One side spits on the other side.
Advantage: The other side.
The other side calls it Kristallnacht.
And the advantage is gone.
Why don’t people understand that?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A regular person thinks about things and then writes about them.
3 comments:
I think I get it. But would side one have re-lost the ad-one by responding, "Didn't you mean 'kindernacht?"
Of course hyperbole got another foot in the door when Erykah Badu, someone whom I still otherwise have a good deal of respect for, decided to "assassinate" herself here in Dallas. (How important does one have to be to go from just being figuratively killed to having been figuratively assassinated?)
Except that one side didn't spit on the other side:
http://internetscofflaw.com/2010/04/02/cleaver-retracts-spitting-charge/
Maybe I didn't get it? I wasn't even thinking Capitol and tea party. I was thinking figuratively of the Pope's priest’s comparison to anti-Semitism. It's the German that got me. But then it usually does.
Spit or no spit I have become a fan of the Mad Hatters’ propensity for horrendously misspelled signage, now enshrined under the category “Teabonics.”
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pargon/sets/72157623594187379/
But then again, there’s the “glass house” situation with folks who apparently can’t even spell “flicker?”
The only thing about the teabonics designation is its unfair comparison to “ebonics,” which does in fact, have an at least agreed upon intrinsic grammar. But speaking of signs and the health care assault on the liberty of the insured, I had a cousin Fay with a speech impediment who, unfortunately, spit when she talked. I often wondered whether NYC Subway signage was an infringement on her first amendment rights.
Now I’ll tell you what foolhardiness is. Foolhardiness is posting something ridiculing teabonics without spellchecking first.
Post a Comment