Who’s the Fairest Gun Advocate of Them All?


I’ve been speeding a lot of time on Facebook lately engaging my fellow citizens in a spirited discussion on issues of our time.

Recently some intellectual historians have been bandying about a graphic informing citizens about who supports their gun rights and who doesn’t.  I have a very high tolerance for foolishness as this column amply illustrates.  But this particular piece, brought out the fact checker in me.

Sure, it’s an article of faith in these climes that anyone who opines that there might possibly be some limits to the second amendment is a traitor, communist or – egad! – a Muslim.  But as one who has steadfastly avoided and in fact decried comparing Donald Trump to Hitler or Mussolini (how blind is he who will not see?), I really must say that this this graphic hits a new level of silliness.

Facts are stubborn things:  OK, George Washington lived in the country – as did most everyone else in his day – and could make the case that a flintlock was necessary for protection.  Since he did, in fact, lead a well-regulated militia, one could logically conclude that he ‘thinks I should be able to own guns.’

Thomas Jefferson:  ditto on living in the country, but he was, after all, a secret Muslim.  I know because I clearly recall seeing it on TV…or maybe u-tube.

Being a very short person who also lived in the country, James Madison, probably toted an AK47 nearly everywhere to fend off huge bullies like Washington and Jefferson; however, it should be noted that when the British terrorists came to burn his White House, he chose not to exercise his right to bear arms in a fight to the death, instead fleeing with wife Dolly to the relative safety of Octagon House bearing a portrait of G. Washington.  Ever the critic, one thinks that perhaps Andrew Jackson, who killed a chap in a duel with an unlicensed gun, might have been a better example, but I guess his Democrat ties got him voted off the island.

From here, the ground even shakier.

Mr. Lincoln did preside during the war of the Northern aggression to deprive poor Southerners of their constitutional states’ rights to own other people.  And he certainly wasn’t shy about using military force.  But there is no record of his carrying a weapon of any sort when terrorists struck Ford’s theater…how different the outcome of that sad day might have been if he had. And one can only speculate whether, as he lay dying, Mr. Lincoln took time out to reconsider his alleged position on Mr. J.W. Booth’s right to bear arms.

It is highly doubtful that Mr. Gandhi, a noted pacifist, was in favor of anyone owing or using guns, even less so after a person fatally shot him with one.

As for Dr. King:  He did apply for a gun permit out of what turned out to be a well-founded fear that some white folks wanted to shoot him, but subsequently repudiated that decision: “How could I serve as one of the leaders of a nonviolent movement and at the same time use weapons of violence for my personal protection?”

Now for the fun part:  King George III was mad as a hatter, which would not disqualify him from owning a weapon in his former colonies, and had no objection to his well-regulated militia popping off rounds hither and yon.

Heir Hitler, a very bad man, and I shared only 18 months on earth together, so I doubt that my gun rights really appeared on his radar. But if anyone ever supported well-regulated militias with guns, it was he…Brown Shirts, Black Shirts, gestapo, death head brigades…a real gun advocate, he deserves honorary NRA membership.

Joe Stalin, also a very bad man, did lead a well-regulated militia against the Hitler’s minions and killed several million people, often with a gunshot to the back of the head. I don’t know how he felt about my gun rights, but he certainly liked his. Another potential NRA member.

Mao, another very bad man, opined that power emanates from the barrel of a gun, a position philosophically in tune with unfettered gun rights advocates. He also led a well-regulated militia against the Japanese and Nationalist Chinese.  And what were the red guards if not a militia?  Sign him up, Mr. La Pierre!

Kim Jong Il was no Hitler, Stalin or Mao, but a pretty bad chap, tho hardly as bad as his dad. (Those Kims are really hard to keep track of!)  He was born in Russia, but spent much of his life – when he wasn’t kidnapping nubile actresses – trying to throw foreigners out of Korea.  (Kinda like Ted-From-Toronto Cruz, but I digress.) By creating a million-plus man Army, he made Korea the most gun-rich land per capita this side of Montana. A real second amendment advocate!

