The Real Seamus Story

Hi. My name is Seamus Romney, III and I have a story to tell.


I am the grandson of the late Irish setter Seamus Romney, the same Seamus Romney who famously rode in a dog carrier on top of Mitt Romney’s station wagon during a twelve-hour vacation trip to Canada back in 1983.

Gramps always spoke highly of his master Mitt and not just because that’s who fed him. Although my grandfather Seamus often said, “Don’t bite the hand that feeds you”, I don’t think that meant he was holding back in any way on his opinion of Mr. Romney.

A lot of folks have made much of the station wagon incident and my grandfather’s twelve-hour ride atop the car to Ontario. I don’t think that criticism is fair. I got to hear my grandpa’s version of that event many times and not once did he condemn his master outright. As far as Seamus was concerned, it was a privilege to ride on top of the car.

A car, by the way, that was an American-made vehicle. An American-made vehicle, Seamus would often say, that was built by a strong, vibrant American car company that didn’t need, and would never accept, a government bailout.

Legend has it that, during that vacation trip, Seamus had a fear-induced “accident” while riding atop the Romney family station wagon. While my grandfather didn’t deny that this happened, he insisted that he wasn’t afraid. The simple explanation, according to him, was that, just before the trip, he snuck into the Romney pantry and ingested half-a-dozen licorice sticks and a bagful of prunes.

Grandpa Seamus praised Mr. Romney for stopping the car at a gas station and hosing down the crate for my grandfather’s benefit. He often cited that action as an apt metaphor for what he thought his master would be able to do for the whole country if ever elected President.

To hear my grandfather tell the story, Mr. Romney wasn’t a bad man. Seamus didn’t mind riding in the roof-mounted crate. “After all”, he repeatedly said, “Massa Romney wasn’t a cruel dog owner. He always meant well.”

What was cruel, according to Seamus, was having to spend time that summer vacation in Canada. My grandfather didn’t much care for that country and, until his dying day, blamed the healthcare system there for influencing his master and beguiling him into imposing a version of it on Massachusetts.

Some have commented on the fact that Mr. Romney eventually sent Seamus to live in his sister’s home in California. They say this illustrates the cold, unfeeling nature of the man.

But my grandfather never held a grudge about the move. Throughout the years, he was loyal to a fault. But I can’t help wondering if he might have preferred the lifestyle of that pampered Portuguese Water Dog named Bo who currently resides in The White House. Sadly, he’ll never know and it’s looking more and more likely that none of his descendants will either.

Dear Diary

“Obama was sexually warm, but emotionally cool, early girlfriend says”
- headline from The Globe & Mail - May 3, 2012

Entries from the diary of Genevieve Cook  reveal the details of Barack Obama’s first serious romantic relationship back in the early 1980s.  And now we’re also learning about Mr. Obama’s latest romantic entanglement from the diary entries of someone called the American People:

August 28, 2008
Dear Diary,
I think I’m in love.  His name is Barack and he appears to be everything I want in a man.  He says all the right things and - be still my heart - he actually listens to what I have to say.  I don’t want to get my hopes up but I think he could be the one.  Today I officially made him my number one candidate.

November 4, 2008
Well, dear diary, it finally happened.  Barack and I went all the way.  He’d been suggesting that we become intimate for months and I’d been resisting.  After all, there were other suitors and I wasn’t sure if I wanted that serious a commitment.  But he finally won me over with his sweet words and bold promises.

January 20, 2009
It’s been a crazy two months and my head’s just been spinning.  First I dumped my old boyfriend George and now Barack and I have finally decided to live together.  We’ve even made a four-year commitment.  No need to rush into things but if Barack is as great a guy as I think he is, then there could be wedding bells in the future.  How does eight years in a big white house sound, dear diary?

February 14, 2009
It was awfully sweet of Barack to get me a big present for our first Valentine’s Day but, dear diary, I’m a bit concerned.  All through our first months, he kept telling me that he was financially responsible but now it turns out he’s a bit of a spendthrift.  To the tune of one trillion dollars.  When I confronted him, he just said you have to spend money to make money and not to worry my pretty little head about it.

March 23, 2010
Dear Diary,
When we first started dating, Barack and I talked about having a family.  I expressed my concerns about hospital costs and he said not to worry, that he would make sure that we were secure and had full medical coverage.  Well, it turns out he wasn’t being completely honest with me.  That free healthcare we were going to get now seems to have a hefty price tag and he may not even provide it; we may have to buy it from some insurance company.

November 2, 2010
Dear Diary,
I guess the bloom is off the rose.  Maybe in that first blush of romantic love I expected too much.  Today I expressed my feelings in no uncertain terms.  I told him I was disappointed and decided to take control of the house.  I told him I wasn’t necessarily thinking of a divorce, that this was more like a trial separation and that we’d re-visit the situation in a couple of years.

May 3, 2011
Dear Diary,
It’s been a rough few months and I was continuing to have my doubts about us as a couple.  For months Barack has seemed distant and withdrawn.  He was letting people like John Boehner and Mitch McConnell push him around.  He no longer seemed to be that strong man I fell in love with.  But yesterday all that changed when I found out that he had given the orders to eliminate Osama bin Laden.  I have to admit that my heart skipped a beat and I actually swooned.

May 5, 2012
Dear Diary,
OK, so maybe every romance is like this.  After all, you can’t maintain that initial excitement forever.  Sure, Barack has his faults and maybe he doesn’t follow through on all his promises.  He said he’d get my family jobs and he hasn’t.  But he’s really not that bad and can I really do better?  There’s that rich, good looking guy Mitt who keeps calling but I don’t feel any magic between us.  I think I’ll just wait until November and decide then.

The Flight of the F-35

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard Tory Airlines flight F-35. We’d like to thank you for choosing Tory Airlines. Although we know that most of you are having second thoughts about flying with us, we nevertheless appreciate that you have entrusted us with a majority position.

Today’s destination is as yet undetermined although we originally planned to land on time and under budget. Some of you may have heard that we’re heading for the point of no return. Others may have assumed that we’re on a path to financial oblivion. However, we’d like to assure you that we have no intention of veering off course again and we will no longer be flying by the seat of our pants.

Your aircraft has the latest in aviation technology thanks to the generous donations of you, the Canadian taxpayer. For the token sum of $2,000 each, you have helped build one of the fastest, most efficient fleets in the world. Despite the aircraft’s limited seating capacity, it will reach its destination in less time than you can say “what happened to our majority?”

Because of aisle restrictions, there will only be limited food and beverage service on this flight. Today’s menu consists of sour grapes, humble pie and roast crow.

For security reasons, on-board entertainment is restricted to a single movie: “The Hangover.” Furthermore, due to recent budget cuts, no CBC TV or radio broadcasts are available.

