Last night, your three On Tap bar flies managed to assemble for a visit to a bar (or rather, series of them) of an entirely usual variety. Specifically, thanks to the generosity of the good folks at National Review (really, Geraghty), Cam and I were invited guests to the cocktail parties that preceeded last night’s White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner at the Capitol Hilton in Washington. (If you want to read about the actual dinner, itself, the Washington Post has a pretty good write-up.)
To be sure, I’ve heard a lot about these blow-outs before. And if you hadn’t, you need only consult Wonkette or Fishbowl DC (which describes the evening as Washington’s “prom”.)
But I’d never actually seen the thing in person.
It was, in a word, striking.
The various pre-parties were wrapped around a lovely outdoor plaza, and once into one, you could mingle among all of them.
Cam met Justice Clarence Thomas and hung out with some cast members from 24.
I said hello to Justice Antonin Scalia, talked immigration (briefly) with Ben Wattenburg, introduced myself to Fed Chair Ben Bernake (who made a joke about interest rates), and chatted about Virginia politics with an old reporter friend from the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
There was a lot of celebrity watching to be done, as well. I saw everyone from rapper Ludacris to recent American Idol victim Mandisa. I spotted Michael Strahan — who Krempasky apparently ran into across town. (He was the tall one.) Phil Simms hung for more than a little while with the National Review crowd. And Washington Post columnist / TV star Tony Kornheiser was impossible to miss. (Hello, Tony. It was a little late in the evening for the shades, wasn’t it?) Favorite pass-time for the evening: making fun of all of the hideously bad celebrity fake tans. (Tucker, you look like you’ve spent too much time at a nuclear waste site.)
But for me, the highlight of the evening was running into former Virginia Governor (and now, Mayor of Richmond) Douglas Wilder. You see, I had been a student in a small seminar that the Governor taught a few years ago at Hampden-Sydney College. Happily, he remembered it well, and despite the fact that he seemed hot in pursuit of someone else, stopped and chatted with me about for more than a few minutes. Fond memories and well wishes were exchanged. And I drifted off with a smile on my face.
The cynical part of me thinks that my genuine smile was in the minority. There was much glad handing, networking and source-building being done around me. But upon reflection, it struck me that although the event has very much come into the 21st century, there’s something very old school about the whole thing. Reporters and their sources, getting together, getting to know each other, putting aside the spin and just enjoying each other’s company. That can’t be bad for reporting.
Next year, we’ll have to figure out a way to have a blogger room.
Cam says: It was a wonderful and incredibly odd evening. Besidese the fake TV tans (something I definitely need to keep in mind if/when the OnTap TV show takes place), there were some dresses that just defied explanation.
Case in point- the woman in her late 50’s who thought it would be fun to wear a dress that looked like four of Warhol’s Campbell soup paintings sewn together. Ma’am, that was mmm, mmm, bad.
Rita Cosby, on the other hand, looked delicious. Seriously. I can’t find a picture of her from Saturday evening, but she’s now surpassed Patti Ann Browne on my AILF list.
The thing I didn’t like was turning into a celebrity-hound. What do I care if Phil Simms is standing ten feet away from me. I wasn’t a Giants fan growing up. And yet there I was, thinking to myself “Wow. That’s Phil Simms. I wonder who else is here?” If I get to go back next year, I really hope I can restrain myself from the oohing and ahhing over the celebrities.
I’m in Bentonville, Arkansas — home of the world’s largest retailer (also a client.)
Business travel is increasingly a fact of life for all of us. It means time away from home and family.
But there’s also an opportunity to discover little gems that you’d never have the chance to experience at home. Like tonight.
I departed my home away from home in search of my evening meal and wound up at the Whole Hog Cafe, sitting in front of a plate of pulled pork, baked beans, and home made cole slaw. Now, I eat barbeque as often as I can in as many places as I can. This was among the best I’ve ever had. Best of all — the Whole Hog isn’t a big chain. There are only three of them in the whole world. And one is right here in Bentonville.
After dinner, I found my way to Andy’s Frozen Custard. There are a handful of Andy’s, scattered around Arkansas, southern Missouri, and Northeast Texas. And the frozen custard is fantastic.
