he shows in often gruesome detail, took control of the party in large part due to an imbalance of passion. The rightists had strong and clearly defined principles and a willingness to fight for them, while the moderates lacked both.
7/ Bill Maher with a serious segment - he was talking about the Romney gaffe in the second debate where he accused the President of not calling the Benghazi attack and "act of terror", and he was trying to get his two conservative panelists to admit Mitt was wrong.....
It is a brilliant example of the right wing bubble - all of the "Fox like" media accused Obama of not dealing with Libya, but the facts are that he called the attack an act of terror the next day, on video.....but if the bubble keeps repeating a lie, even with proof conservatives won't believe it......
Great, if infuriating [who were these assholes?] 7 minute clip.......
8/ Pretty funny four minute local news fails compilation, by Conan O'Brien and Andy Richter......amusing to me anyway, as I never, ever watch the local news. It's put together so poor, stupid people can feel superior to the schlebs they show doing dumb/painful stuff......just sayin.....
I remember the Fox Channel in Miami had a motto for local news - if it bleeds, it leads......
9/ The technology behind this is incredible - it's a 360 degree picture of a beautiful old wooden church in Poland, but you can look at every corner of the church in detail with the pan, tilt and zoom features along the bottom......or you can use your mouse and wheel to move it as well....
How do they do this stuff? Amazing.....
10/ I had to watch this music video, as it has almost 532 million hits on Youtube - this is about 7% of the world's population of 7 billion......it's a chubby Korean rapper called PSY, and the "song", sung in Korean, is "Gangnam Style"......
So here it is.......bulkogi anyone?
11/ Corruption that goes unpunished is corrosive to a society, but as with the Wall Street banks that defrauded us there are many instances where the oligarchy gets away with behaviour that may not technically be criminal, but is certainly unethical.
This is one of them, and Mitt Romney is one of the beneficiaries through an investment in a hedge fund headed by Paul Singer, who is also a huge supporter of both Republicans and the Romney campaign.....
Mitt Romney’s opposition to the auto bailout has haunted him on the campaign trail, especially in Rust Belt states like Ohio. There, in September, the Obama campaign launched television ads blasting Romney’s November 2008New York Times op-ed, “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.” But Romney has done a good job of concealing, until now, the fact that he and his wife, Ann, personally gained at least $15.3 million from the bailout—and a few of Romney’s most important Wall Street donors made more than $4 billion. Their gains, and the Romneys’, were astronomical—more than 3,000 percent on their investment.
It all starts with Delphi Automotive, a former General Motors subsidiary whose auto parts remain essential to GM’s production lines. No bailout of GM—or Chrysler, for that matter—could have been successful without saving Delphi. So, in addition to making massive loans to automakers in 2009, the federal government sent, directly or indirectly, more than $12.9 billion to Delphi—and to the hedge funds that had gained control over it.
One of the hedge funds profiting from that bailout—
$1.28 billion so far—is Elliott Management, directed by
Paul Singer. According toThe Wall Street Journal, Singer has given more to support GOP candidates—$2.3 million—than anyone else on Wall Street this election season. His personal giving is matched by that of his colleagues at Elliott; collectively, they have donated $3.4 million to help elect Republicans this season, while giving only $1,650 to Democrats. And Singer is influential with the GOP presidential candidate; he’s not only an informal adviser but, according to theJournal, his support was critical in helping push Representative Paul Ryan onto the ticket.
Singer, whom Fortune magazine calls a “passionate defender of the 1%,” has carved out a specialty investing in distressed firms and distressed nations, which he does by buying up their debt for pennies on the dollar and then demanding payment in full. This so-called “vulture investor” received $58 million on Peruvian debt that he snapped up for $11.4 million, and $90 million on Congolese debt that he bought for a mere $20 million. In the process, he’s built one of the largest private equity firms in the nation, and over decades he’s racked up an unusually high average return on investments of 14 percent.
Other GOP presidential hopefuls chased Singer’s endorsement, but Mitt chased Singer with his own checkbook, investing at least $1 million with Elliott through Ann Romney’s blind trust (it could be far more, but the Romneys have declined to disclose exactly how much). Along the way, Singer gained a reputation, according to Fortune, “for strong-arming his way to profit.” That is certainly what happened at Delphi.
* * *
12/ The technology of our living room entertainment center is changing fast......now there is Boxee TV.......read how it works, and how it will give you unlimited storage of anything you want to record......
Boxee, the streaming media company with the funnest name this side of Roku, has unveiled its latest Internet-connected player: It's called the Boxee TV, and it's a $99 box that contains an antenna to watch broadcast high-definition television and a DVR system that gives you unlimited online storage of your recordings. It is, according to Boxee CEO Avner Ronen, the first DVR system that has no storage limits whatsoever.
