Four

While golfing, I took a quick turn to avoid hitting a big chuck hole, and accidentally overturned my golf cart.
A very beautiful and attractive woman, who lived right there on the edge of the golf course heard the noise, came running out of her villa and shouted, "Are you okay?"
As I looked up I noticed she was wearing only a silky see-through bath robe which was partially open, revealing what appeared to be a VERY nice figure.
"I'm okay, I think," I replied as I pulled myself out from under the twisted cart.
She said, "Please follow me to my villa so I can clean and bandage that nasty scrape on your head, then you can rest a while, and I'll help you upright the cart later."
"That's mighty nice of you," I answered, "but I don't think my wife will like me doing that!"
"Oh, come on now," she insisted. "We need to see if you have any more scrapes and treat them if so."  Well, after all, she was really pretty and very, very persuasive.
Being sort of shaken and weak, I finally agreed, but repeated, "I'm sure my wife won't like this."
We walked to her place just a 100 yards away, and after a couple of Scotch and waters and the bandaging, I thanked her and said, "I feel a lot better now, but I know my wife is going to be really upset, so I'd better go now."
"Don't be silly!" she said with a smile, letting her robe fall even more open. "Stay for a while. She won't know anything, and by the way, where is she?"
I replied, "Still under the cart, I guess."

AmVets

The player protest thing that has been going on this year has bored me. The opinions of socially secluded, uneducated athletes, who have been coddled because of rare physical skills, do not interest me. They do interest the press which thrives on reporting conflict.
The players have the right to protest in the manner they choose.
The owners have the right to respond to the protests in the manner they choose, punishment in the form of restriction from participation is within their right.
The owners for the most part have acquiesced to the bitchy athletes, which is their right to do, a business choice.
The business choices of the players, owner and NFL collection have been detrimental to the business of professional football.
Viewership is significantly down, I have watched fewer games this season, perhaps one quarter what I usually would have watched.
The NFL as a collective business has responded curiously to this, they did call meetings with the players and while incentivized to end the protests, failed to accomplish that.
Editorials and commentary that I have encountered suggest that the NFL is unwilling to tackle the problem for fear that they will alienate the expected demographic powers of the next generation.
I see this is an acceptance of the growing victimization culture.
Claim you are a victim and the truth is secondary to the sound bite.
Anyway, turning round to the AmVets. This is an organization that I have ridden with in a number of motorcycle related charity events. The membership is intertwined with members of the Patriot Guard Riders of which I am a member. These are people that donate their time and money for causes centered on assisting the families of veterans.
AmVets created an advertisement and sought to have that played during the Super Bowl. The NFL rejected the AmVets advertisement on the grounds that it was too political. Now, I have not seen the advertisement, so it is possible that it may have been offensive, but to my experience, I seriously doubt that. The NFL has the right to do business with anybody it wishes to, or not to.
The NFL has chosen to support the political speech of players and suppress the opinions of patriots.
I have the right to to not watch the Super Bowl.
I will not.

Perhaps a better name for the game would be Super Bawl.

FOREIGN Affairs

The bride gave me a pile of books to read for Christmas. This was the first I grabbed, to replace the John Irving novel that has lost me in the Philippines.
Foreign Affairs is a novel written by Stuart Woods, a man who as a boy my mother in-law taught in a Dearing, Georgia  (silent e) elementary school back in the 1940's.
The cover describes Stuart Woods as a New York Times bestselling author. Which after reading this book diminishes my impression of the vaulted New York Times listing. Publishing in 2015, this is a short novel of 308 pages, those having 1.5 spacing and wide margins. It hardly has to be mentioned that this is a fast read.
Let me save you some trouble and tell you the story.
The hero is Stone Barrington, a former New York city policeman who through superior intellect has amassed a large fortune involving businesses around world. Stone is pulled out of a New York dinner party for an emergency board meeting in Italy to discuss a new hotel being built. Getting the first available flight he's seated next a sexy young lady who becomes the focus of the plot. In Italy things become complicated when a local mobster tries to extort the hotel company into becoming partners. Being the studly man that the name Stone infers, Barrington tells the man to pound sand. The mobster reacts by kidnapping the young lady and impose a partnership. Barrington gets the CIA, FBI, POTUS, Italian Intelligence and MI6 all involved because he knows everyone and everyone owes him a favor. Naturally the girl is saved and the guinea bastard is jailed.
There, no you do not have to read the book.
Wait for the television movie, its perfect for one of those crap portrayals.
In case you are interested there are 81 such Woods novels out there, he writes about four per year.
Back to John Irving.

Sequential Hermaphrodites the Sequel

Of all the stupid inane posts I've made over the years, Sequential Hermaphrodites??? has had the greatest number of hits.
A product of all the scumbag perverts out performing web searches based on the keyword "hermaphrodite".
Anyway, Drew sent me this picture earlier today, it is funny and it fits our pattern.

Ryan's Hope

I think there was a television show by that name.
Anyway, after sending my Speaker of the House a form letter, I received a form letter in response.
The differences between the two forms are that mine was specific and , the Speaker's form letter is both non-specific and patently dishonest.

Notice how the Speaker says "Taxpayer money should be spent with transparency and accountability or not at all" but does not say that is his objective or Congressional policy.
It is a true statement that taxpayers deserve transparency and it is also true that politicians avoid true transparency. Positive information is released to paint spending bills favorably but always withholding the ugly compromises.
They lie and have the audacity to preach at people that demand better.