Your flight crew today is headed up by Captain Stephen Harper, a pilot with a wealth of flying experience although perhaps a bit shy in the oversight department. At last word, your co-pilot will be Peter MacKay although his assignment may be subject to last minute changes.

We would ask that you direct your attention to the front of the plane for a brief safety demonstration. This plane has no emergency exits although in the event of a mishap, the pilot will be able to eject safely and, in all likelihood, fall clear of any possible fallout and debris.

As for the remaining crew members, unfortunately there is no easy way out and they should resign themselves to their fate. Passengers, as always, will be responsible for any cost overruns and are basically on their own.

Prior to takeoff, rather than placing your seat in an upright position, we ask you instead to bend over. We would likewise ask you to have your credit card ready when exiting the plane as your ticket price may have increased significantly during the flight.

Once again, on behalf of the captain and the crew, we hope you have a pleasant flight wherever it might take you. As you may now have guessed, we really have no idea where we’re going. However, you can be assured that, as always, you’ll take it in the end.

Justifiable Laptopicide

“A video of an angry American father pumping nine slugs from a handgun into his daughter's laptop has gone viral on YouTube and sparked an impassioned online debate over his parenting skills.

- The Ottawa Citizen - February 11, 2012

Tommy Jordan, of North Carolina, fired a round of bullets from his .45 handgun into his daughter Hannah’s laptop after she posted a complaint on Facebook about having to do chores around the house. Viewers from coast to coast have weighed in on the debate as to whether this constituted good parenting.

While the question of whether or not it is appropriate to shoot your child’s laptop is no doubt an important one, there are other more important issues that seem to have been lost in this debate. First, of course, is the fact that Mr. Jordan’s short shoot-em-up video shows him smoking a cigarette while dispatching his daughter’s computer.

I think we can all agree that, by smoking on camera, Mr. Jordan has not presented a desirable role model to either his daughter or the approximately two million YouTube viewers who watched his video. At the very least, he should have included a verbal aside or a video pop-up advising kids that smoking is bad for them.

A more important issue is the type of ammunition used in the laptop shooting. Mr. Jordan states that he used exploding hollow-point rounds which apparently cost him a dollar apiece. Was this the most effective and economical way to carry out the task at hand?

Clearly it would have been cheaper to have used lead round-nosed bullets and fully-jacketed bullets would have caused the smallest cavities. But to ensure maximum wounding effect, albeit at a greater cost, exploding hollow-point rounds were definitely a good choice. For future computer shootings, Mr. Jordan might want to compromise between cost and effectiveness and go with semi-wadcutter bullets.

A subsidiary issue worthy of debate is why Mr. Jordan chose to use nine bullets. From the video, it appears that four or five slugs judiciously placed would have achieved the desired result. On the other hand, he was not simply trying to disable the computer; he was also trying to make a point about his daughter’s bad behavior. Thus, a few extra shots were probably called for with an absolute upper limit, say, of twelve to avoid any possibility of message overkill.

What is particularly surprising to me is that few, if any, YouTube viewers raised the important question of what brand of laptop this was and how did it perform after the shooting? A related question is whether Mr. Jordan had purchased any extended warranty coverage and, if so, did he opt for firearm damage protection?

There remains, of course, one far more important question to discuss: Was Mr. Jordan restricted by the handgun laws in his home state of North Carolina? Did he have no choice but to use a .45 handgun? Was the option of a semi-automatic Glock not available to him? If not, why not? After all, this is America and the right to bear arms should be as little restricted as possible, particularly when it comes to computer killings.

Whether you’re a responsible parent trying to make a point to your rebellious teenage daughter or you’re a frustrated porn viewer whose desktop has frozen for the hundredth time, you should be guaranteed as wide an array of firearm options to dispatch the offending piece of computer hardware. After all, in America, when your computer screws up or dies, you have every right to finish it off in any manner you choose.

Toryleaks

In light of the continuing controversy over Bill C-30, the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act, Canada’s Conservative Government® has decided to introduce the following additional pieces of legislation:

The Protecting Members of Parliament from Twitter Fanatics Act

Prime Minister Harper has taken personal ownership of this new bill and hopes to see early passage. The primary purpose is to exempt Canadian parliamentarians from any mention on Twitter posts anywhere in the world.

“It’s just common sense,” said the Prime Minister. “MPs cannot carry out their very important functions if every aspect of their lives is broadcast through such frivolous media. How can they be expected to concentrate on the tasks of running the country if they have to answer to all manner of public documents and factual statements?”

The Protection of the Sanctity of Marriage Act

In keeping with their pro-family agenda, Canada’s Conservative Government® has deemed it necessary to take measures to protect the institution of marriage. Justice Minister Rob Nicholson states that this bill is a necessary follow-up to the legalization of same-sex marriage.

“While we may not have supported same-sex marriage initially,” says Minister Nicholson. “Now that it is a reality, we consider it important to provide certain protections to all marriages, be they heterosexual, homosexual or asexual.”

Those protections include a ban on the publication of any particulars of divorce proceedings. “To ensure that the institution of marriage continues to be held in high regard,” said Nicholson. “It only makes sense to restrict reference to anything that might have to do with marriage breakdown.”

Apparently Mr. Nicholson was heard to say that if you’re not for this bill then you’re against all forms of marriage including gay marriage.

The Announcement of New Legislation When the Prime Minister is in Canada Act

The aim of this bill appears to be twofold. First, the government wants to ensure that the Prime Minister no longer announces his government’s legislative intent while overseas in such places as Switzerland and China. As noted by Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird: “The Prime Minister should leave it to me to make dumb statements or hug cute panda bears while out of the country.”

Second, the government wants to ensure that any ministers of the Crown hold off on public comment on proposed legislation under their purview until the Prime Minister is back from any foreign trips. This latter provision, known as the Toews Amendment, will ensure that a minister cannot unilaterally take any action or make any incendiary statement without first clearing it with the Prime Minister.

The Avoid Helicopters At All Costs Act

This bill is specifically directed at the Minister of National Defence and spells out unequivocally the minister’s obligation to avoid anything to do with unwinged motorized aviation devices. That means avoiding any purchases of helicopters, any rides in helicopters and even any mention of helicopters, choppers, eggbeaters or whirlybirds.

When asked to comment on the proposed legislation, current National Defense Minster Peter MacKay demurred stating off the record that he was afraid that even referencing the bill might get him into more hot water.

The I’m the Boss and Do As I Say Act

The Prime Minister has decided to also champion this new bill. “I think some of my ministers still aren’t clear on the nature of their portfolios and the extent of their ministerial power,” said Mr. Harper. “If they had any doubts before, this bill will make it abundantly clear who’s in charge.”

