Archive for the ‘You’ve got to be kidding!’ Category

In 2012, I mused about Big Brother and Viagra in advertising.  At that time, I hadn’t heard the radio ad from a doctor that promises you’ll get results right at his office.  Is that good thing?  How long do you have to stay before you can safely leave?  Who would want to be the receptionist in that waiting room?

But I digress.  Here’s a re-post of that post.  As I prefer not have to click on another link to get to what I want to read, I’m posting the original here for your reading pleasure.  Please enjoy responsibly.


So many of the little helpful things on the internet are (or can be), if you think about them, a little creepy. Ads pop up based on things in your emails that are pulled out by something. Before I send an email, a box comes up to inform me that the word “attached” appears somewhere and did I mean to attach a file? If “they” can do this, what other information might “they” be tracking, recording and using? Great conspiracy (and reality) stuff here. But why can’t “they” figure out that I, as a female, am unlikely to want Viagra and not send me spam about it? It’s all more than a bit “1984”.

Speaking of Viagra….I always wonder….are there really that many men who need it? Would they get together for a guys’ night out, hanging around the swimming pool and sing “Viva, Viagra”? Wouldn’t they rather be at home so they don’t miss “the moment”? (Maybe I’m mixing products here, but you get the idea.) I’d also like the bathtub rights for all those Cialis people who sit out on the top of a mountain in his and hers tubs! Never quite got the connection there.

And why on earth would anyone think that insurance should pay for Viagra for prisoners???? Or for anyone, for that matter?

But the question that we’ve never been able to answer satisfactorily and causes gales of laughter every time we toss it around is how do you discreetly get to the doctor or hospital if, after four hours, you’re still “Viva-ing”? As one of our daughters said about something completely unrelated when she was very young, “I never had a problem like that before!” So very true!

There are all sorts of jobs and I certainly applaud the initiative behind this personal pooper-scooper business. (more…)

If you watched the recent college football national title game (or just read headlines), you know that  during the game, Brent Musburger praised the beauty of the girlfriend of the Alabama quarterback when the camera focused on her.  From an article by Dean Obeidallah at (more…)

When selling a house, it’s important to get a good realtor so I turned to a former neighbor, owner of a number of rental properties as well as his own house, for a recommendation.  After talking on the phone, the realtor came by to look at our house and tell me what things needed to be done before putting it on the market. (more…)

I opened my eyes this morning not to the sight of San Jose, Costa Rica, but the rain-drenched green of Illinois.   You were possibly expecting to see more pictures like the one above  or hear about our trip to Costa Rica, Day 1?  I was looking forward to taking some pictures and telling that story.  Here’s what really happened. (more…)

Anabelle and her person

When I was growing up, I dreamed of living in Denver, near the Rockies so I could go into the mountains whenever I like, skiing in the winter, enjoying the fresh mountain air in the summer. That was before I found out that Denver has a lot of pollution these days and also before I found out that Denver is being run by bigots.

They’re not bigoted against people (at least as codified by law); they’re bigoted against pit bulls. And there’s a lot more of bigotry going on in the United States. Besides Denver, Miami, Cincinnati and San Francisco (tolerant of virtually anything known to man), all figured prominently in the new documentary, “Beyond the Myth”,

From the web site:
The documentary intelligently explores the contributing factors behind the public’s generalized fear of ‘pit bulls’, and examines the conflict existing between advocates and opponents of breed discriminatory laws, commonly referred to as breed bans.

It investigates the myths associated with these breeds, challenges the idea that they are inherently vicious, and presents eye-opening research regarding the media’s role in influencing people’s opinion on dog attacks.”
Some of these cities have killed over a thousand pit bulls since their laws went into effect. It was heart-rending to see a picture of a pile of dead pit bulls, all killed simply because of their breed, not because of anything they’d done. There was a lot of sniffing going on in the darkness of the theater.

It was depressing to find out that if a pit bull was involved in an attack, the words “pit bull” and “attack” were usually in the headline of the newspaper article, which was also more prominently placed in the paper than any articles on dog attacks where no breed specified because the attack wasn’t by a pit bull. The film pointed out that boy killed by pit bulls in San Francisco, Nicholas Scott Faibish, (whose mother was later cited for child endangerment, as she left him alone with two dogs, one of which had bitten him earlier in the day) was cited hundreds of times while the story of a girl, Kate-Lynn Logel, killed by the family’s malamute was hard to even find. For more information on how the news media slants news stories on dog bites, see CHAKO’s website,

I would never trivialize any attack on any person by any dog. I don’t put animals ahead of people. But as a Christian, I believe that people should treat animals as God’s creation. If you don’t want to take proper care of a pet, don’t have one. If you have a dog, you need to care for it, train it, restrain it when necessary, make sure it gets along with people, give it something to do, don’t let it run loose around the neighborhood, don’t leave small children alone with a dog and certainly not with several dogs, etc. Yes, there are some dogs of every breed that are just mean, even dogs are predisposed to fight. But most dogs, treated well, and with the realization by their owners and others that they are animals, not people, just want to love and be loved.