Granted, Obama Care is – depending on which lunatic is shouting into the microphone at the moment – the moral equivalent of Nazi-ism or slavery, but I personally know our President is not against my owning a gun.  Just a few nights ago after we finished prayers at the secret White House mosque, we decided that a little crack cocaine would help us think outside the box on ways to take Christ out of Christmas and smuggle 5-year-old terrorists into the United States. When I volunteered to go down the street and procure some, the Prez said, ‘better safe than sorry,’   and presented a hand gun he grabbed  from a sleeping secret service agent so I could shoot any policeman who accosted me.

If you don’t believe me, check out the video.

It’s online unless the mainstream media have managed to suppress it.



AT LARGE snares advance presidential debt address text

Due to a bureaucratic quirk, the Federal Aviation Administration, which is now closed down due to Congressional inaction on its charter, managed the shredding machines at the White House. With the shredding machines out of service, AT LARGE was able to go through the White House trash cans as they waited for pick up on Pennsylvania Avenue. Below is the text of President Obama’s address scheduled for delivery at 8:00 PM EST on August 1.

My fellow Americans,

Tonight I ask you to take a look back at recent history.  When my predecessor took office, the national debt was under control. During his tenure – aided by a Republican-controlled Congress for most of his two terms – President Bush elected to fight two unfunded wars and sign an unfunded prescription drug program for seniors.  He also established what we now call a ‘balanced approach’ to increasing debt:  Cutting taxes and increasing spending.

Then came the recession and President Bush joined with responsible, even courageous  members of congress from both parties to stop the recession from becoming a depression, maybe even taking down the world economy. Wise move, but that cost money as well.

That left us looking at a dog’s breakfast when I took office: Spiraling debt and the need to spend even more to get the economy going again, to get Americans back to work.  But from the day I took the presidential oath, some in the ‘loyal opposition’ decided that making me a one-term president was more important that making America work again. 

Some – certainly not all, but too many — in the opposition  stood in the way of every move we made to jumpstart and supercharge the recovery, some out of principle, some out of fear the Tea Party Mad Hatters in their own party would add them to roles of the unemployed if they did the right thing for the country.

To keep it short and simple, these Republicans screwed up the economy, did their best to stop any and everything anyone proposed to fix the economy and now want you to put them in charge again so they can screw it up even worse!

Which brings us to today:

Last night, the House of Representatives adjourned without passing a debt limit extension, all because they could not tolerate a balanced program of cost cutting and revenue increases.

Today, the secretary of the treasury informed me that unless immediate action is taken, the government could not pay – to name only a few – salaries to our military men and women in harm’s way, stipends for hungry kids and social security checks senior citizens, all of whom depend on a Contract With America a for a good part of their daily bread. 

Worse yet if that is possible, without action America will be thrown into default, unable to repay interest to the people who loaned us the money to fight the unfunded wars and battle the recession, a move that would have catastrophic effects on today’s and tomorrow’s economy and job markets.

In spite of the reasonable voices of leaders on both sides of the aisle, it seems like some members of congress want to destroy the United States in order to save it!

Not on my watch!

After the horrible events of 9/11, then-President Bush stated that Article II of the Constitution provides the president with “all necessary authority” to preserve and protect the United States from enemies, both foreign and domestic.  To tell you the truth, I didn’t like that argument much back then, but now that I’ve walked a few miles in the president’s shoes, well, he has a point.

And in this case, the constitution is a lot more specific about the issue at hand.

Section 4 of the 14th Amendment states unambiguously:

“The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law… shall not be questioned.”  

In other words, the constitution clearly demands that the military salaries, social security payments and debt payments, all authorized by law, MUST be paid in full and on time.