Some observers have questioned the need for this particular piece of legislation given the Prime Minister’s current iron grip on all aspects of the governing process. “I suppose it wouldn’t hurt to formalize the status quo,” Treasury Board President Stockwell Day was heard to say. “But I won’t get in trouble for saying that, will I?”

The Liberals and NDP are Big Crybabies Act

This bill has no actual monetary or punitive provisions. Much like the Multiculturalism Act, the Liberals and NDP are Big Crybabies Act is simply a recitation of principles dear to the hearts of some Canadians and all Conservatives.

The short form title of the bill is the Opposition Sucks Act and it contains ten sections comprising a litany of right-wing complaints against the Tories’ opponents. Informally referred to as the Ten Commandments, they include such articles of faith as “They’re all socialists”, “All they do is tax and spend”, “They’re all bleeding hearts” and, of course, “Trudeau sucks.”

Dear Primary Care Provider

A medical advice column for those suffering on the presidential primary campaign trail:

Dear Primary Care Provider:

I am clearly the best qualified candidate but I’m having trouble getting people to vote for me. I’m a bit overweight and some say I have excess baggage. But there’s nothing wrong with my ego and my presidential ambitions are as healthy as ever. What can I do to improve my political health?

Speaker Newt

Dear Speaker Newt:

Sometimes even a healthy ego can be overinflated which can be damaging to one’s political constitution. It wouldn’t hurt to scale back on your self-regard a touch and take a daily dose or two of humility.

As for your weight problem and excess baggage, if you can’t drop a few pounds, at least cover up any unseemly bulges. Try turning past liabilities into assets by dressing them up. For example, three marriages can be positively characterized as a lifelong commitment to serial monogamy.

If you still want to be around in November, don’t make promises you can’t keep. It’s one thing to promise the moon in Florida but it may not fly in Maine or Nevada.

Primary Care Provider

Dear Primary Care Provider:

I’ve been running for almost five years now and I still seem to have problems finishing. Everyone says I look great and my fiscal health has never been better. But when it comes to my electability, there seems to be something missing. What more can I do?

Governor Mitt

Dear Governor Mitt:

First, I want to commend you for having the courage to talk about electoral dysfunction. Not all men are comfortable with this topic.

Oftentimes, electability issues are evident when we examine a patient’s family history. For example, maybe you have inherited your father’s political problems. Was he a governor like you? Did he belong to a quirky, non-traditional religion? Was he a failed presidential candidate?

If you feel you’re stuck, it may be a good idea to change your political positions. It has often been said that moderation is the key to good health but that doesn’t always apply to one’s political well-being. Have you tried switching to a more conservative approach? Just be careful not to change positions too quickly or too often or you may end up suffering a severe case of the flip-flops.

Primary Care Provider

Dear Primary Care Provider:

I’m 76 years old and some say I have the constitution of the Energizer bunny. I keep running and running and I can run forever.

Unfortunately, all that running hasn’t translated into good test results. My numbers always seem to be in the low teens and I can’t make that primary breakthrough I so desperately need. Is there some new approach you can recommend to boost my flagging polling numbers?

Congressman Ron

Dear Congressman Ron:

I understand that you, too, are a doctor so I’m going to give you some straight medical advice. In most endeavors, consistency and dedication are desirable qualities. But politics is different.

You are to be commended for sticking to your principles and philosophy no matter what crazy positions they force you to adopt. But to achieve political health, you not only have to appeal to yourself; you also have to appeal to others.

Thus you may want to soften your stance on certain issues. Have you considered adopting a program of Libertarian Lite? If that’s not for you, I strongly suggest forming a third party. You may not achieve your desired result but you’ll almost certainly stop your opponents from doing so.

Primary Care Provider

Dear Primary Care Provider:

I’ve been suffering from a variety of political ailments for several years now. No matter how hard I try, my test numbers just won’t improve.

My unemployment numbers are way up, my GDP is down and my accumulated debt is off the charts. How can I get back in the pink?

President Barack

Dear President Barack:

First of all, when it comes to your political health, don’t say pink or red or anything even remotely socialistic.

Given your horrible numbers, usually I would recommend drastic action like taking the next four years off. But as bad as your results are, sometimes it’s good to remember that others are in worse shape than you.

I can’t say for sure but I suspect that if my other patients keep beating one another up for the next five or six months, you’ll do just fine in the only test that really matters: the one on November 6th.

Primary Care Provider

Stephen's Id Versus His Super-ego

Stephen Harper’s recent address to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland made headlines for the prime minister’s suggestion that Canada’s Old Age Security plan needs to be overhauled. What didn’t make headlines, however, was the internal dialogue Mr. Harper’s mind was obviously having. The italicized portions represent his moralizing super-ego in the form of the actual words spoken by him at Davos. The parenthetical portions are the more instinctual responses by his id.

On what we must do now: First, we will, of course, continue to keep tax rates down. (I’m an economist by training so I know this won’t work for the economy. But my right-wing constituency demands it and I do know what works politically.)

We will be taking measures in the coming months....Not just to return to a balanced budget in the medium term, but also to ensure the sustainability of our social programs and fiscal position over the next generation. (Boy, am I having regrets about pissing away that huge surplus the Liberals left me. Oh, well, it looks like no one’s really noticing that screw-up anymore. Chances are they still won’t remember come next election time.)

The problems afflicting Europe — and for that matter the United States — are not only challenging today but, in my judgment, threaten to be even greater problems in the future. (It’s fun to take potshots at the big boys but I sure hope to hell they figure this mess out. Otherwise we’re screwed, too.)

We have already taken steps to limit the growth of our health care spending over that period. (Luckily, for me, I’m part of federal employee plans which compensate me 80% for drugs and additional medical procedures and 90% for most dental work.)

We must do the same for our retirement income system....For those elements of the system that are not funded, we will make the changes necessary to ensure sustainability. (After all, someone has to bear the brunt of this coming crisis. Just so long as it’s not me and I get to keep my MP’s pension of $18,626 a month if I stick it out to 2015. In my position, $223,517 a year may not be enough but at least it’s a start and it is indexed.)

We will also continue working with the Obama administration to implement our joint "Beyond the Border" initiative, our plan to strengthen and deepen our economic and security links to our most important partner. (I wouldn’t mind joining the United States. Hey, who wouldn’t? So long as I’m part of the one per cent and with my generous pension and potential revenue from speaker’s fees, I should have no problem qualifying.)

However, at the same time, we will make it a national priority to ensure we have the capacity to export our energy products beyond the United States, and specifically to Asia. (Screw those environmental terrorists and their political buddies in The White House. Once we get one of our Republican pals reelected, we can get that Keystone pipeline project back on track.)

