Thursday, March 20, 2008
Dr. Pepper and Wine: The Debate
Resolved: If all the wine in the world were turned into Dr. Pepper, there would be a net gain in taste.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Deja Vu a la Clinton
Headline
Bill Clinton: I didn't play the 'race card.'
Previous Headline
Bill Clinton: I did not have sexual relations with that woman.
Bill Clinton: I didn't play the 'race card.'
Previous Headline
Bill Clinton: I did not have sexual relations with that woman.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
William F. Buckley, Jr. 1925-2008
He was a conservative I hated to hate. I admired his perverse perspicaciousness, his clever pleonasm, his gifted periphrasis, his polysyllabic dexterity. He had no sympathy for antisesquipedalianism. Though he was wrong on many things, he charmed you with his style. and generally was not nasty to his opponents in intellectual combat. Born to wealth, he unashamedly enjoyed its privileges. He was personally gracious to his many friends and debated others with skill and good humor. His libertarianism did allow him to denounce the futile war on illegal drugs, which was one of the few point on which I found myself in agreement. A man of many talents, including playing the harpsichord, he will be missed.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Yawn -- Nader is Running Again
Ralph Nader is right on the issues, e. g., that we live in what is dangerously close to a plutocracy and that making Medicare universal is a better plan than either Clinton or Obama offers.
The only possible justification for his candidacy is that it would actually change the political climate in ways that would make what he advocates more politically feasible in the future -- his own reason for what he is doing. Will it? I doubt it seriously. But as long as he does not prevent a Democrat from being elected, let him have his say.
Should be be allowed in the presidential debates? Only if he qualifies in enough states to make him a possible winner and the reputable polls show convincingly that at least 15% of voters intend to vote for him.
The only possible justification for his candidacy is that it would actually change the political climate in ways that would make what he advocates more politically feasible in the future -- his own reason for what he is doing. Will it? I doubt it seriously. But as long as he does not prevent a Democrat from being elected, let him have his say.
Should be be allowed in the presidential debates? Only if he qualifies in enough states to make him a possible winner and the reputable polls show convincingly that at least 15% of voters intend to vote for him.
King/Queen or President?
The way Hillary and Barack are quibbling over the details of their respective health care plans, you would think they were running for Queen/King, that the day after they took office they could by royal decree enact their version into law. Any policy either of them recommended could be rejected, modified, or put aside for one Congress prefers.
So all the debate about whose plan is better is a minor point at the moment. Each has strong points, and both have weaknesses. Either plan would be a lot better than any Republican President would support. Neither is as good as simply making Medicare available to everybody.
The question before us is whether Hillary or Barack should be the Democratic nominee, and that will not be settled -- and should not be -- on the basis of which has the better plan right now. Remember: we elect Presidents not Kings or Queens.
In any rational discussion each would acknowledge the valid criticisms against what they offer and merely claim that their proposal is on the whole better than the other's and the best that can be hoped for in the current political climate. Boy, am I a dreamer!
So all the debate about whose plan is better is a minor point at the moment. Each has strong points, and both have weaknesses. Either plan would be a lot better than any Republican President would support. Neither is as good as simply making Medicare available to everybody.
The question before us is whether Hillary or Barack should be the Democratic nominee, and that will not be settled -- and should not be -- on the basis of which has the better plan right now. Remember: we elect Presidents not Kings or Queens.
In any rational discussion each would acknowledge the valid criticisms against what they offer and merely claim that their proposal is on the whole better than the other's and the best that can be hoped for in the current political climate. Boy, am I a dreamer!
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Suddenly Feeling Ancient
I always thought that "Golden Oldies" music was the good stuff from the 40's and 50's. I just learned that radio now uses the term to refer to the 1980's! Boy, do I feel old.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Why Obama is Winning
Obama has integrated his masculine-feminine sides. In Clinton one dimension is usually behind the other, and the integrated person is seen only sporadically. We never ask who the real Obama is. We often do ask that question about Clinton.