Unlike other DVRs which store shows on a hard drive within the device, Boxee's "No Limits" DVR instantly uploads your recorded content via Wi-Fi or Ethernet cable into a storage locker on the Internet. You can access your recordings either on your television through the Boxee box, or on any Internet browser on your computer, tablet or smartphone on the Boxee website. With a monthly subscription fee, Boxee provides an infinite amount of online storage space for your recordings; if you choose not to subscribe to the service, you get a reduced amount of space.
What content will you be able to record? Well, the Boxee TV comes with an antenna that can pick up HD feeds from channels like ABC, Fox, NBC, and CBS (for those within the broadcast area); there's also a cable input on the back of the device for subscribers to basic cable service. Ronen swears that your DVR storage for those feeds is truly unlimited and that, if you really wanted to, you could record all day, every day, and you would not hit any kind of storage limit. The Boxee TV can record up to two channels at once, which I think we can agree is a lot of potential recorded TV.
13/ Jon Stewart with a look at the latest Republican Senate candidate who mangles his 17th century comments on rape......this is what scares me about the Republicans....they say it's fiscal responsibility and shrinking the government, but when they get into power all they want to do is ban abortion and use the gumment to tell everyone how to live.....
An amusing four minutes.......
14/ If you want yet another indication of how corporations own our government, this is confirm it for you. The University of Iowa, a solid midwestern college, did a study of how crops can be rotated the old way so farmers can use less chemicals and pesticides, and the results were amazing - using a four year rotation they used 80% less chemicals for the same yield......
Because this would annoy Monsanto, the Department of Agriculture refuses to acknowledge the report from the University and the researchers couldn't get it published.
This shit makes me sick.......
IT’S becoming clear that we can grow all the food we need, and profitably, with far fewer chemicals. And I’m not talking about imposing some utopian vision of small organic farms on the world. Conventional agriculture can shed much of its chemical use — if it wants to.
This was hammered home once again in what may be the most important agricultural study this year, although it has been largely ignored by the media, two of the leading science journals and even one of the study’s sponsors, the often hapless Department of Agriculture.
The study was done on land owned by Iowa State University called the Marsden Farm. On 22 acres of it, beginning in 2003, researchers set up three plots: one replicated the typical Midwestern cycle of planting corn one year and then soybeans the next, along with its routine mix of chemicals. On another, they planted a three-year cycle that included oats; the third plot added a four-year cycle and alfalfa. The longer rotations also integrated the raising of livestock, whose manure was used as fertilizer.
The results were stunning: The longer rotations produced better yields of both corn and soy, reduced the need for nitrogen fertilizer and herbicides by up to 88 percent, reduced the amounts of toxins in groundwater 200-fold and didn’t reduce profits by a single cent.
In short, there was only upside — and no downside at all — associated with the longer rotations. There was an increase in labor costs, but remember that profits were stable. So this is a matter of paying people for their knowledge and smart work instead of paying chemical companies for poisons. And it’s a high-stakes game; according to the Environmental Protection Agency, about five billion pounds of pesticidesare used each year in the United States.
No one expects Iowacorn and soybean farmers to turn this thing around tomorrow, but one might at least hope that the U.S.D.A.would trumpet the outcome. The agency declined to comment when I asked about it. One can guess that perhaps no one at the higher levels even knows about it, or that they’re afraid to tell Monsantoabout agency-supported research that demonstrates a decreased need for chemicals. (A conspiracy theorist might note that the journals Science and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences both turned down the study. It was finallypublished in PLOS One; I first read about it on the Union of Concerned Scientists Web site.)
15/ Bill McKibben has become the guru of climate change, and this is a great 12 minute interview with him on the Bill Maher show.......
Bill McKibben's spot on Bill Maher's HBO show, and it is indeed one of the best climate segments I've seen on TV for quite some time.
McKibben is eloquent and lucid as ever — though you can tell he's a bit ill at ease in a room full of knee-slapping pundits — and the segment never lags over its 12-minute running time. It's a good chance to catch up on the most recent developments on the climate front, and their current relation to political and pop culture.
16/ Movie Review
"Cloud Atlas" opens today, and this review is respectful and explains quite a lot about the movie......my guess is you will either love this or hate it......Tom Hanks is the lead star, and it's directed by the Wachowski's [The Matrix].......
In 1849 a businessman on a Melville-esque sea voyage in the South Pacific battles a mysterious illness and shelters a runaway slave. In 1936 Robert Frobisher, a penniless young composer, flees Cambridge for Edinburgh to join the household of a vain and temperamental maestro. Four decades later an alternative-press journalist risks her life investigating safety problems at a nuclear power plant.