In this regard, we will soon take action to ensure that major energy and mining projects are not subject to unnecessary regulatory delays - that is, delay merely for the sake of delay. (How do those bleeding hearts figure we can grow the country if we have to check for problems all the time? Once the economy is booming again, no one’s going to cry over a little spilt milk, oil or uranium.)

We will ensure that, while we respect our humanitarian obligations and family reunification objectives, we make our economic and labour force needs the central goal of our immigration efforts in the future. (Except, of course, for our investor immigrant program. If you can afford to buy your way in, why not? After all, isn’t that the American - I mean Canadian - way?)

Monsieur Romney

After attacking the former governor of Massachusetts for being a “moderate” – a bad word in Republican circles – the ad’s narrator says: “And just like John Kerry, he speaks French too.”

- The Globe & Mail - January 13, 2012

Politics can be a nasty business what with candidates attacking not only one another’s positions but also their traits and personalities. But it looks like the current campaign for this year’s Republican presidential nomination has sunk to a new low.

Newt Gingrich has taken off both gloves and come out swinging against Mitt Romney by portraying him as that most hated of people - a francophone. What can the former governor do now? It’s impossible to prove a negative - i.e. - that he can’t speak French. And any use of the French language would just make matters worse. Or would it?

Perhaps Romney’s best defense is a good offense. It’s time for the Mittster to go on the attack and celebrate his Frenchiness, perhaps with an attack ad of his own like this one:

Camera pans across a private library filled with leather-bound books and lights on a distinguished-looking Mitt Romney seated at an impressive oak desk.

“My fellow Americans. As I seek to become your next president, it saddens me to see my opponents stooping to nastier and nastier tactics. Rather than debate me on the issues, they are now engaging in ad hominen attacks. Ad hominen, of course, being Latin meaning attacks against me personally.

“Yes, I understand Latin; I even speak a bit of it. And there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s a dead language, you see. Contrary to the view of Rick Perry, it is not the lingua franca (there’s that Latin again) of Latin America. As far as I know, they still speak mostly Spanish and Portuguese down there.

“I have to admit that I also speak a little Spanish. Un poco, as they say, and I’m proud to own up to that. After all, our Hispanic brothers and sisters in this great land of ours make up a sizable percentage of the electorate and I’d like to think that we are sympatico.

“Which brings me to the subject of French. Yes, I do know some French. There I’ve said it. And, quite frankly, there’s nothing wrong with that.

“Much of our own American language is based on French. Take coup de grâce, for example, which is something I’d like to deliver to my bête noire Newt Gingrich this Saturday in South Carolina.

“So if one of us happens to know quelques mots en français, what’s the big deal? It’s not like that makes me an adulterer or a surrender monkey.

“I think it’s about time we celebrated a candidate’s linguistic abilities in this country. It’s time we stopped insisting that you have to be unilingual, or in the case of George W. Bush non-lingual, to serve in The White House.

“I understand some French. I can write some French. And I can even speak a bit of the language. Just enough, in fact, to tell those wine-guzzling, cheese-loving, shower-avoiding snobs to laissez-nous tranquilles.

“Knowing French is not a weakness. Being French, on the other hand, is. And when it comes time to keep those Frenchies in their place, I’ll be le president who can do it in both languages.”

The Secret Handbook

If you’ve been following the Republican leadership race (and who hasn’t?), you’re probably wondering how the various candidates are able to consistently stay on message. You’re probably also wondering why there is so little difference between their positions. The answer lies in an unknown, recently-leaked manual called "The Secret Handbook for Republican Presidential Candidates." Here are some of its entries:
Age, Sex and Race
The Republican Party prides itself on being an equal opportunity elector. We don’t care whether you’re young or old, male or female or black or white. Heck, we don’t even care if you’re Hispanic. But the one thing we do ask is that you be rich....really, really rich. Electoral politics is not for the faint of heart and definitely not for those light in the wallet.
Religion
It’s really pretty simple; Christ must be your personal savior, preferably in the context of a fundamentalist strain of Christianity. No exceptions. Sorry Joe Lieberman. We try to be as flexible as possible on this matter which is why we’ve kind of looked the other way for that Mitt Romney fellow. But, truth be told, we’d be more comfortable with an out-and-out born-again Baptist.
Affairs (the Newt Gingrich Rule)
It’s OK to have an affair so long as it was in the last century and you’ve shown at least some remorse. Recent affairs, however, or ones lasting longer than twelve years will be fatal to any candidate unless she’s a woman. After all, we’re not Democrats.
Brain Freezes (the George W. Bush Rule)
Good ole boy impressions are perfectly acceptable. So, too, are the occasional malapropism and slip-up. But beware of lowering your perceived IQ under the political Mendoza line (as of today, about 90). One or two brain freezes won’t necessarily be fatal unless followed by a double mistake on who can vote and when. We’ve added a Rick Perry Corollary this year, also known as the Two-drink Maximum Rule.
Taxes (the Grover Norquist Rule)
This one’s pretty simple. No new taxes. Period. Fullstop. Exclamation point. Don’t even waffle on this one (are you listening Jon Huntsman?) or say "Read my lips." And don’t forget; ‘no new taxes’ is just the minimum position. If you actually want to win the nomination, you have to propose lowering taxes, especially for the wealthy. Acceptable positions include "a flat tax", "no tax" or even "9-9-9," whatever the heck that means.
Gun Control (the Charlton Heston Rule)
Republicans like guns. And we like others to like guns, too. That’s why we support the right to bear arms and, if necessary, arm bears. Whatever it takes to keep freedom ringing loud and clear in our streets in the middle of the night is fine by us. If you absolutely, positively have to waffle on this issue, you can always claim to be a bit of a moderate and propose personal limitations on small, handheld nuclear weapons.
A Mexican Fence
When it comes to immigration, the minimum acceptable position is a fence along the Mexican border. What kind of fence or how tall is entirely up to you. Ten feet, twenty feet, wire mesh, concrete, electrified. Be creative. How about an alligator-filled moat or a tourist-themed Great Wall of Texas?
A Female Candidate (the Sarah Palin Rule)
If you wish to be the first female Republican presidential candidate, stay out of the race. That way you can’t screw up and, with any luck, by the time the convention rolls around, there’ll be no one left to run except for you. This is also known as the anti-Michele Bachman Rule.
Libertarians (the Ron Paul Rule)
We welcome libertarians into the Republican Party. We’re just not that keen on having them run as president. Let’s face it; every party needs a little comic relief and Ron Paul is both little and comic, kind of our version of Dennis Kucinich. But there’s no point in making the next election any easier for Obama than it has to be.