Barack is the woman who doesn't cry. Hillary is the man who sometimes does.
Obama can be soft in speaking of uniting, working together, going beyond the old he-man politics, cooperating, overcoming the past and seeking transformative change without destruction -- all in a deep voice and preserving his manliness. He has it together in a unified package – an authentic person.
Most of the time Clinton presents herself as strong, invulnerable, experienced, smart, tough, a battle-scarred veteran who has been tested by Republican dirty tricks, i. e., the well-prepared man who is ready from day one to send the troops into battle if necessary. Moreover, too often she comes across as cool and controlled -- a persona she has worked hard to project in this man-dominated world. Even worse she frequently gives the appearance of being programmed and calculating, careful to seem on both sides of every issue, offering something for everybody in her zone of support and offending as few as possible.
Behind that John Wayne exterior is a soft, vulnerable, human being with feelings who is hurt by being disliked and who can cry. For a brief time in New Hampshire and in her closing remarks at the Austin debate last night, this side came through, and it was appealing and persuasive. In these moments she was empathetic, genuinely concerned about hurting people and ready to champion their cause.
Oh, I know about the demographics, the fund-raising, the contrast between Obama's purple poetry and Clinton's plodding prose, the organizations on the ground, Clinton fatigue, and all that other stuff the TV pundits peddle ad nauseam. All this is important, of course, but I think the decisive difference that may get him into the Oval Office and her back in her Senate office is his ability to project persistently a winsome, compelling, unified personality, whereas the face she presents most of the time is losing and the appealing face that could make her a winning candidate is seen only now and then and too late..
PS: Maureen Dowd has the same idea (NY Times, February 24) but probably didn't get it from me, though hers is cuter. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/opinion/24dowd.html?hp
Barack is the woman who doesn't cry. Hillary is the man who sometimes does.
Obama can be soft in speaking of uniting, working together, going beyond the old he-man politics, cooperating, overcoming the past and seeking transformative change without destruction -- all in a deep voice and preserving his manliness. He has it together in a unified package – an authentic person.
Most of the time Clinton presents herself as strong, invulnerable, experienced, smart, tough, a battle-scarred veteran who has been tested by Republican dirty tricks, i. e., the well-prepared man who is ready from day one to send the troops into battle if necessary. Moreover, too often she comes across as cool and controlled -- a persona she has worked hard to project in this man-dominated world. Even worse she frequently gives the appearance of being programmed and calculating, careful to seem on both sides of every issue, offering something for everybody in her zone of support and offending as few as possible.
Behind that John Wayne exterior is a soft, vulnerable, human being with feelings who is hurt by being disliked and who can cry. For a brief time in New Hampshire and in her closing remarks at the Austin debate last night, this side came through, and it was appealing and persuasive. In these moments she was empathetic, genuinely concerned about hurting people and ready to champion their cause.
Oh, I know about the demographics, the fund-raising, the contrast between Obama's purple poetry and Clinton's plodding prose, the organizations on the ground, Clinton fatigue, and all that other stuff the TV pundits peddle ad nauseam. All this is important, of course, but I think the decisive difference that may get him into the Oval Office and her back in her Senate office is his ability to project persistently a winsome, compelling, unified personality, whereas the face she presents most of the time is losing and the appealing face that could make her a winning candidate is seen only now and then and too late..
PS: Maureen Dowd has the same idea (NY Times, February 24) but probably didn't get it from me, though hers is cuter. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/opinion/24dowd.html?hp
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Word and Idea Stealing
Plagiarism is unacceptable. Therefore Clinton and McCain should give credit to each other when they make the same criticisms of Obama in almost the same words.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Thoughts on a Snowy Day: Happiness
Happiness: Happiness is the last day of the pledge drive on NPR. And today is the day. Pledge week on public TV and radio has been called "the fund raising equivalent of waterboarding." NY Times Magazine (February 17, 2008)
Friday, February 08, 2008
Dream Team in 08 Not Likely
No Clinton-Obama team:
Would you want to be Vice-President if Bill is in the White House all day and sleeping with the President at night? Naah! At the prospect BO would remember Cactus Jack Nance Garner's -- FDR's Vice-President --1933-41 -- statement that being VP is "not worth a bucket of warm spit." (The New Yorker, March 22, 2004, claims that he actually said "warm p*ss.")