So many people, when they’re on the road, seek out the familiar — the chain places that dot every corner of our modern suburbarn landscape. Not me. Give me a little local flavor every day. That’s what makes being on the road tolerable and, yes, even fun.
Jim: So I checked out Michelle Malkin’s latest Vent, and I have my first major bone to pick with her.
Michelle has positive things to say about the new film, “United 93″, but she has a major problem with a portion of the film’s web site, entitled, “Why do they hate America?” Malkin laments that the section doesn’t mention bin Laden, that it Catholic-bashes because of its references to the Crusades, it blames Israel for jihad, and an attempt to portray Muslims as “the perpetual victim of Western aggression.” She even compares this essay to statements by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. “Universal Studios has some explaining to do. Blaming the victim is no way to honor the heroes of United flight 93,” she concludes.
Stop. Please.
I tried to make the point with Cam on the show the other day. All Universal Studios has done is answer the prayers of everyone who got tired of neo-Nazis and government conspiracies and “Fahrenheit 9/11″ and “Syriana” and “Flightplan” and made a film that portrays our enemies in the war on terror accurately.
I suspect that if “United 93″ bombs, you will not see another major movie dealing with Islamist terrorism for another ten years. (I know Oliver Stone has his “World Trade Center” coming out this summer; I mean that Hollywood will conclude that the market for “America-is-bad” movies will have been demonstratably profitable, but that there’s no market for “al-Qaeda-is-bad.”)
Do I like the “Why do they hate America” essay? No. But I’m not going to get up in arms about it and attack a studio that’s taken an enormous financial and public relations risk to create a film dealing with issues I’ve been clamoring for for a while. Bashing Universal and comparing their web site to Zarqawi just sends the message that even addressing these issues isn’t worth it.
A little perspective is in order. Let’s dial back our perpetual outrage meters back from 11 once in a while, okay?
Marshall: First, I agree with Jim that Universal has gone out on a limb to make this film, and I want to give them credit where credit is due for that. I think Jim is right that if the film bombs, it’s going to send a powerful message to the other studios. I also agree that Michelle, who I very much like, has gone a little overboard on this one.
Having said that, I’ve also read the essay in question on the website. My reaction: it’s not so much slanted as incomplete. For example, the discussion of “modern times” includes nothing about Israel or the history of Islamic terrorism since World War II. The discussion of ancient history is pretty bland and factual, but again, incomplete. That’s a shame. Universal has an opportunity to educate, and they’ve missed it.
It seems the British Judge who recently ruled that author Dan Brown did not plagarize portions of his mega-hit book, Da Vinci Code, decied to have a little fun of his own. The Times of London is on the case:
In another twist to the publishing phenomenon, it was disclosed yesterday that the judge in the recent plagiarism court case included a coded message in his written judgment.
Contained within certain words, Mr Justice Peter Smith wrote certain letters in bold italic. On first inspection, there seems to be no pattern or reason why the letters are chosen and they could be easily viewed as a typographical errors. But Dan Tench, an observant solicitor at the London-based law firm Olswang, thought otherwise. “We’re not sure yet what it means, but we’re working on it,” he said.
Half of Britain is spending their evening piecing together the message. So we’ll leave the deciphering to the decendants of Blechly Park and raise our pint in a toast to Mr. Justice Peter Smith. Outstanding, sir!
Jim: Okay, halfway relevant confession time: I absolutely despise The Da Vinci Code. Not because it’s a bad airport thriller novel, but for the airs that it puts on of “blowing the lid off the hidden truth”! And, of course, the roughly eighty bazillion rip-off novels taking up space in bookstores. Ironically, I love all of the elements of TDVC - secret brotherhoods, lethal and menacing henchmen, exotic locations and a race around the globe for long-lost treasure with mystical/religious significance. (The Raiders of the Lost Ark formula.) But now every thriller has to have meaning, and revealed moral and philosophical truths, blah blah blah.
Also, if you read the comments left on the book’s Amazon page… it’s just depressing the number of people who read this novel - a work of fiction - and completely buy into its premise. To spoil it for the one person who hadn’t heard it yet, TDVC posits that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were an item and had kids and there was a holy bloodline running around long after they departed this earth, and the Vatican has been covering up this shocking revelation for centuries.