Who's Naughty or Nice

Ho! Ho! Ho! Santa Claus here and I want to answer some special letters I received this Christmas season. It’s not just kids who write me looking for presents, you know. This year I got some written requests from a few grownups, too.
Although Santa tries to get every kid who writes to him a present that he or she really wants, that same rule doesn’t always apply to these older correspondents. More often than not, I find it’s better to give them something they actually need.

Barack Obama
Ever since he was a little boy in Indonesia, Barack has been asking to live in a big white house. I finally managed to make that one happen for him but now he’s asking for everything under the sun like a Democratic-controlled Congress and a five percent unemployment rate. Hey, I’m Santa, not a miracle worker. There’s only so much I can do. But I do know what Barack needs and that’s why this Christmas I’m going to bring him a kick in the pants, a stiffer spine and a crazy Republican presidential nominee.

Hillary Clinton
I remember Hillary when she went by the name of Rodham which was right up to 1992, as I recall. Anyway, poor Hillary has not always gotten what she wanted for Christmas including the Democratic nomination in 2008 and a faithful husband. But that doesn’t mean that this is her year. I know she’d like to see her boss trip up and take a political face-plant but I’m going to save her best present for 2016.

Mitt Romney
Little Mitt has had it pretty easy all these years. His dad was the head of American Motors and the governor of Michigan so he got just about everything he wanted. That included the governorship of Massachusetts and a cushy corporate gig. Now he says he wants the Republican nomination. Before he gets that gift, however, I think he needs a few other things like a personality de-stiffener, a consistent platform and maybe a new style of underwear.

Newt Gingrich
I’ve known Newt since he was knee-high to a grasshopper which, ironically, makes a great meal for a newt. It’s been hard trying to keep up with his Christmas wishes over the years since he keeps changing his mind on such things as ethical standards, consulting contracts and wives. Now he says he wants to run the whole dang country. This year, however, I think I’m just going to give him what he really needs: a daily dose of humility and a five-second delay when speaking.

Ron Paul
From the moment he could talk, little Ronnie was the odd child. He never wanted more; he always wanted less. As in less government, less spending, less foreign involvement. Now he’s actually asking me for something more, namely the Republican presidential nomination. Before I can do that, however, I’m going to have to get him a moderate platform and a whole new personality. Until then, he’ll have to make do this year with a leather-bound collection of the works of Ayn Rand.

Rick Perry
At least there’s one guy whose wants are the same as his needs. That’s why I’ll be putting a one-way ticket back to Austin in Rick Perry’s stocking this Christmas.

The Last Liberal Republican

The last living liberal Republican has decided to disown that label. Tired of being called a "liberal" or even a "socialist", Dirk Delaney, 76, of Providence, Rhode Island could no longer take the incessant ridicule and finally gave up.
In the last century, liberal Republicans once roamed the American political landscape in huge numbers. They were heard to regularly proclaim their liberal social views on op-ed pages, at national conventions and even during presidential elections.
"I remember when we had a real say in the Republican Party," said Delaney. "Why we once even had one of our own as Vice President."
"You remember Nelson Rockefeller, don’t you?" questioned Mr. Delaney plaintively. "He was a liberal Republican, you know."
But those days of left-leaning Republicans thriving in large numbers in every state of the union (except possibly Idaho) are long over. The socially progressive member of the G.O.P. seems to have gone the way of the dodo bird.
In recent years, sightings of liberal Republicans had become rarer and rarer. It was thought that there might still be some small groups of these exotic creatures in sanctuaries in the northeast but they were seldom spotted in public or in print.
"I know there were a few left," said Delaney. "But they would only reveal themselves to me in private. They were afraid to go public for fear of being labelled ‘pinkos’, ‘commies’ or, even worse, ‘Democrats.’ It got so bad that even the moderate ones were loath to admit that they had once voted for Richard Nixon or Gerald Ford."
Now that Mr. Delaney has foresworn the hated label, there may be no one left to carry on the once-proud tradition of liberal Republicanism. In fact, rumor has it that an application has been made to formally induct that phrase into the Oxymoron Hall of Shame.
"I had great hopes for that Mitt Romney fellow," said Delaney. "His father George was a liberal Republican, you know. But you’d never know it to listen to his son. I don’t think he even acknowledges his real father anymore. The last I heard, he said his dad was a poor, hardworking dirt farmer who died when Mitt was just an infant."
With the disappearance of the last liberal Republican, the G.O.P. is reportedly marking the transition by changing its informal description as "the party of Lincoln" to "the party of Reagan" or possibly even the "G.O.T.P.", as in the Grand Old Tea Party.

Republican Idol

The next presidential election is almost a year away and already there have been a dozen Republican presidential debates with plenty more to come. Apart from their sheer number, perhaps the most surprising fact about these encounters is their high TV ratings.

In view of those ratings, rumor has it that at least three major TV networks are in a bidding war to make the debates an ongoing weekly series. Recently leaked draft scripts hint at what we can expect from future episodes:

Thursday, November 17th

Mitt Romney tires of endlessly debating and getting no bump in the polls. The former Massachusetts governor decides to take a pass on the next debate but doesn’t know how to do it without causing a big ruckus. Romney finally decides to announce a fake religious holiday on November 17th called the Mormon Day of Silence when the faithful must not speak for 24 hours. The candidate shows up anyway, keeps his vow of silence and sees his polling numbers double overnight.

Thursday, November 24th

All but counted out of the race, Rick Perry chooses to play to his strength: hilarious miscues. The Texas governor decides to become the leading Republican joker and walks onto the debate stage dressed as a Thanksgiving turkey. Perry stumbles, stutters and, when asked, is unable to come up with even one policy position. Leaving the audience in stitches, he declares himself America’s comedian-in-chief. Sadly, his presidential polling numbers keep falling although, on the plus side, his vice presidential numbers soar.

Thursday, December 1st

Herman Cain continues to battle allegations of sexual harassment and yet still retains high polling numbers. Figuring that denial equals success, the former pizza chain exec decides to deny unreported incidents of sexual misconduct, drugs and even money laundering. The other candidates are mystified as Cain’s numbers rise faster than warm pizza dough.

Thursday, December 8th

Ron Paul’s frustration at being a perennial also-ran finally shows through. The charisma-challenged candidate figures that if sex scandals helped Herman Cain’s standing, they can do the same for him. During the debate, Paul claims that he slept with seven women, two men and a goat ---- all at the same time. However, no one believes him and his numbers drop like Ayn Rand’s popularity at a socialists’ convention.

Thursday, December 15th

Seeing no movement in her campaign, Michele Bachmann takes a giant risk and dresses up as Sarah Palin for the latest debate. Neither her husband Marcus nor Newt Gingrich notices Bachmann’s transformation although Gingrich does become strangely aroused. At first, the crowd responds positively but when the disguised Bachmann continues to speak in mostly complete sentences, the ruse is revealed and the audience turns on her.