Hill and Bill playing second fiddle to Barack? Naah!
Would you want to be Vice-President if Bill is in the White House all day and sleeping with the President at night? Naah! At the prospect BO would remember Cactus Jack Nance Garner's -- FDR's Vice-President --1933-41 -- statement that being VP is "not worth a bucket of warm spit." (The New Yorker, March 22, 2004, claims that he actually said "warm p*ss.")
Garner's dictum did not hold with Bush-Cheny and some other recent occupants, of course, but, if it were Clinton-Obama, it might become true again -- in fact if not in outward appearance.
But, on the other hand, politics makes for strange bedfellows, so Hillary-Barack in bed could happen (we refer here to "political" bedfellows, of course -- a clarification necessary whenever Bill is in the vicinity, since he has had some strange "non-political" bedfellows).
Hill and Bill playing second fiddle to Barack? Naah!
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Theological Question
News Report: February 7, 2008
At least 55 killed in tornadoes in the South
Write an essay on one of the following:
1. Show how this event illustrates intelligent, benevolent design.
2. Show how this event expresses the love of God without appealing to ignorance, mystery, or eschatology.
Multiple Choice Test:
1. God caused.
2. God did not cause but permitted.
3. God neither caused nor permitted, in fact had nothing to do with it.
4. God could have prevented it but didn't.
5. God would have prevented it but couldn't.
6. None of the above.
7. I don't know. It's a mystery. (The coward's answer, permitted in my classes only on the first day.)
For the correct answer send $1.23 in a plain brown package containing a stamped, self-addressed envelope. For express service, send $1.79. For a 30 second personal lecture on the subject, park a 2008 BMW (any model) in my driveway and hand me the keys and title.
At least 55 killed in tornadoes in the South
Write an essay on one of the following:
1. Show how this event illustrates intelligent, benevolent design.
2. Show how this event expresses the love of God without appealing to ignorance, mystery, or eschatology.
Multiple Choice Test:
1. God caused.
2. God did not cause but permitted.
3. God neither caused nor permitted, in fact had nothing to do with it.
4. God could have prevented it but didn't.
5. God would have prevented it but couldn't.
6. None of the above.
7. I don't know. It's a mystery. (The coward's answer, permitted in my classes only on the first day.)
For the correct answer send $1.23 in a plain brown package containing a stamped, self-addressed envelope. For express service, send $1.79. For a 30 second personal lecture on the subject, park a 2008 BMW (any model) in my driveway and hand me the keys and title.
Monday, February 04, 2008
One Final Time: the God-Critics
Recent best-sellers by Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Christopher Hitchens have urged the thesis that religion is bad and should be eliminated. I have had my say about this before, but today I administer the coup de grace.
Their intellectual sin is that, in the words of Alfred North Whitehead, they commit the "fallacy of misplaced concretion." They mistake an abstraction about religion for the whole of the concrete reality. They look at history and the present and find many reprehensible ideas and practices associated with religion and attribute them to religion. They take what they and many of us would regard as untrue and wrong, i. e., bad, and take that to be the essence of religion, its reality.
In short, religion is more complex and ambiguous than the simplistic representations of the God-deniers.
Their intellectual sin is that, in the words of Alfred North Whitehead, they commit the "fallacy of misplaced concretion." They mistake an abstraction about religion for the whole of the concrete reality. They look at history and the present and find many reprehensible ideas and practices associated with religion and attribute them to religion. They take what they and many of us would regard as untrue and wrong, i. e., bad, and take that to be the essence of religion, its reality.