Therefore, pursuant to the powers vested in me as president by Article II and the 14th Amendment of the Constitution and in keeping with the oath I took to preserve and protect the constitution of the United States from all enemies, both foreign and domestic, I have issued a presidential finding that the debt limit is constitutionally invalid and ordered the secretary of the treasury take whatever steps necessary to insure the validity of the public debt, to keep the checks and debt payments flowing.

This action will prevent this unprecedented disaster from harming, perhaps irrevocably, the United States of America.

I have no desire to provoke a constitutional crisis.  Indeed, if those in Congress who have blocked every reasonable and prudent compromise had been mindful of their constitutional obligations, none of this would have been necessary.

This decision will not be popular with those who would destroy America in order to save it.  Some even say that the House of Representative will inevitably pass a resolution of impeachment.

Well, you did not elect me president of this great nation to preside over the bankruptcy of our government.  And I did not swear a sacred oath to preserve and protect the United States with my fingers crossed.

So the bills will be paid. 

And if — instead of complying with our constitution and passing legislation to pay our nation’s most solemn debts — the U. S. House of Representatives would rather pass an impeachment resolution, well BRING IT ON!

God bless all of you and God bless the United States of America!


The Day of the Inguina

Dr. Kathleen Cleland -- The Hot Officer Chick With Knives

The Day of the Inguina:  Somehow, I came down with a double(!) Inguinal hernia  (“busted groin” in Texan).
Being of Irish decent, Ms. Scanlan (Da Wife), naturally considering my lifestyle, attributed the malady to drinking martinis, downloading Internet porn leading to prodigious self-abuse and, of course, smoking.
That despite assurances from a bevy of (anti-smoking, it goes without saying) docs that none were the cause, while, perhaps, all aggravated the condition. The condition also aggravated Ms. Scanlan since it limited my ability to stand up at the stove cooking away on delightful dishes for hours, gave me an ideal excuse for not carrying her heavy soda up the stairs in our town house and – to a lesser, but not insignificant degree – adversely impacted the efficacy of my, ah, marriage tackle.
It was also necessary on occasion for me to push the intestine back in its ‘little house,’ an act deemed not appropriate in many, especially feminist, venues.
Since the condition was, in fact, aggravated by my favorite vices (see above),my  the usual denial strategy, which has worked well over the years for smoking-related afflictions, failed utterly in this case.
I called my dear primary care physician, Dr. Stephen Cornwell, who diagnosed the hernia over the phone and had me drop by his stylish digs.  After the ritual ‘stop smoking, stop drinking and lose 20 pounds’ litany, he admitted that only a surgeon could fix it.
Based on my desire not to have a dude doc fiddling around with my nether parts, he recommended an outstanding female surgeon, Dr. Kathleen Cleland (above). I later found out that good Dr. Cleland was a former Army surgeon who served on our side in Iraq.  And when I met her, I discovered she is, well, a prodigious beauty.
I do some work for a group of mostly retired female military officers and have dubbed them, no doubt to their extreme delight (sic), ‘hot officer chicks.’  Thus Dr. Cleland – she actually didn’t seem to mind – instantly became ‘The Hot Officer Chick with Knives.’  This was a win-win surgical situation. Either she cures my hernia and lets me return to what Dr. Cornwell calls my ‘odious lifestyle’ or the last thing I see is a hot blonde coming after me with a sharp instrument.
Like what’s to think about?
Well, the thing I should have through about was medical clearances:  Part of the rampant discrimination against real Americans (a.k.a. smokers) seems to be docs’ fear that their gummed-up lungs will cause them (the smoker, not the doc) to croak on the operating table.  While Dr. Conwell ran all his tests, shook his head in wonder and pronounced me healthy as an ox, the lung doctor was a bit of a harder sell.
Dr. Adlah Sukkar, basically speaking, wanted me to stop smoking for 37 years and to never have lived in Taipei/Tokyo before their Green emergence before she would authorize the procedure.  And she made me take a battery of lung tests (that culminated in the technician, an attractive Philippina, shouting, “More, more.  Don’t stop! Harder.  Harder! Don’t stop!” to encourage me to propel a Ping-Pong ball up a tube to test my exhalation.  That test didn’t end well as I laughed so hard I spit out the tube into which I was breathing.)
I finally asked Dr. Sukkar if she used one of those Philips toothbrushes. When she admitted she did and displayed a most attractive smile, I explained:  “Those tooth brushes vibrate to get plaque off your teeth to prevent tooth decay; smoker’s cough vibrates your arteries and stuff like to get rid of plaque that causes Alzheimer’s.”
I finally got the clearance and Dr. Cleland’s great staff managed to track down all the paperwork. Dr. Sukkar’s folks – she’s a fine, caring physician, but her staff can follow neither simple written nor spoken instructions – had lost, misfiled or misdirected.
I got the word Tuesday and the procedure was scheduled for today, Friday Feb. 18.
This was somewhat a cruel act as it gave Ms. Scanlan very little time to agonize over my fate or, perhaps more importantly, to master skills like using the TV tuner, turning on her cell phone and coping with computers, all tasks for which she relies on me.  Every form of refuge has its price!
Now Alexandria Hospital is a good place… as hospitals go.  Valet parking.  Kind and efficient staff.  Close to our digs.
But it’s a hospital and one can generally assume that when one arrives at a hospital (no cigarettes after midnight) before 6 am, nothing worse is going to happen to him/her for the rest of the day.
Actually, nothing did. The docs, fearing lung complications, decided to give me an anesthetic cocktail that put me out for the count with no ‘drug-over’ and no recollection of the surgery.
Despite the hara kiri on my lower belly, I awoke with two tiny scars (sorry fans, no bikinis this summer), full possession of my faculties such as they are, and no…zero…zip pain.  Not even discomfort so-far, tho Dr. Cornwell says I might need a pain pill when the local wears off.
Released four hours after check-in, Da Wife and I had lunch in a restaurant with a smoking section and then went home.  Total time expended: 6.5 hours.  Marriage tackle seems to be responding to the normal stimulus.
Exhausted from the ordeal, Ms. Scanlan took a nap; I caught up on some website revisions and wrote this blog.
The last thing I saw before I went under was a blonde hot officer chick coming after me with a knife…  AND I woke up to return to my odious lifestyle.
See, Obama-care is the best of all possible worlds!