In our own day a feckless book publisher finds himself trapped in a nursing home. Sometime in the corporate, totalitarian future a member of the genetically engineered serving class, a fast-food worker named Sonmi-451, is drawn into rebellion, while in a still more distant, postapocalyptic, neo-tribal future (where Sonmi is worshiped as a deity), a Hawaiian goatherd. ...
That last one is a little more complicated, involving a devil, marauders on horseback and the possibility of interplanetary travel. It is also where the spoilers dwell. In any case, these half-dozen stories are the components of “Cloud Atlas,” David Mitchell’s wondrous 2004 novel, now lavishly adapted for the screen by Lana and Andy Wachowski and Tom Tykwer.
“Cloud Atlas” is a movie about migratory souls and wayward civilizations, loaded with soaring themes and flights of feeling, as vaporous and comprehensive as its title. Big ideas, or at least earnest intellectual conceits, crowd the screen along with suave digital effects and gaudy costumes. Free will battles determinism. Solidarity faces off against domination. Belief in a benevolent cosmic order contends with fidelity to the cruel Darwinian maxim that “the weak are meat the strong do eat.”
Describing this movie, despite its lofty ambitions, can feel like an exercise in number crunching, and watching it is a bit like doing a series of math problems in your head. How do three directors parcel six plots into 172 minutes? (And how much might that cost?) Which actor — most of them inhabit several roles, in some cases changing gender or skin color as well as costume, accent and hairstyle — tackles the widest range of characters? What is the correlation between a musical phrase and a comet-shaped birthmark? How many times doesHugo Weaving sneer?
Maybe the achievement of “Cloud Atlas” should be quantified rather than judged in more conventional, qualitative ways. This is by no means the best movie of the year, but it may be the most movie you can get for the price of a single ticket. It blends farce, suspense, science fiction, melodrama and quite a bit more, not into an approximation of Mr. Mitchell’s graceful and virtuosic pastiche, but rather into an unruly grab bag of styles, effects and emotions held together, just barely, by a combination of outlandish daring and humble sincerity. Together the filmmakers try so hard to give you everything — the secrets of the universe and the human heart; action, laughs and romance; tragedy and mystery — that you may wind up feeling both grateful and disappointed.
The five minute extended trailer......gives a look at the complex plot.......
Todays video - Working ladies have issues too.......
Todays father and son joke
A father passing by his son’s bedroom was astonished to see the bed was nicely made and everything was picked up. Then he saw an envelope propped up prominently on the center of the bed. It was addressed, “Dad”. With the worst premonition, he opened the envelope and read the letter with trembling hands:
Dear Dad,
It is with great regret and sorrow that I’m writing you. I had to elope with my new girlfriend because I wanted to avoid a scene with mom and you. I’ve been finding real passion with Joan and she is so nice even with all her piercing, tattoos and her tight motorcycle clothes. But it’s not only the passion dad, she’s pregnant and Joan said that we will be very happy. Even though you don’t care for her as she is so much older than I, she already owns a trailer in the woods and has a stack of firewood for the whole winter.
She wants to have many more children with me and that’s now one of my dreams too. Joan taught me that marijuana doesn’t really hurt anyone and we’ll be growing it for us and trading it with her friends for all the cocaine and ecstasy we want! In the meantime, we’ll pray that science will find a cure for AIDS so Joan can get better; she sure deserves it!!
Don’t worry Dad. Someday I’m sure we’ll be back to visit so you can get to know your grandchildren.
Your son,
Benjamin
P. S. Dad, none of the above is true. I’m over at the neighbor’s house. I just wanted to remind you that there are worse things in life than my report card that’s in my desk center drawer. I love you! Call when it is safe for me to come home.
Todays short golf joke
Long ago, when men cursed and beat the ground with sticks, it was called witchcraft.Today it's called golf.
Todays King Arthur joke
Young King Arthur was ambushed and imprisoned by the monarch of a neighboring kingdom. The monarch could have killed him but was moved by Arthur's youth and ideals. So, the monarch offered him his freedom, as long as he could answer a very difficult question. Arthur would have a year to figure out the answer and, if, after a year, he still had no answer, he would be put to death.
The question?...What do women really want? Such a question would perplex even the most knowledgeable man, and to young Arthur, it seemed an impossible query. But, since it was better than death, he accepted the monarch's proposition to have an answer by year's end.
He returned to his kingdom and began to poll everyone: the princess, the priests, the wise men and even the court jester. He spoke with everyone, but no one could give him a satisfactory answer. Many people advised him to consult the old ugly woman, for only she would have the answer. But the price would be high; as the woman was famous throughout the kingdom for the exorbitant prices she charged.