This neglects the fact that religion is always embedded in a cultural context and inexplicable apart from that setting. To abstract religion from its cultural setting is to mistake what is abstracted for the reality itself, i. e., "to commit the fallacy of misplaced concretion."
Remember Paul Tillich, "Religion is the substance of culture; culture is the form of religion."
Remember Paul Tillich, "Religion is the substance of culture; culture is the form of religion."
In short, religion is more complex and ambiguous than the simplistic representations of the God-deniers.
Finis
Too Often the Media Lack Self-criticism and Are Ignorant of Their Ignorance
A free press is essential to a democracy -- to expose corruption in high places, to inform the public about important matters, and so on. Our press frequently fulfills its role well and is to be commended. But journalists tend to think of themselves more highly than they ought to think. (Like some preachers?) It is impossible to be totally fair and balanced since reporters and commentators are human beings with finite perspectives even when they try their damnedest to be competent and impartial. By the very choice of the topics they cover, they make judgments about what is important and what is not.
Two criticisms in particular:
1. They lack sufficient self-criticism. For example, long ago the major reporting agencies decided that the Democratic race was between Clinton and Obama. Edwards was not given the attention he deserved. They will, of course cry, "Don't shoot the messenger," but they forget that the media can shoot the candidate by their lack of attention. They don't just report reality, they participate in determining what people think is reality.
2. They are sometimes ignorant of their ignorance. Most would not attempt to say much about string theory in physics because they know how little they know about it. But they do not hesitate to speak freely about religion, politics, faith, separation of church and state, and the like. They lack sophistication but don't realize it. They lack depth of understanding and don't recognize the shallowness in themselves and others.
On religion and politics, e. g., they apparently can conceive of only two options: political decisions based explicitly on a particular set religious beliefs and a total relegation of religion to the private sphere totally divorced from political choice. They are apparently innocent of other "live options" (W. James) between and beyond this simplistic dichotomy. Note their typical approval of John Kennedy's statement to the Houston Baptist preachers in 1960, which actually is superificial and leaves unanswered what his "conscience" -- his guide -- is guided by. If it is not guided in any sense by his religious faith, then one wonders how broad and deep this faith is.
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jfkhoustonministers.html
Mario Cuomo is a much better guide here. http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mariocuomoreligiousbelief.htm
My advice is to journalists is this: Heed Socrates, who said, "Know thyself."
Two criticisms in particular:
1. They lack sufficient self-criticism. For example, long ago the major reporting agencies decided that the Democratic race was between Clinton and Obama. Edwards was not given the attention he deserved. They will, of course cry, "Don't shoot the messenger," but they forget that the media can shoot the candidate by their lack of attention. They don't just report reality, they participate in determining what people think is reality.
2. They are sometimes ignorant of their ignorance. Most would not attempt to say much about string theory in physics because they know how little they know about it. But they do not hesitate to speak freely about religion, politics, faith, separation of church and state, and the like. They lack sophistication but don't realize it. They lack depth of understanding and don't recognize the shallowness in themselves and others.
On religion and politics, e. g., they apparently can conceive of only two options: political decisions based explicitly on a particular set religious beliefs and a total relegation of religion to the private sphere totally divorced from political choice. They are apparently innocent of other "live options" (W. James) between and beyond this simplistic dichotomy. Note their typical approval of John Kennedy's statement to the Houston Baptist preachers in 1960, which actually is superificial and leaves unanswered what his "conscience" -- his guide -- is guided by. If it is not guided in any sense by his religious faith, then one wonders how broad and deep this faith is.
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jfkhoustonministers.html
Mario Cuomo is a much better guide here. http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mariocuomoreligiousbelief.htm
My advice is to journalists is this: Heed Socrates, who said, "Know thyself."
Question of the Day
Do we really want the Billary Clintons to be president of the United States again?