My state, Ohio, until recently wasthe only state with the dubious distinction of having breed-specific language state-wide. Thankfully, that’s changed.  This is from the American Veterinary Medical Association,

On February 21, 2012, Ohio HB 14 was signed into law by the Governor. This bill removes pit bulls from the definition of “vicious dogs” in state statute. Prior to the adoption of HB 14, Ohio was the only state in the nation to have state-wide breed-specific legislation enacted. The bill also revises the definition of “dangerous dog” and “vicious dog”; makes changes to the requirements that owners of dangerous or vicious dogs must abide by; and provides penalties for violations of the act.

While dog-bite prevention remains a priority, breed-specific legislation does not address the problem. Proper socialization of dogs, and proper training for both animal and owner, are important steps to prevent dog bites. Additionally, breed-specific bans create a host of other issues for animals and pet owners, including the risk of abandonment of the animal.

This is a great piece of legislation and I am happy that the Ohio legislature, Governor, and Ohio Veterinary Medical Association worked to get this adopted.

The bill becomes effective 90 days after signing.”

However, cities can still have breed-specific laws as does Cleveland Heights, a city next to ours and self-proclaimed “nuclear-free zone” and a supposed bastion of tolerance and diversity. Here is part of the laws regarding dogs… well, some dogs…not quite in line with all that tolerance and love, but typical of the belief that all pit bulls and pit bull mixes are inherently vicious dogs, without any sort of proof:

• “Pit bulls and pit bull crosses are considered vicious dogs (505.091). (See below.)

• Animals may be impounded if in violation of Cleveland Heights Animal Control ordinances. A fee and all kennel charges must be paid in order for the animal to be released.

Vicious Dog Ordinance

Cleveland Heights Ordinance #71-1987 added Section 505.091 to the Animal Control section of our Codified Ordinances and deals specifically with vicious dogs and Pit Bull Terriers. The owner of a vicious dog has a great responsibility to neighbors and the public. In order to meet that responsibility, regulations have been established that must be followed. It is believed that dog owners who follow these requirements will reduce the likelihood that their dog will be involved in a bite. In addition, neighbors and people who pass by the dogs when the dogs are in the yard or are being walked will be less likely to feel threatened by the dog.

The city defines a vicious dog in three ways:

1. Any dog with a propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack, to cause injury or to otherwise endanger the safety of other human beings or other domestic animals;

2. Any dog which, without provocation, attacks a human being or another domestic animal;

3. Any pit bull terrier, which shall herein be defined as a Staffordshire Bull Terrier breed of dog or any mixed breed of dog which contains as an element of its breeding the breed of Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, American Pitbull Terrier as to be identifiable as partially of the breed of Staffordshire Bull Terrier or American Staffordshire Terrier by a qualified veterinarian duly licensed as such by the State of Ohio;

(Notice that these dogs are automatically labeled vicious without having met #1 and # 2 above!–my insert.)

If you have a vicious dog, the following is necessary to comply with the law:

(For the rest of the ordinances, please go to

In general, the saying “There are no bad dogs, only bad owners” is true. Cities must realize that they need to do their research, not just react and certainly not just kill. Hard to believe that there are places in this country where practically anything goes, where the police can come into your house, take your dog and kill it, just because it’s a specific breed, no matter what that dog’s even done or not done. There are lots of people working to change this but until then, maybe I’ve just helped your decision about where to work and live easier by eliminating some cities from your possibilities. You can thank me later. And thanks to Libby Sherrill, writer/producer/director for making this eye-opening movie! See it if it comes to a theater near you.

I’ve learned I love “What Not to Wear”. Who’d have thought? Besides having to periodically scrape my jaw off the floor when I see what some people do wear, I’ve learned the following:

• Stacy and I will never agree completely on what constitutes a comfortable shoe. Cute, maybe;
comfortable, no.

• My wardrobe isn’t all that bad.

• There are some things Clinton and Stacy ought not to wear.

• Try on things you think might not look good or that you wouldn’t ordinarily wear. Sometimes you’ll
find something that looks great.

• Your family and friends DO notice what you wear…and they love you anyway.

• $5,000 goes farther when shopping in NYC than I’d ever imagined.

• Once you’ve used up the credit card, money goes even farther at the thrift store!! OK, I didn’t learn
that from “What Not to Wear”, yet it is true and thrifty and fun.

• Hair stylists think every woman needs her hair colored. I don’t agree.

• What you see in the mirror and what others see when they look at you are often wildly divergent.

• It’s difficult to take advice gracefully and gratefully. But it’s also difficult to give advice gracefully
and inoffensively. If it were all given and taken gracefully, gratefully and inoffensively, no one
would watch the show.