A Woman’s (Museum) Work Is Never Done

Any husband knows:  When the ‘little ladies’ set their minds on something, the best strategy is to say, ‘yes, dear!’ – especially if the gals are planning to pay for the project out of their ‘pin money.’  

Resistance is futile and the payback for opposition is certain and draconian, if not immediate.

This elemental concept seems to have eluded Senators Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Jim DeMint (R-SC), who, despite being listed as married to women in their bios, have banded together to block passage of legislation sponsored by fellow Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine authorizing the sale of an embarrassingly small patch of unused federal land a block off the National Mall as the site for the National Women’s History Museum.

Yes, I said ‘sale.’

The government had planned to give away the very same land as a site for a national medical museum, but the docs grew weary of jumping through federal hoops for the property and decided to build in Atlanta, whose major attraction most probably lies in its distance from Senators Coburn, DeMint and their ilk.  

But the Collins legislation is no government giveaway: It calls for selling the property to the Women’s Museum and backers have money in the bank to pay cash for the site. (In the spirit of full disclosure, one of those backers is Mrs. AT LARGE, but I already told you I know on which side my bread is buttered.)

So what’s and where’s the senator’s beef?  Shiite Republicans like the Oklahoma-Carolina axis love privatization and where better to start than by milking the ladies for some unused federal land?  (AT LARGE has always said, “If we’re really worried about the national debt, why not sell the Grand Canyon or Oklahoma to some rich foreigners to pay our bills, but that’s another story.)

Well, the two senators are too smart to say, “We don’t want girls in our Mall tree house,” or “If they get a museum, they’ll be wantin’ to vote next!”

Instead, the good-old boys club makes the scurrilous, nay, silly argument that passing the bill might somehow make the tax-payers liable if the project headed south in the future.