What you believe religiously is up to you. But please, please, please don’t change your view of God, Jesus, the Church, Christianity, etc. based on a thriller novel. (In which the Vatican is ruthless and has stunningly lethal and effective hitmen, I add. Right. We can’t weed out pedophiles, but we can whack somebody like Tony Soprano or Ernst Blofeld when we need to. Sure.)
Just a smidgen of legwork and historical research will show you that Dan Brown took a lot of liberties with his portrayal of early church history, and that more facts are aligned against his theory than in favor of it.
Marshall: Whoah. Jim went all serious on me. Not to worry, though. I’m bringing it all back to my new favorite judge.
Seems someone cracked the judge’s code.
And it’s a message about World War I era Admiral Jackie Fisher, the Royal Navy’s visionary leader who came up with the idea for Deadnought battleships and single-handedly transformed naval warfare. Like the judge, I too am a bit of a naval buff, and the fact that he chose to celebrate Admiral Fisher and make a few headlines along the way, absolutely makes my day.
While we engage in a lot of snark here at OnTap, I’d like to think we can recognize good things when they happen as well.
One of those good things: HotAir.com.
This looks to be the perfect blend of video and blogging that I think we all hoped Pajamas Media would be.
Marshall: Leave it to Michelle to do right what others have tried and failed to do. It’s a good site and a good destination. And of course, no one would ever accuse Michelle of being hard on the eyes.
Jim: I’ll give it two cheers. Michelle is, of course, delightful. The graphics beside her have a Weekend-Update-in-the-classic-Dennis-Miller-days feel. But the Vent is, in its current incarnation, just Michelle reciting some of the day’s headlines with a pithy comment or two. It needs either A) an “audience” reacting to her comments or B) some other figure to react to what she’s saying. A person just speaking to the camera is pretty blah, and while I’d rather watch Michelle speak to the camera than most newscasters (let’s face it, many of us would watch Michelle reading the phone book aloud), it’s not all that different than hearing someone read her blog aloud.
But this is something to watch - and something that makes me wish I were back in the U.S. - er, for a longer period - and able to really play with this technology.
Back before men rode into space on the tips of rockets, there was a special breed of adventurer who came to the high desserts of California to go higher, farther and faster than any many alive. They were the test pilots. And in the post World War II era, their contributions were absolutely critical to our security and the development of jet aviation. They put their lives on the line everyday. There were few like them.
One of those men was Scott Crossfield.
Anyone who has read Tom Wolfe’s masterpiece, The Right Stuff, or seen the movie by the same name, got to know a bit about Crossfield. To be sure, we all know Chuck Yeager’s name a little better. But for years, Yeager and Crossfield traded records as each got the first crack at the hot new jets from Lockheed, Gruman, Douglas Aviation and others.
Crossfield loved to fly in a way that very few of us can every appreciate. He survived the most dangerous and deadly form of flying for decades.
And yesterday, on a routine flight back from Alabama to his home in Northern Virginia, he was killed when his Cessna 210 crashed in the mountains of North Carolina. While his death his said, there’s something appropriate about his passing behind the controls of the plane he loved so much doing what he was born to do.
Crossfield was one of the giants of the Twentieth Century. We should all mourn his passing.
Is it just me, or is the “oh so tolerant and accepting of everything” Left a little bigoted and narrow-minded these days?
I mean, from Michelle Malkin’s inbox we see she’s been called a “chink”, a “f***ing slanty-eyed c**t” and other delightful phrases.
You’ve got folks at Meta-Filter wondering about Scott McClellan being gay (a charge they like to throw around like you’re average 14-year old. “Hey McClellan… you’re GAY!! Haw haw haw”).
A sampling:
Between the gay-question-mark that is McClellan, Cheney’s lesbian daughter (complete with same sex life-partner) and gay-operatives like Gannon (plus all the others we HAVEN’T heard about yet)… Not to mention the fact that Bush surrounds himself with unmarried spinster cheerleaders. This administration is practically one big alternative lifestyle showcase.
I thought the Left was supposed to be a little more open minded and tolerant of people who are different than them.