If Hillary does become president, maybe Bill, the ex-boyfriend of Monica Lewis, could teach a class on ethics to the female interns. He could make the point that shaking a finger vigorously for emphasis when lying does not work. Perhaps he could also give them some tips on how to get stubborn stains off a dress.
If Hillary does become president, maybe Bill, the ex-boyfriend of Monica Lewis, could teach a class on ethics to the female interns. He could make the point that shaking a finger vigorously for emphasis when lying does not work. Perhaps he could also give them some tips on how to get stubborn stains off a dress.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Success of "the surge"
Soldier Suicides at Record Level
"Suicides among active-duty soldiers in 2007 reached their highest level since the Army began keeping such records in 1980, according to a draft internal study obtained by The Washington Post. Last year, 121 soldiers took their own lives, nearly 20 percent more than in 2006."
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
CNN Election News, November 5, 2008
CNN Breaking News
November 5, 2008
This is Bluf Witzer, along with the most conceited political team in television, bringing you the results of yesterday's extraordinary election. This special report is brought to you by HARD ON, HEAT UP--HARD ON HEAT UP -- good for both men and women. You know what it is for.
CNN can now confirm that Barack O'Hillary has been elected president of the United States. The victorious candidate has the most remarkable resume in the nation's history.
The president-elect has a white Christian mother from Kenya, a black Muslim father from Kansas, and grandparents who are Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, and Agnostic. There is also Native American, Asian, Hispanic, Polynesian, and Australian aborigine blood in the ancestral line.
The President-to-be is an Omnitarian who believes everything that has ever been believed by anyone, anytime, anywhere and professes to have been born again fourteen times, each time into a different religion.
The winner in yesterday's election has White House experience, having been the spouse of a former president.
The newly elected soon to be resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has been both a father and a mother and once was both.
The newly elected Vice-President, John Mary Smith, is of unknown parentage, has no resume, no religion, and is of indeterminate gender.
This special report has been brought to you by HARD ON, HEAT UP--HARD ON HEAT UP-- good for both men and women. You know what it is for.
November 5, 2008
This is Bluf Witzer, along with the most conceited political team in television, bringing you the results of yesterday's extraordinary election. This special report is brought to you by HARD ON, HEAT UP--HARD ON HEAT UP -- good for both men and women. You know what it is for.
CNN can now confirm that Barack O'Hillary has been elected president of the United States. The victorious candidate has the most remarkable resume in the nation's history.
The president-elect has a white Christian mother from Kenya, a black Muslim father from Kansas, and grandparents who are Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, and Agnostic. There is also Native American, Asian, Hispanic, Polynesian, and Australian aborigine blood in the ancestral line.
The President-to-be is an Omnitarian who believes everything that has ever been believed by anyone, anytime, anywhere and professes to have been born again fourteen times, each time into a different religion.
The winner in yesterday's election has White House experience, having been the spouse of a former president.
The newly elected soon to be resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has been both a father and a mother and once was both.
The newly elected Vice-President, John Mary Smith, is of unknown parentage, has no resume, no religion, and is of indeterminate gender.
This special report has been brought to you by HARD ON, HEAT UP--HARD ON HEAT UP-- good for both men and women. You know what it is for.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Post-South Carolina Words to the Candidates
Here are my unsolicited messages to the Democratic candidates:
To Bill: Just shut up. (Oh, I forgot, Hillary is the candidate.)
To Hillary: Tell Bill to shut up and remind him who the candidate is.
To: Barack: You are inspiring, idealistic, and hopeful, and your message of partisan-transcending politics sure makes for a good speech and may even be a good strategy to get elected, but you are naive if you think the Republicans are suddenly going to play nice if you are elected president. You said it is wrong to think that rich people do not care about the poor. Of course they care about the poor but only if it does not cost them much to help them. How many are willing to pay substantially higher taxes, for example, if that is what is required? You should be reminded of what Walter Rauschenbusch and Reinhold Niebuhr knew and what John Edwards knows: the privileged will not surrender their self-interests without a fight. But the thought that you could be the President moves this white Southerner to tears and would be for me as an old man a dream come true. If you are inaugurated in January 2009, Martin, my fellow-Georgian and Crozer graduate, will be looking down upon the scene and smiling.