Thursday, December 22nd

In this Christmas episode, the debate regulars get a surprise visit from President Obama who joins the Republican presidential hopefuls on stage. When asked what he’d most like from Santa for Christmas this year, Obama replies: “World peace and ABM - anyone but Mitt.”

More Cherry Apologies

In an event rarer than a solar eclipse, Don Cherry has apologized. After tearing a strip off former tough guys Stu Grissom, Chris Nilan and Jim Thomson, calling them “hypocrites”, “pukes” and “turncoats”, the “Hockey Night in Canada” blowhard took it all back.

At first it was assumed that the apology was sincere and heartfelt. But given the threatened legal action by Messrs. Grissom, Nilan and Thomson, it appears that Mr. Cherry’s ‘mea culpa’ was more motivated by fear of financial loss than sincere regret. In fact, some other threatened lawsuits may explain these additional unexpected apologies from hockey’s most colorful commentator:

Swedes

“I truly regret calling various Nordic hockey players ‘chicken Swedes’,” said Mr. Cherry. “I don’t know what I was thinking. Those guys are tough and can really play hard.” Cherry denies that his about face had anything to do with a cease-and-desist letter he received from the Stockholm law firm of Peterssen, Petersson & Pedersson. “I was wrong,” said Cherry. “Any of those guys can go into a corner with a dozen eggs in their pocket and some of them would definitely break.”

Ron MacLean

"Cripes, did he really think I was serious with all my comments about him?”, said Cherry. “I was just kidding around, that’s all.” Apparently MacLean could take no more and engaged the services of the Toronto law firm Bleedum Drye to make his case. “OK, so he’s not a sniveling little butt kisser,” said Cherry. “If that’s what he needs to hear to make this lawsuit go away, then so be it.”

Bobby Orr

“This one breaks my heart,” said Cherry. “I love the guy; I really do and now I’ve gotta deny my love.” Apparently the greatest defenseman to ever play the game had reached his limit with expressions of love from his former pal Grapes. “It hurts to say it,” said a tearful Cherry. “But I apologize for any hugs, kisses or other expressions of affection directed towards Mr. Orr and I will never embrace or embarrass him again.”

The NDP

“I didn’t know that ‘pinko’ was a bad word,” said Cherry. “I just figured those bicycle riders like the color pink and that’s why you call them pinkos. I’m truly sorry for any offense I may have caused and I will never use that word again.” Asked to comment on the NDP’s platform and recent electoral success at the federal level, Don Cherry declined. “I’m staying mum when it comes to those guys although I think all you kids at home can guess what my real opinion might be.”

The Canadian Apparel Federation

“I can’t lie,” said Cherry. “This one really hurts.” The former Boston coach was talking about his apology to the entire Canadian menswear and fashion industry wherein he undertook to stop wearing any more outrageous suits and shirts. “I’m sorry if my clothing choices caused any damage to the haberdashery sector of this great country of ours,” said the style-challenged former coach. “I honestly thought I looked great in those outfits. Now I know better.”

Diefenbastard

“A museum dedicated to John Diefenbaker has decided to give a man who suspects he's the former prime minister's only child access to its artifacts for DNA testing.”

- The Canadian Press - 16/9/2011

Toronto native George Dryden is on a mission to prove that he is, in fact, the illegitimate son of Canada’s 13th prime minister. If nothing else, Mr. Dryden’s feistiness and dogged determination suggest that he may well be John Diefenbaker’s son.

But it turns out that Mr. Dryden is not the only potential illegitimate child of a recent Canadian leader. Rumor has it that the following people may also have illegitimate links to 24 Sussex:

Fred Wilson

This Ottawa native may be the love child of former prime minister Joe Clark. One anonymous source suggests that the polite, soft-spoken thirty-one-year-old was conceived on December 13, 1979, the very day that Mr. Clark’s minority government was defeated, nine months less a day since he took power. At the time, Mr. Clark’s defeat was blamed on his inability to do math but instead it may have occurred because of a secret assignation with one Enid Wilson in the Parliamentary cloak room. Nine months less a day later, Ms. Wilson gave birth to a baby boy with a distinctive receding chin.

Unlike George Dryden, Fred Wilson has not made any attempts to establish his true parentage. “Mr. Clark seems like a very nice man,” said Mr. Wilson. “And I assume he’s very busy. It wouldn’t really be right to bother him about such a minor matter, would it now?”

Gilles Lalonde

The 26-year-old from Montreal apparently has a strong case for claiming Brian Mulroney as his father. Not only is Mr. Lalonde the spitting image of Canada’s 18th prime minister, his mother, former Mulroney housekeeper Giselle Lalonde, has confirmed a brief relationship with her former boss.

Yet Mr. Lalonde has not pursued the matter further. In fact, the smooth-talking, lantern-jawed Montrealer has adamantly denied that Mr. Mulroney is his biological father. “I’ve got a nice little restaurant business here in Montreal,” said Mr. Lalonde. “If it was ever established that I’m a Mulroney, I could lose half my customers overnight. I’ve got nothing against the guy but, heck, I’ve gotta make a living.”

Phyllis Smith

Calgary is home to this 21-year-old aspiring accountant who, with her ski-slope nose and slight midriff bulge, bears an uncanny likeness to our current prime minister. DNA testing has, in fact, established that Ms. Smith is Stephen Harper’s daughter. However, since Phyllis Smith’s mother Brenda has adamantly denied being even a ten-foot pole length away from Mr. Harper, the biological connection was, until recently, a mystery.

“My mom says she’d rather sleep with a rattlesnake than Stephen Harper,” said Phyllis Smith. “And I believe her.” But there is a simple explanation. It turns out that there was a slight mixup with donor samples at a Calgary fertility clinic 22 years ago and the rest is history.

Jacques Strappe

Shawinigan native Jacques Strappe has long believed that he might be distantly related to Canada’s 20th prime minister Jean Chretien. After all, Mr. Strappe bears a definite resemblance to Mr. Chretien and has the same inability to speak either of Canada’s official languages. But he never guessed that he might actually be a son of the former prime minister.

“For me, pepper, I put it on my plate and I don’t mind if it’s proved that I’m Mr. Chretien’s son,” said Mr. Strappe. “A proof is a proof. What kind of proof? It’s a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it’s because it’s proven.”

Kim Turner

Perhaps the strangest possible prime ministerial love child is Kim Turner of Vancouver, B.C. Rumor has it that Ms. Turner is not just the child of one prime minister but is, in fact, the spawn of two prime ministers.

Historians have often wondered how Kim Campbell managed to decimate a majority Tory government and reduce it to two members in the House of Commons back in 1993. Apparently her illicit affair with former prime minister John Turner and subsequent unreported pregnancy was the distraction that cost her and her party the election.