Jim: Sorry, Cam. After the CBS piece, TKS posts, and the lovely Washington Post profile of a lefty blogger who contributes to Daily Kos, it’s hard to come up with anything new to say when individuals on the left vomit forth name calling and nastiness that appall everyone, including their more decent and fair-minded ideological brethren. Of course they’re not “oh so tolerant and accepting of everything” and I’m assuming you “these days” comment was sarcastic. They never were tolerant and accepting. I have to wonder if there is anyone left who actually buys into that line anymore. Of course they’re not “open minded and tolerant of people who are different than them.”
When you compare societies - say, American and Turkish, or American and Chinese, or even Japanese for that matter - you find some groups of people are more tolerant of differences than others. But the folks who e-mail Michelle Malkin or post at Metafilter have never cared about tolerating those who are different; their actions are to attack, insult, smear, and swear at those who think differently. Attacking those who dissent from their worldview is pretty much the purpose of their lives.
And this is why I’ve grown increasingly tired of the blogosphere. What was once shocking is now par for the course. Of course folks are now circulating Malkin’s home address and phone number. If they could physically harm her, they would. Their worldview is that they are inherently good, that those who are on the other side of the ideological divide are irredeemably evil, and that any action - including harassment or worse - is justified, because they’re fighting the good fight. (I’m sure you recall the acts of vandalism and violence that Malkin detailed in the run-up to the election.)
The proliferation of folks who see political differences as a justification for everything from verbal and online abuse to harassment to outright violent attacks is a tremendously disturbing trend… and sadly, I have absolutely no idea how to mitigate this.
Scott McClellan’s leaving. I think in light of Jim’s recent rants, he should be a lock for the job of White House Press Secretary.
Jim: My goal would be to address all inquiries in the manner of Dr. Gregory House. Seriously, relations with the White House are so bad, the Bush administration has little to lose by choosing the most derisive, disrespectful and verbally abusive press secretary they can find.
What follows is Jim’s “Demo Tape” for the job of White House Press Secretary:
Cam, as Helen Thomas: Jim, Iranian President Ahmadnicrazyguy has said that Israel is a “boil on the buttocks of Islamic supremacy. We are the lance that will puncture that festering, pus-filled boil.” Does the President agree with Ahmadnicrazyguy’s assessment of Israel?
Jim: Helen, hold it. Stop right there. I want you to read that question again, silently and in your head, so that none of us have to hear the windy noise of your lips flapping again. Now, have you read the question again in your head?
Helen Thomas: Blargle abrgha ifh ods. Bush lied. How can you look at yourself in the mirror every morning knowing you work for the Devil himself, Mr. Geraghty?
Jim: Damn. I was hoping that your stupid mind contemplating your own stupid question would create such an intense vortex of stupid that your head would implode. Sorry, camera guys in the back, I really tried to get you guys a good visual today.
Cam: Jim, David Gregory. Is it true that in fact, you had relations with several goats while you were living in Turkey?
Jim says: Gregory, I admire your commitment to the twelve step program. However, one of the steps is making amends, and you still haven’t apologized to the American people for wasting our time with your hyperventalating tantrums that you claim are questions.
Gregory: A followup, Jim. Fuck you.
Jim: See you at happy hour, Gregory.
Gregory: Do you know who I am? I am DAVID FUCKING GREGORY OF N-FUCKING-B-FUCKING-C. YOU’RE DEAD, GERAGHTY!!! DEAD!!!! I’LL HAVE YOUR LIVER FOR LUNCH!! (to cameraman) Did you get that on tape? Was it my good side? I’m on “Hardball” tonight.
Jim: Gregory, I’m told liver goes well with chianti, but I don’t want to send you on another bender, so I’ll move on to the mouth breathing wastes of space on the other side of the room… yes, you?
Cam: Jeff Gannon, Talon News. Um… do you work out? And what are you doing after work tonight?
Jim: To the first question, Yes, and to the second, tonight I’m mocking the lefty bloggers who thought outing you was a significant accomplishment.
Cam: Elizabeth Bumiller, NYTimes. With the price of gasoline at 3 dollars a gallon, what does the Bush administration plan to do to address the needs of consumers?