To John: In South Carolina you were, as you claimed, the grown up. You have the most passion for the poor and the best programs to help the poor of all races and ethnicities. You know that the quest for a justice is a fight and not simply a matter of inspiring everybody with great speeches to join in -- although they are supremely important as M. L. King, Jr. demonstrated. But most Democrats are not buying your message. That is too bad, but I don't see much hope for your campaign. I deeply regret that. If you drop out, I hope you will support Barack and try to teach him a little realism about the world, but he needs to do what is necessary to get elected. Maybe what the world needs now is inspiration and hope even if the high idealism of Barack is not altogether realistic, so don't overdo your instruction.
PS TO ALL AMERICANS: Think about it -- an African-American man with a white American mother from Kansas and a black father with a Muslim background from Kenya -- that man President of the United States!
O my, what a day that would be! What a day that would be for the United States. What a day that would be for the world. O my, what a day!
To Bill: Just shut up. (Oh, I forgot, Hillary is the candidate.)
To Hillary: Tell Bill to shut up and remind him who the candidate is.
To: Barack: You are inspiring, idealistic, and hopeful, and your message of partisan-transcending politics sure makes for a good speech and may even be a good strategy to get elected, but you are naive if you think the Republicans are suddenly going to play nice if you are elected president. You said it is wrong to think that rich people do not care about the poor. Of course they care about the poor but only if it does not cost them much to help them. How many are willing to pay substantially higher taxes, for example, if that is what is required? You should be reminded of what Walter Rauschenbusch and Reinhold Niebuhr knew and what John Edwards knows: the privileged will not surrender their self-interests without a fight. But the thought that you could be the President moves this white Southerner to tears and would be for me as an old man a dream come true. If you are inaugurated in January 2009, Martin, my fellow-Georgian and Crozer graduate, will be looking down upon the scene and smiling.
To John: In South Carolina you were, as you claimed, the grown up. You have the most passion for the poor and the best programs to help the poor of all races and ethnicities. You know that the quest for a justice is a fight and not simply a matter of inspiring everybody with great speeches to join in -- although they are supremely important as M. L. King, Jr. demonstrated. But most Democrats are not buying your message. That is too bad, but I don't see much hope for your campaign. I deeply regret that. If you drop out, I hope you will support Barack and try to teach him a little realism about the world, but he needs to do what is necessary to get elected. Maybe what the world needs now is inspiration and hope even if the high idealism of Barack is not altogether realistic, so don't overdo your instruction.
PS TO ALL AMERICANS: Think about it -- an African-American man with a white American mother from Kansas and a black father with a Muslim background from Kenya -- that man President of the United States!
O my, what a day that would be! What a day that would be for the United States. What a day that would be for the world. O my, what a day!
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Warning: New Peril-- a Spoof
A new menace threatens us -- the invention of new technologies that tempt people to use more gasoline.
Example 1: The Prius gets great mileage, the champ. A whole bunch of people are experimenting to see just how many miles they can squeeze out of a gallon of gas. They have developed elaborate procedures and written instruction manuals with their own jargon. Why, just recently four men from West Virginia went on a 600 mile trip, not because they needed to get somewhere but because they were all experts at pushing the limits of the Prius to get the best possible mileage and wanted to set a new record. Wasting gas on a trip to nowhere.
2. Alas, some close relatives of mine just purchased a new Honda Accord with all the gizmos and gadgets imaginable, including a state of the art GPS. They projected a destination-- somewhere they didn't need to go -- and set out to test the wisdom of the device, an object that you can talk to and interact with. On the way, they decided they didn't really want to go that far and made turns to head back home. GPS said, "Try to make a U turn!" When they persisted, it said, "Well, OK, I am recalculating."