While the evidence of her twin prime ministerial parents is overwhelming, Kim Turner strongly denies any connection. “Hey,” said Ms. Turner. “Would you admit that you were related to those two losers? Let’s face it, I was in the womb longer than the two of them combined were prime minister.”

Selling the Sizzle

MEMO

TO: Earl Stuckley, CEO, U. S. Motors

FROM: Charles Miller, VP Marketing

I regret that it’s come to this. I had hoped that our ongoing disagreements with the production and engineering departments could be resolved through normal channels. But now it is clear that the impasse is so intractable that it requires your involvement.

For years now, our employees in the marketing branch have gone above and beyond the call of duty to bring our company into the 21st century. We have spent countless hours creating and designing marketing plans that will ensure our continuing profitability and long-term success.

Unfortunately, the engineering and production folks refuse to cooperate in the implementation of even our simplest idea. And, as you know, if we don’t have a product to match our advertising campaign, we don’t have a hope of increasing sales.

The various divisions of a company are not competitors. Rather, we are all members of one team — a team whose singular goal should be corporate success.

We have done our part; now we urge you to get the other departments onside as well. All that means is to design and produce a car to match our sterling marketing campaign.

They say it can’t be done but if we can dream it, whey can’t they produce it? Our TV ads touting our new H2O-powered SUVs have tested off the charts with consumer focus groups. Is it too much to ask the geniuses over in engineering to come up with just one vehicle that runs on water?

As for price points, if we expect to stay competitive with the Japanese, we need a family van that comes in under $10,000. And that means one with all the bells and whistles, too, including cup holders and a DVD player. Our print ads are ready to go with an MSRP of $9,999. Anything higher and we’re destined for failure. Just because those wacky number-crunching pencil pushers over in accounting say it can’t be done is no reason to pull the plug on this project now.

We’re no less adamant about our proposed multi-media campaign for the Pegasus — the world’s first affordable flying family sedan. We appreciate that cutting edge technology like this can’t be produced overnight. But if the production guys can’t even commit to a 2014 model, all our work on a combined Facebook-Twitter-YouTube rollout will be for naught.

Frankly, we here in marketing are tired of carrying the load for U. S. Motors. Great ideas don’t come cheaply and they don’t come along every day either. If the bright, creative minds in our shop don’t at least occasionally see a practical realization of one of their brilliant outside-the-box concepts, we’re going to lose some of our top marketing people to the competition.

We don’t want to be unreasonable. We recognize that marketing may have a monopoly on the best and the brightest. So we accept that the water-fuelled SUV and the flying sedan may have to be delayed a bit.

But in the meantime, we feel the least we can expect from our coworkers is a piddling 75 miles-per-gallon, $12,000 subcompact with automatic driver-less operation and self-cleaning option. We can roll out an ad campaign for this in three to four months. Can production at least match us on that?

I hope we can count on your support as I know you are a can-do kind of guy who is not going to take “It’s physically impossible to build a 75 m.p.g. car for $12,000" as a legitimate excuse for more heel dragging. If you can light a fire under the other departments, we’re ready to fan those flames into a brushfire of sales success.

Yours in motoring,

Chuck Miller

The Dominion of Canada

It’s official. Stephen Harper is a staunch and unapologetic monarchist.

Last month his government brought back the Royal Canadian Air Force and the Royal Canadian Navy as the official names for the sea and air branches of our military. Then he ordered that the Queen’s portrait hang in every Canadian embassy around the world.

But according to government insiders, that’s not the end of it. The Prime Minister apparently has even more Queen-friendly proposals in the works. Seldom reliable sources have revealed the following future pro-monarchist steps:

* Canada’s maple leaf flag will be replaced by the old red ensign.

* Our country will henceforth be referred to as the Dominion of Canada, the Kingdom of Canada or the Queendom of Canada.

* “God Save the Queen” to replace “O Canada” as our national anthem.

* The national capital will be moved from Ottawa to Kingston, the original capital of the united Canadas back in 1841.

* The Queen’s English will be declared our sole official language.

* Canadians will be urged to call trucks “lorries”, umbrellas “bumbershoots”, car trunks “boots” and to pronounce aluminum as “aluminium.”

* Charles will be invited to move here and become King of Canada.

* Quebec will be asked to reconfirm its defeat on the Plains of Abraham and formally surrender to the Queen.

* Dairy Queen will be designated Canada’s official soft ice cream restaurant and Burger King will be our official national hamburger chain.

* A knighthood will be posthumously awarded to a famous former Toronto Maple Leafs defenceman so that Canada’s official donut shop can henceforth be known as Sir Tim Horton’s.

* The Senate will be changed to the House of Canadian Lords. We will now refer to Hugh Segal as Lord Tubby of Kingston and Mike Duffy will be known as Lord Puffster of Charlottetown.

Fifteen Minutes A Day

A recent Taiwanese study found that fifteen minutes a day of moderate exercise may add three years to your life.
As far as I’m concerned, this is great news. Not for the reason given by the lead researcher, namely that this result will presumably encourage more people to take up a daily exercise regimen.
Rather, this study demonstrates that there’s really little reason to get off the sofa and start walking, running or climbing stairs. Let’s face it; exercise sucks, big time. So if I’m going to gain three years at the end of my life, what’s the actual cost in exercising time?
Let’s do the math. Assuming that the average life expectancy for a male is 79 and that this regular exercise thing would start at around 14 years of age, that means sixty-five years of fifteen minutes a day of exercise to increase your lifespan to 82 years.
Is it worth it? Well, fifteen minutes a day for sixty-five years means a quarter hour times 365 days a year or 91.25 hours a year. Times sixty-five years that adds up to 5,931 hours or about 247 days or two-thirds of an entire year.
As far as I’m concerned, I’m not ready to undergo a definitely unpleasant two-thirds of a year in return for three end-of-life years. Plus, that two-thirds of a year would have to be subtracted from those three years anyway. Much like a car in the garage for repairs, that time hardly counts as useful living.
Let’s be realistic, too; those years between 79 and 82 are not likely going to be your best ones. In fact, if experience is any judge, they’re probably going to be filled with aches, pains, illnesses, ailments and lots of medications.
Why spend your life annoying yourself for a quarter of an hour a day if all it gets you in the end is three years of geezerhood? Nice try Taiwanese study but this is one guy who’s not going to fall for your fancy multi-factor cohort group statistical analysis.
I don’t need any fancy research telling me to exercise. That one-or-two-glasses-of-wine-a-day-is-good-for-you study is all the medical research I require. Unless, of course, you’ve got a more-red-meat-extends-your-life study or some watching-sports-on-TV-promotes-heart-health research. Then I’m all ears.