Why rely on my prose when I can quote Meryl Streep, the Women’s Museum spokesperson who ponyed up a cool million of her own money for the project:

“We are not asking for a check — we want to give them a check.”  

Of course, nothing in Washington is as it seems. Deepthroat sources tell AT LARGE that the real reason these silly solons stand between the dames and their land deal are a bit more devious:

They’re afraid that the new museum will ‘glorify’ two women who, well, were just not Tom and Jim’s ideal ‘tea party partners.’

And who are the two women who give these big, manly senators the vapors?

OK, Jane Fonda, I could understand. But Margaret Sanger and Victoria Woodhull? …gee guys!

Ms. Sanger was the mother of the birth control legalization movement. Sen. Coburn, an MD who has delivered more than 4000 babies, practiced family medicine before moving on to medicate/anesthetize the body politic. So, arguably, her anti-one-coupling-one-baby actions adversely impacted his customer pool and bottom line, but still…

Ms. Woodhull was a newspaper publisher, suffragette, and the first female candidate for president.  She also espoused ‘free love,’ a stand certain to win her the admiration and gratitude of AT LARGE and all red-blooded American men, save only Messrs. DeMint and Colburn. Perhaps Sen. DeMint, in his previous life as head of a market research firm had a bad experience with a newspaper publisher, a presidential candidate…or free love.

It’s not clear whether this whole problem could be solved to Coburn and DeMint’s satisfaction by the Stalinist solution of airbrushing Sanger and Woodhull from the Women’s Museum website.  Or achieving a ‘fair and balanced’ museum by adding sections for, say, Sara Palin and Christine O’Donnell, both of whom are said to think Coburn and especially DeMint are ‘the cat’s meow.’

In any case, museum backers who have semi-deep pockets, a slew of Republican backers as well as Democrats and Meryl Streep on their side don’t seem in the mood to airbrush history.

Instead, they’re relying on public pressure to move the two naysaying senators and, failing that, hope to persuade Senate Majority Leader Harry (Profiles in Courage) Reid to man-up and take the extreme step of scheduling a vote on the measure after the election.

A woman’s museum work is never done!


Wal-Mart and Women – Don’t Play it Again, Sam!

A million monkeys hammering randomly on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the works of Shakespeare.  So I guess it was in the cards that the determinately whacky San Francisco-based Ninth Circuit would eventually write a decision that made sense.

Sure enough, the Ninth Circuit ruled last month in favor of a class action pay and promotion gender bias suit filed by female Wal-Mart workers.  That means that sometime before those monkeys complete their rendering of the complete works of Dostoyevsky in the original Russian, the case involving Wal-Mart’s systematically paying women less than men may and keeping the change may – just may – go before a jury.

So why does a most-of-the-time libertarian, occasional recalcitrant right-wing national security hawk and full-time male hale socking it to Wal-Mart – even if it makes AT LARGE’s next purchase of socks produced by Third World kids a penny or two more expensive?

Let’s see. 

Well first, paying women less than men for doing the same job is against the law.  (Just like crossing U.S. borders without papers, tho I don’t think the tea party folks are on the side of the angels when, so to speak, it comes to equal pay for women.) It’s also really wrong, bad business and – note to Sam’s Club members – not very manly, if you’ll pardon my 20th Century vocabulary.

Finally – those cheap socks aside – Wal-Mart’s discriminating against women is bad for AT LARGE and other guys who know happiness, nay survival in this economy is based on having a working wife.

(Didn’t you hear, Sam?  Nowadays, working women spend their salaries on ‘luxuries’ like food, mortgages, car payments and occasionally buying martinis for aging columnists at The Palm, not just on necessities like make-up and frilly dresses manufactured by Eastern European kids.) While Wal-Mart doesn’t seem to mind hosing women, they’ll be in big trouble if our wives ‘sock it to ‘em’ and make hubbies buy our automatic weapons, power tools, gym shoes and XXL sweat pants at a competitor’s store.