Two trips to nowhere using gas just to play with big boy toys. Suppose this catches on? Our dependence on foreign oil will explode. We must put a stop to it now before it spreads..
PS My daughter points out that in the examples given, the perpetrators were men. What can we learn from this?
Example 1: The Prius gets great mileage, the champ. A whole bunch of people are experimenting to see just how many miles they can squeeze out of a gallon of gas. They have developed elaborate procedures and written instruction manuals with their own jargon. Why, just recently four men from West Virginia went on a 600 mile trip, not because they needed to get somewhere but because they were all experts at pushing the limits of the Prius to get the best possible mileage and wanted to set a new record. Wasting gas on a trip to nowhere.
2. Alas, some close relatives of mine just purchased a new Honda Accord with all the gizmos and gadgets imaginable, including a state of the art GPS. They projected a destination-- somewhere they didn't need to go -- and set out to test the wisdom of the device, an object that you can talk to and interact with. On the way, they decided they didn't really want to go that far and made turns to head back home. GPS said, "Try to make a U turn!" When they persisted, it said, "Well, OK, I am recalculating."
Two trips to nowhere using gas just to play with big boy toys. Suppose this catches on? Our dependence on foreign oil will explode. We must put a stop to it now before it spreads..
PS My daughter points out that in the examples given, the perpetrators were men. What can we learn from this?
The Mystery at the Farmhouse: A Short Story
Scene: The 1880's, a small farmhouse. Emily is talking to Vince on the porch. The back of Emily's hand rests on her forehead, her fingers gently curling, she looks slightly toward the sky . . . .
E: Vince, O Vince, you can't leave me now, my Darling!
V: But Emily . . .
E: Vince, you can't leave me now, not when Dr. Jessup told me this very morning I am going to have a baby, your baby, Vince, my baby ....
V: But Emily, I have to, I must . . .
E: O Vince, you can't, not when that mean old man from the bank is coming out today to repossess the house because my sick, aging Mother can't pay the mortgage . . .
V: That mean old man, Emily, is my Father, and I drew up the foreclosure papers. We are just doing our jobs.
E:Vince, you didn't. You couldn't, but you did, didn't you?. O, you awful cad, you rotten scoundrel! I am so angry. I am so depressed, so angry, so depressed. I HATE you! I HATE myself. Don't you dare move one step til I get back.
Emily runs in the house and presently comes back with a pistol in her hand.
E: I hate you so much I could kill you. I hate me so much I could kill myself. Kill me, kill you! You, me, me you! Which? Both? Neither?
BANG. . . BANG. . .
THE END
E: Vince, O Vince, you can't leave me now, my Darling!
V: But Emily . . .
E: Vince, you can't leave me now, not when Dr. Jessup told me this very morning I am going to have a baby, your baby, Vince, my baby ....
V: But Emily, I have to, I must . . .
E: O Vince, you can't, not when that mean old man from the bank is coming out today to repossess the house because my sick, aging Mother can't pay the mortgage . . .
V: That mean old man, Emily, is my Father, and I drew up the foreclosure papers. We are just doing our jobs.
E:Vince, you didn't. You couldn't, but you did, didn't you?. O, you awful cad, you rotten scoundrel! I am so angry. I am so depressed, so angry, so depressed. I HATE you! I HATE myself. Don't you dare move one step til I get back.
Emily runs in the house and presently comes back with a pistol in her hand.
E: I hate you so much I could kill you. I hate me so much I could kill myself. Kill me, kill you! You, me, me you! Which? Both? Neither?
BANG. . . BANG. . .
THE END
Friday, December 28, 2007
Thought for the Day
My friends, we have to meet the challenge of these obnoxious TV commercials HEAD ON, HEAD ON, HEAD ON . . . . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)