Look Who's Bankrupt Now

A lot of folks are worried about the debt ceiling crisis. As in, what’s going to happen if the United States defaults on its debt?
Some commentators are predicting a doomsday scenario in which credit ratings plummet, interest rates skyrocket and the financial sky starts falling. Others say that failure to increase the debt limit will lead to a worldwide financial meltdown.
But is the situation actually that dire? Not really because, after all, the United States is in debt just like you and me. And we know what happens to us when our finances go south. That’s right; we declare bankruptcy.
And that’s all that’s going to happen to the United States of America on August 2nd if Congress and President Obama can’t get a deal done. America will simply declare bankruptcy.
At first, that will sound really scary and people will be predicting doom and gloom and pulling their hair out. But once everyone takes a couple of deep breaths and a Valium or two, it will quickly become apparent that declaring bankruptcy may be the best thing that ever happened to the country.
Bankruptcy means that you get to write off your debts against whatever assets you have left. In the case of the United States, that means eliminating all that monstrous debt held by China and others and eliminating it for about ten cents on the dollar.
Plus, usually in a bankruptcy proceeding, you get to protect basic family assets like your vehicle and your home. Thus, even if the U. S. goes Chapter 12, it can probably still hold on to Air Force One and The White House.
Even if America has to foreclose on The White House, is that really such a bad thing? After all, the place is two hundred years old, is really outdated and needs a heck of a lot of renovations. Letting the World Bank or the International Money Fund take possession might actually be a blessing in disguise.
Of course, some folks in Washington may lose their jobs because of this debt default thing. But chances are that won’t happen right away. In fact, many of those holding elected office likely won’t see a pink slip until November of next year.
And before we get to that point, remember who makes the laws in America. That’s right - Congress. So if they don’t like the consequences of a national bankruptcy, all they have to do is pass a couple of laws and change the rules to favor the bankrupt party.
So don’t sweat this latest so-called crisis. Every cloud has a silver lining although this particular one may well be lined with gold at upwards of $2000 an ounce.
As always though, in the end, this situation will work out just fine, at least for America’s bankers, politicians and power brokers. As for the rest of you? Not to worry. Now that the NFL lockout is over, there’ll be plenty of bread and circuses to go around for everyone.

The Will & Kate Road Show

This is a warning to my American friends, particularly those living in Los Angeles. Watch out. Will and Kate are coming.
Prince William and his wife Catherine, the newly-crowned Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, have just spent the last week traveling across Canada and they’re now heading south for a three-day trip to L. A. I feel it’s my duty to let you know what to expect.
The Will & Kate Road Show took Canada by storm. Wherever they went, huge crowds gathered to greet them and more than a hundred journalists followed along to record their every word and fashion statement.
I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised by this phenomenon. As a Canadian, you’d think that I would understand matters royal. After all, Queen Elizabeth is our nominal head of state.
But I wasn’t prepared for the overwhelming reception Will and Kate received. It was like they were, well, royalty or something.
In recent years, we Canadians have been less and less enamored of the British royals given their wealth, aloofness and scandals. But Will and Kate seem to have revived our nation’s love affair with the royal family and, thanks to them, I suspect we’re stuck being a constitutional monarchy for years to come.
Which brings me to my warning to you folks. Don’t be fooled by what appears to be a simple, friendly diplomatic visit by Great Britain’s future head of state and his wife. I think there’s something more afoot here.
Have you noticed what’s happening in England lately? The economy is a mess, labor strife is rampant and the country is a shadow of its former self.
My guess is that this royal visit is a rearguard action, an attempt to undo the deeds of the American Rebellion or what you folks so quaintly call the American Revolution. England needs financial help and what better way to get it than to take back America?
Be careful. This cute young couple may seem harmless but I suspect they have a hidden agenda. Their ultimate aim may well be to regain their ancestors’ status as King and Queen of the Americas.
Let’s face it; despite your revolutionary roots, most of you still have a love affair with royalty. After all, didn’t you almost make George Washington your first king? And, like it or not, most women still grow up with dreams of marrying a real life prince.
You folks are sitting ducks or, in this case, sitting dukes and duchesses in waiting. Once Hollywood gets a glimpse of this glamorous couple, they’re going to want to adopt them and jump on the royal bandwagon. What movie star or mogul wouldn’t want a chance at nobility?
And once Hollywood is on board, the rest of the nation will follow and before you know it, you’re bowing and curtseying to kings and queens again. I’m just saying, watch out. If you wake up some day and find you’re paying a tax on your tea, don’t say I didn’t warn you.

If Nominated, I Will Not Notice

“Gov. Mitch Daniels of Indiana said early Sunday that he would not become a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination.....”
- The N. Y. Times - May 22, 2011

Mitch who? Oh, well, never mind. Given the ever-increasing number of declared non-candidates for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, I felt that it was probably time for me to announce my intentions as well.
Despite the urging of virtually no one, I have decided not to enter my name for the Republican nomination. I regret the inconvenience my decision may have caused to my supporter but I have every reason to believe that he will get over it.
Some will say that I withdrew my name due to family considerations. Let me make this as clear as I possibly can. I am not withdrawing in order to spend more time with my family. In fact, if the truth be known, my wife and daughter were my two biggest fans and specifically asked that I spend less time with them. Sadly, their fondest wish will now go unfulfilled.
Others have speculated that certain closet-based skeletons and previously undisclosed personal scandals caused me to reconsider my position. Let me unequivocally refute that notion right now. Without commenting on my financial shortcomings and the several unfortunate animal-related allegations, I am proud of my record and would not be ashamed to discuss these matters publicly in a presidential campaign. Given today’s decision, however, such a discussion is not presently required.
Conjecture was rife (or perhaps rifeless) that I would not run due to my past political record. That is simply not true. There is nothing in my political record that I am ashamed of or that would cause me to withdraw my name from consideration. That is, of course, because there is nothing in my political record.
Initially I had thought that the Republican Party deserved a wide array of candidates for the upcoming nomination battle. Clearly there was no shortage of right-of-center candidates including those on the hard right, the ultra right and the just plain nutty right. But there was a definite lack of left-of-center potential nominees.
With that fact in mind, I was prepared to offer myself up as a candidate to appeal to that segment of the Party faithful. However, it turns out that there is not a great deal of demand for even a centrist candidate, much less a so-called liberal one. I have been advised that the Democratic Party also has no current need for nominees of that persuasion.
In the end, I decided to absent myself from the upcoming nomination race because I realized that there was already a wealth of qualified individuals. With sterling candidates like Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich to choose from, there was no need to offer myself to the voters. I’m sure that one of those folks will make an acceptable Republican presidential nominee. At least that’s one thing Barack Obama and I can agree on.
In short, if nominated, I will not notice; if elected, I will not care.