So the recent Wall-Mart decision is a source for optimism, but, alas, only limited optimism.

 Judging from media reports, Wall-Mart gender discrimination in pay and promotions was – maybe still is – egregious.  Should the case come before a jury of the discrimination victims’ peers, the women who initially sued and and others who join in the class action may well win big bucks.  But the case has already been going on for eight years and may go on for decades– unless Wall-Mart suddenly realizes that bad law suits (as opposed to ill-cut men’s suits) are bad for business.

Which brings us to the main lesson for women who are facing sex discrimination in their jobs right now: When you’re being economically violated, it’s no time to ‘lie back and think of England.’ Just because such practices are wrong, unfair and illegal, you can’t let ‘George,’ or Wal-Mart plaintiffs Betty Dukes, Michelle Braun and Dolores Hummel et al take care of it for you.

Don’t get mad, get even! Get help and a lawyer…now!


Real Americans won’t reconcile with ‘deem and pass’ benefits

Over the past 50-plus years from the Senate floor, Congressional galleries and on CSPAN, AT LARGE has watched passage of legislation that has changed America and perhaps the world.

Almost none of this significant legislation has passed without naysayers.  Not content to say something along the lines of ‘Hey, this isn’t a super great bill,” opponents invariably predict cataclysm, even apocalypse should a bill they oppose become law.

It’s déjà vu all over again when it comes to healthcare reform, popularly known as Obama-care. (The latter nomenclature may be telling:  Seems to me that a lot of folks who oppose healthcare reform care less about healthcare that they care about opposing President Obama, but that’s another story.)

Sure, proponents picture babies and old folks dying in front of unreformed, un-socialized hospitals.  And opponents picture a hellish America where the sun never shines after the government takes over our beloved, all-American insurance companies.  But that’s par for the course.

In the last couple days, however, the healthcare reform silliness reached, well, epidemic proportions on both sides of the aisle and ideological spectrum when discussion shifted from the details of reforms/non reforms to the procedure by which a bill might pass.

If one wishes to retain an appetite for law and sausages, it is best to watch neither made. So whether it’s the transmutation of intestines into andouille or the grinding of a controversial bill into law, the process can be fairly unappetizing.

But history judges sausage on its taste.  And after the legislative dust settles, a law is judged not on how it passed Congress, but on what is does to or for Juan and Jane Q. Public.

“Oh, no!” say the bed-wetters, their delicate bladders bloated with the right’s Kool-Aid. “The Democrats will pay a terrible price if they pass even a good bill through sneaky parliamentary maneuvers. The American people will exact terrible vengeance.”

Wow!  That’s heavy stuff!

So wanting to find out more about the righteous wrath storm to come, AT LARGE dusted off his heretofore faithful crystal ball and dialed up a scene two years after Obama-care became the law of the land.

A typical American family is sitting around the kitchen table discussing finances.

“Little Jared needs an operation to repair his pre-existing defective heart valve that will kill him in 18 months without surgery.”

“What should we do, honey?”

“We could use money from our insurance coverage to pay for the procedure, dear…”

“Goodness, no! I’m not going to take money that came from legislation that passed Congress on an underhanded, self-executing ‘deem and pass’ procedure thought up by Nancy Pelosi and that darn House Rules Committee.”

“I love you even more when you stand on principle over House rules, darling!”

“And I love you, too, sweetie. We’ll just sell little Suzie to human traffickers so we don’t have to take that filthy Democrat money.”

“And if there’s cash any left over after the surgery bills are paid, we can send it to Speaker Boehner for a new spray-on suntan treatment!”

I normally trust my crystal ball.

But if you buy that scenario, you’re smoking something that didn’t come from your neighborhood pharmacy. 

And don’t hold your breath until the insurance company reimburses you for that stash!


Augusta has Wood(s): Tiger to play with his golf balls for a change

For the third time today, some seemingly sapient citizen has solicited my views on Tiger Woods. 