The last day of the year arrived and Arthur had no choice but to talk to the old woman. She agreed to answer the question, but he would have to agree to her price first. The old ugly woman wanted to marry Sir Lancelot, the most noble of the Knights of the Round Table and Arthur's closest friend! Young Arthur was horrified. She was hunchbacked and hideous, had only one tooth, smelled like sewage, made obscene noises, etc. He had never encountered such a repugnant creature in all his life. He refused to force his friend to marry her and endure such a terrible burden; but Lancelot, learning of the proposal, spoke with Arthur.
He said nothing was too big of a sacrifice compared to Arthur's life and the preservation of the Round Table. Hence, a wedding was proclaimed and the woman answered Arthur's question thus:
What a woman really wants, she answered....is to be in charge of her own life.
Everyone in the kingdom instantly knew that the woman had uttered a great truth and that Arthur's life would be spared.
And so it was, the neighboring monarch granted Arthur his freedom and Lancelot and the ugly woman had a wonderful wedding.
The honeymoon hour approached and Lancelot, steeling himself for a horrific experience, entered the bedroom. But, what a sight awaited him. The most beautiful woman he had ever seen lay before him on the bed. The astounded Lancelot asked what had happened. The young beauty replied that since he had been so kind to her when she appeared ugly, she would henceforth, be her horrible deformed self only half the time and the beautiful maiden the other half. Which would he prefer? Beautiful during the day....or night?
Lancelot pondered the predicament. During the day, a beautiful woman to show off to his friends, but at night, in the privacy of his castle, an old ugly woman? Or, would he prefer having a hideous woman during the day, but by night, a beautiful woman for him to enjoy wondrous intimate moments?
What would YOU do?
What Lancelot chose is below.
BUT....make YOUR choice before you scroll down below.
He said nothing was too big of a sacrifice compared to Arthur's life and the preservation of the Round Table. Hence, a wedding was proclaimed and the woman answered Arthur's question thus:
What a woman really wants, she answered....is to be in charge of her own life.
Everyone in the kingdom instantly knew that the woman had uttered a great truth and that Arthur's life would be spared.
And so it was, the neighboring monarch granted Arthur his freedom and Lancelot and the ugly woman had a wonderful wedding.
The honeymoon hour approached and Lancelot, steeling himself for a horrific experience, entered the bedroom. But, what a sight awaited him. The most beautiful woman he had ever seen lay before him on the bed. The astounded Lancelot asked what had happened. The young beauty replied that since he had been so kind to her when she appeared ugly, she would henceforth, be her horrible deformed self only half the time and the beautiful maiden the other half. Which would he prefer? Beautiful during the day....or night?
Lancelot pondered the predicament. During the day, a beautiful woman to show off to his friends, but at night, in the privacy of his castle, an old ugly woman? Or, would he prefer having a hideous woman during the day, but by night, a beautiful woman for him to enjoy wondrous intimate moments?
What would YOU do?
What Lancelot chose is below.
BUT....make YOUR choice before you scroll down below.
Noble Lancelot said that he would allow HER to make the choice herself.
Upon hearing this, she announced that she would be beautiful all the time because he had respected her enough to let her be in charge of her own life.
Now....what is the moral to this story?
The moral is.....
If you don't let a woman have her own way....
Things are going to get ugly...
Todays blonde joke
A blonde goes into a nearby store and asks a clerk if she can buy the TV in the corner.
The clerk looks at her and says that he doesn't serve blondes, so she goes back home and dyes her hair black.
The next day she returns to the store and asks the same thing, and again, the clerk said he doesn't serve blondes.
Frustrated, the blonde goes home and dyes her hair yet again, to a shade of red.
Sure that a clerk would sell her the TV this time, she returns and asks a different clerk this time.
To her astonishment, this clerk also says that she doesn't serve blondes.
The blonde asks the clerk, "How in the world do you know I am a blonde?"
The clerk looks at her disgustedly and says,"That's not a TV -- it's a microwave!"
The clerk looks at her and says that he doesn't serve blondes, so she goes back home and dyes her hair black.
The next day she returns to the store and asks the same thing, and again, the clerk said he doesn't serve blondes.
Frustrated, the blonde goes home and dyes her hair yet again, to a shade of red.
Sure that a clerk would sell her the TV this time, she returns and asks a different clerk this time.
To her astonishment, this clerk also says that she doesn't serve blondes.
The blonde asks the clerk, "How in the world do you know I am a blonde?"
The clerk looks at her disgustedly and says,"That's not a TV -- it's a microwave!"
No comments:
Post a Comment