• Bras are a good thing.

• Always have something that “pops”, some bit of color somewhere.

• Most women in the US must have more purses than I do. That’s OK with me. I’d rather buy books.

• Clothes aren’t the most important thing about you, but they can get in the way of people seeing what
that most important thing is.

• Some clothes should never be made in any country by anyone, union worker/homemaker/slave
labor/other, and if made, should never by worn…by anyone.

• I will never refer to a woman’s breasts as “The Girls” (caps intended)!! Ever!! If I do, just shoot me.

It’s Monday morning, time for your daughter to go to preschool. You jump out of bed, get dressed, wake your daughter (maybe twice) , fix breakfast, empty the dishwasher, fix lunch. Let’s see. What do you have for lunch? Even more importantly, what will she eat and not quietly toss in the garbage? Veggies are out, unless you keep an eagle eye on her, which you can’t do while she’s at school. Look in the fridge. Hmmm, how about a turkey and cheese sandwich? Not bad. You know your daughter will eat that. A banana…that’s good, healthy and, best of all, desirable! Add some chips,some apple juice and it’s time to go. Phew! One small step for mother-kind. Now off to the real work of the day. You feel good because your daughter has a nice, reasonably healthy lunch and you can shove those veggies down her throat tonight….er, I mean….watch her to make sure she eats them.

But wait!! You live in North Carolina and in NC today, the preschool lunch police are patrolling the lunch room. According to Matthew Boyle of “The Daily Caller”,, “That meal didn’t meet with approval from the government agent who was on site inspecting kids’ lunches that day.” Guess what? Your daughter’s lunch is busted and suddenly you’re not the next incarnation of Martha-Stewart-mom-edition. You’re a criminal!! Up against the lunch line! Now!

I know it’s hard to believe and it’s more difficult for me to maintain a light, sarcastic tone, when what I really want to do is rip this “government agent’s”  pencil and pad away and throw them out with the uneaten cafeteria veggies. Who in the world, and in his/her right mind, thinks government agents should be inspecting preschoolers lunches???????? Raise your hand; I dare you!! Oh, yeah, and don’t forget who’s paying these people. You and I, the criminal classes.

(Breathe in, breathe out. Wax on, wax off. OK. I’m under control.)

Matthew reports that, “The Department of Health and Human Services’ Division of Child Development and Early Education requires that all lunches served in pre-kindergarten programs must meet USDA guidelines. Meals, the guidelines say, must include one serving each of meat, milk and grain and two servings of fruit or vegetables. Those guidelines apply to home-packed lunches as well as cafeteria meals.”

A few questions/objections spring to mind. What if you’re vegetarian or vegan? What if your child hates vegetables or fruit? Is ketchup really considered a veggie? How about French fries? What if you send a salad with no milk or meat? What if you butt out of my business? (Sorry, that somehow just slipped out!) What if school lunches aren’t particularly healthful or appealing? What if kids throw out the “healthful” parts of that lunch? Oh…they do? Does it count that the kids just take the good food? Is the trash can getting healthier? Is the next step an inspector at each table to be sure each child actually eats all the food groups?

But it gets better! Her meal was so unhealthy that the government agent forced her to eat better-for-her-than-a-turkey-and-cheese-sandwich cafeteria chicken nuggets. I bet she felt much healthier after that!! I’d like to know what happened to the rest of her meal. Did they send it to China where all those starving children are who appreciate having the food you don’t want to eat?

And that really begs the question of which food group they thought she was missing and why chicken nuggets (even if they really are chicken) replaced it? Aren’t chicken nuggets protein and aren’t turkey and cheese both protein as well?

But wait! That’s not all. Although the mother didn’t order the school lunch now and get the free Ginsu knives and free shipping, she did get charged for the cafeteria chicken nuggets, about $1.25 or so, I think, from another report I heard. Talk about adding insult to injury. (I’ve just realized that there are way too many sentences in this blog that require exclamation points but if I put them all in, the whole thing would look like a Robert Ludlum book. In fact, it does have that sort of feel. Perhaps if Jason Bourne had been here, this wouldn’t have happened. Or perhaps the government agent would be dead, the preschool burned to the ground {or blown up}, but with minimal loss of young lives, and all the forces of the US government would be after Jason to force HIM to eat the cafeteria lunch, the better to make him tell all he knows. I’m pretty sure cafeteria chicken nugget would do the trick.)

Now I see there’s a “Man Charged For Allegedly Cooking And Eating Cats: Jason Louis Wilmert Arrested In California”, While the article didn’t mention it, I wonder if they forced him to eat cafeteria chicken nuggets as well. Or did he only have to eat fruit and veggies, put the cat on some whole grains and drink his milk?

This isn’t the death of common sense. This is murder most foul and possibly (no, probably) the start of a nation-wide cereal killing spree.