It seems that Tom Cat, oops, I mean Tiger, shall seek redemption for several-score sins involving cocktail waitresses, among others, by participating in the Masters Golf Tournament played – if that’s the right word for an activity that generates millions, if not billions in revenue – at the Augusta National Golf Club. The announcement comes in the wake of Mr. Woods’s ‘graduation’ from a ‘sex addition’ cure.

AT LARGE is a font of knowledge on many, perhaps all subjects and rarely leaves home without prepared bon mots on a rich variety of causes célèbre lest the ravenous media pack, casual passersby or, especially, cocktail waitresses solicit my comments on the events that alter and illuminate our times. 

But I don’t give a good God-damn about golf!

It is a silly, frustrating activity. Why? Because taking more than 18 shots on 18 holes can be regarded as subpar even if you finish below par.  So much like a visit to a casino or an argument with a spouse, a round of golf always ends in failure. 

Even worse, golf involves fresh air, which has been scientifically proven to hasten aging.  It is conducted outside, where one can catch a cold, perspire, muddy up one’s costume, be bitten by ticks, cross paths with rabid animals or get leaves in one’s hair.  Since Lucky Strike stopped sponsoring tournaments, you probably can’t even smoke on golf courses anymore.  Not AT LARGE’s cup of tea!

A while back, friend and noted feminist Martha Burk took offense because the Masters Augusta National venue doesn’t allow women to join the club, which, one could argue, is none of her business; however, most of the big buck membership fees for hard driving corporate types is tax-deductable, meaning less lucre for the government to spend on, say, killing our foreign enemies, bailing out too-big-to-fail banks and hiring school teachers.  That, arguably, is her business and — assuming we pay taxes — our  business, too! And in fairness, if women can fight in Iraqi deserts, why can’t they play in Augusta sand traps?

Just before the conversation, I had suffered severe brain damage flying in first class next to a duffer who told me in agonizing detail about each shot in his most recent 2,000 rounds of golf. I prayed for a hijacking before mercifully sinking into an all-but irreversible coma.  With this horrific experience fresh, I tried to persuade Ms Burk that all-male clubs like Augusta National, the Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility and the National Football League were necessary as a means of insolating rich golfers in plaid trousers, terrorists and violence-prone individuals from, well, me — not to mention The Little Ladies.

Surprisingly, she didn’t listen and annual protests over the Masters have become a rite of spring.

Surprised that Tiger Woods picked the ‘no women need apply’ Augusta National for his post-sex addiction therapy coming-out party?  It actually makes sense: Do you want to loose a recovering sex-aholic brandishing his driver and on his first outing at, say, a cocktail waitress convention? Sounds like a recipe for disaster!

That said, I am mystified by TW’s original sin:  If the world’s third richest man can’t relax and unwind a bit at the 19th hole, like why bother?  (Same comment on recent history: Why go through the travails of getting elected president of the U.S. if you can’t tryst with Miss America?  Or run for congress if you’re denied tickle parties with ‘single male staffers’ (the media’s word, not mine!)?

(For the record: AT LARGE  only dallies alone or with the missus! If I erred in this department – in the words of former House Majority Leader Dick Armey – ‘The last words I would hear on this earth would be my wife asking, ‘How do you reload this thing?’”)

Not to say Tiger hasn’t paid dearly for driving into the marital and PR rough: He’s lost endorsements valued at millions, tho last I heard, Gillette was sticking with the Woodsman. (It was a close shave, but I guess they like folks who live on the razor’s edge.)

Since every time Tiger swings his stick, it pumps millions into his pocket and the economy, I think he’ll be all right.  But if worst comes to worst and he’s down to his last $10 million, TW can always sell himself in Asia.

Tiger part are very popular as aphrodisiacs in those climes and whatever else you say, Tiger’s parts have plenty of endorsements!


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 369 other followers

Jared Cameron

It is better to smoke a single candle that to curse the darkness