Things I didn’t know about the fracas in Honduras

It’s not as bad to steal a comment as it is to steal a post, right?  I hope not, ’cause this is taken wholesale from Mike Devx’s comment at Bookworm Room:

First, some direct info about their Constitution. Regardless of whether any of these articles are good ideas, they do exist:

-Article 42 strips citizenship rights from those who call for the re-election or continuing (beyond the term) of the President of the Republic.

- Article 239 not only prohibits the re-election of a President of the Republic, but calls for the immediate removal from public office and disqualification from any political office for 10 years any person who calls for a change in that prohibition.

- Article 373 gives the power to amend the Constitution solely to the National Congress, with no role for any “referendum”.

- Article 374 prohibits any amendments to the prohibition of a multi-term President of the Republic.

- Title VII, with two chapters, outlines the process of amending the constitution and sets forth the principle of constitutional inviolability. The constitution may be amended by the National Congress after a two-thirds vote of all its members in two consecutive regular annual sessions.

There’s more, too. 

I don’t know that kicking Zelaya out of the country was correct or just.  But for the rest of it — it doesn’t look like the Honduras to-do was an old school the-military-decides-to-take-over-the-country deal.

Another really bad joke

For the math geeks out there . . .

Once upon a time there were these two charming puff adders who lived in the woods.  Being faithful and romantic puff adders, they yearned for little baby puff adders to raise and love and cherish. 

Their first winter they mated under the back porch of a house.  But come spring?  No little baby puff adders.

The next year, they mated hopefully in the depths of a dry cave, secret and secure.  But come spring?  No little baby puff adders.

The year after that, they tried a den among the rocks by a riverbank.  But come spring?  No little baby puff adders.

Finally, as a last hope, they tried mating underneath a great fallen tree, a former giant of the forest. 

And come spring?

They found themselves blessed with a whole litter of little baby puff adders!  Joy!!

 

And the moral of the story is . . .

 

With the help of logs, even adders can multiply.

 Thanks Dad!

Lost in translation

Mike’s cousin M is four years old and just cute as a button.  That being said, she needs a little work on her delivery . . .

M: “Knock knock!”

LISSA: “Who’s there?”

M: “Why does . . . why does a gopher . . . wear two shirts?”

LISSA: (puzzled) “Um, what’d you say, sweetie?”

M: “Why does a gopher wear two shirts?”

LISSA: “Gee M, I don’t know, why?”

M: “In case . . . he gets a rip, right here!” (indicating her breastbone)

LISSA: (utterly bewildered) “Oh . . . um, right there?”

M: (gleefully) “Yes!!!”

LISSA:  “Um, oh!  Hahahaha!!!” 

After a bit of clarification from the aunts and uncles, I give you a perhaps more-comprehensible version:

Q. Why does a  golfer wear two shirts?

A: In case he gets a hole in one.

You might like M’s version better

Happy Friday!

Today’s snorfle

Today, my brother and I found a little bird that couldn’t fly. While trying to convince my mom that it couldn’t fly so we could keep it, I lightly tossed it in the air and it landed a few feet in front of me. Then my cat grabbed it and ate it. FML

Cat owners everywhere are shaking their heads and going Shoulda seen that one coming, buddy.

Happy Anniversary, Borepatch!

And many happy returns!

Memento of a father-son relationship

Go.  Read.

Unbelievably sucky ad

Dear Burger King,

I understand that you ran this ad only in a limited market (Singapore).  I applaud your iota of common sense that kept you from running them world-wide.  That being said — See, there’s this little thing called the Internet.  It allows us to communicate with people all the way around the world — wow!  So I’d advise you to refrain from running ads like this:

Even if it IS to a limited market.  Because it’s just possible that folks in a larger market — like, oh, the United States, Canada, Great Britain, etc. – could get hold of this ad, and they might not think it’s very nice.  Or visually appealing.  Or intelligently creative. 

Just a suggestion!

lovelissa

P.S.  As is often the case, it’s not the porno reference that offends me so much as the utter and complete idiocy, bad taste and general stupidity of making such an ad.  For god’s sake, BK, don’t you have market research folks?

(h/t The Moderate Voice by way of Hot Air)

An amusing comparison

If all kids should have sex ed in elementary school . . .

Because we all know that kids without sex education are at risk for dangerous sexual practices . . .

Like the idea that you can’t get pregnant if you have sex with your shoes on . . .

And you can’t trust parents to properly educate their kids about the birds and the bees at home . . .

AND guns are dangerous, dangerous, dangerous objects that children and teenagers frequently use against themselves rather than against intruders or goblins . . .

Then shouldn’t every elementary school have mandatory gun safety classes?

No?

Never forget, stupidity is bi-partisan

Anyone got a spell-checker?  Buchanan sure could use one . . .

Q: So what does that make community organizing?

A: Aiding and abetting future Enemies of the State.

Hey, why not?  Makes sense to me, given the new definition of low-level terrorism:

The written exam, given as part of Department of Defense employees’ routine training, includes a multiple-choice question that asks:

“Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorism?”

— Attacking the Pentagon

— IEDs

— Hate crimes against racial groups

— Protests

The correct answer, according to the exam, is “Protests.” [snip]

During Bush’s presidency, the Defense Department was criticized for infringing on citizens’ civil rights through surveillance programs designed to protect the nation against terrorist attacks. Brick said she has seen no indication that there will be a change in policy under President Obama.

“We need to see what they do,” she said. “In a number of areas the Obama administration has not backed off and kept the Bush administration line.”*

Yes indeedy, “make love not war” is now low-level terrorism. 

Folks protesting use of the Confederate Flag?  Low-level terrorists!

People advocating American withdrawal from Iraq?  Low-level terrorists!

Parents and kids protesting the end of the DC voucher program?  Educated low-level terrorists!

And don’t even get me STARTED on those weird Tea Party deviants.

I swear, sometimes the abject stupidity coming out of government just boggles the mind. 

Oo oo, I’ve got an idea!  Let’s have them run health care!

*I’d be curious to know how long this version of the exam has been in place.  Why didn’t this come out a year ago?  With all the “Bush infringes on civil liberties!” stories, you’d think this would have made its way to the papers before now.  On the other hand, if this is a relatively new question, well, that’s even more interesting, isn’t it?