Jim: I’ve recommended tapping into the Strategic Snake Oil Reserve that is currently used to fuel Paul Krugman’s columns.
Cam: Followup. Those columns are behind TimesSelect. Do I understand that the White House is willing to pay for access to the reserves, or are we talking unilateral invasion of the Old Grey Lady?
Jim: I’ve already addressed Helen. Oh, you mean the other Old Gray Lady.
Helen Thomas: Invade me, big boy. I haven’t been invaded since Teddy Roosevelt practiced being a Rough Rider on me. Lemme tell you about him speaking softly and using that big stick.
Jim: To answer… to… AAAHHHH! STOP IT!! I can’t write comedy when you’re freaking ME OUT WITH MENTAL PICTURES LIKE THAT!!!!
Cam: Gotta be able to roll with the punches, Mr. Press Secretary.
Jim: Now, to answer your question on the Times, Well, another untouted success of our war on terror has been our successful containment of Maureen Dowd, Krugman, and others wanted for crimes against logic and the English language behind the TimesSelect barrier. An Electron Curtain has descended on the media, and it has successfully isolated some of the voices that are least helpful to informed public discourse.
Reporter: What about David Brooks?
Jim: Every operation has it risks, and at this point we’re ready to classify him as acceptable collateral damage.
You know, when this mixed-up topsy-turvy world gets to be too much for me, and I just don’t know what to think, I turn to the source of wisdom that never fails to deliver.
You know who I’m talking about. The big man. The guy with all the answers. Fox News analyst Juan Williams.
What to do on Iran was troubling me, until I read Juan’s comments from this week’s Fox News Sunday:
WALLACE: Juan, how worried should we be by what happened in Iran this week?
WILLIAMS: Well, only in limited sense. I mean, obviously, the fact that they are staging what looked like a high school play with that phony backdrop on the stage — that has a lot to do with generating support for what is a troubled regime that has trouble at home and is trying to secure itself and to make themselves out to be, you know, standing against the great United States, against Israel, all the rest.
But according to the experts, there’s no way that they’re going to have the potential to actually use nuclear weapons for many years to come. So in the short term, I don’t think there’s a great deal of need to worry.
It’s the long term — it’s the idea that this guy is going on talking about wiping Israel off the earth, wiping the United States out. And the contrary thing is what about the allies here. You know, this morning the British say they’re not necessarily going to join on board. The Russians…WALLACE: Well, for military action.
WILLIAMS: Right. There’s a lot of just concern about the U.S. taking military action and that it could spawn additional terrorist attacks because it could sort of, you know, create a coherent — it could bring together all of the factions who are interested in perpetrating terrorism, even at a time when we’re trying to get Al Qaida under control.
Amen, Juan! Look, our government has top experts taking their very best guesses on how far the secret Iranian nuclear program has gotten. These are the exact same folks who were in charge of watching the Indian and Pakistani nuclear programs, and they were absolutely certain that each country had nukes… the day that they actually detonated their first tests. And these are the folks who had certified that North Korea was living up to its agreements with the U.S. regarding its nuclear program. And these are also many of the same folks providing the intelligence and analysis on Iraq.
With a record like that, there’s no way these guys blow the call on Iran.
According to their estimates, they’re saying the Iranians won’t have a nuke for many years to come. And let’s remember – it took Americans four whole years to build the first atomic weapons, more or less from scratch while fighting World War Two. Clearly, it will take the Iranians much, much longer to build a weapon today, because they’ve got no resource-draining war going on, much more advanced technology, enormous oil wealth, and all of the expertise and technology provided by the A.Q. Khan smuggling network.
And now we’re hearing all this demonization of Mahmoud Ahmedinijad.
Look, it’s not like the guy took Americans hostage.
And, okay, even if he did, it was a long time ago. Everybody does crazy stuff as a kid. Some of us drive too fast; some of us organize an angry mob to invade sovereign American soil, violate international law and threaten to kill innocent civilians. Let he who is without sin cast the first Kalishnakov round.
Remember, when assessing a threat to the country, don’t get distracted by what a foreign leader is actually saying – “I’m gonna wipe Israel off the map,” “I’m going to punish the unbelieving states,” “we can bring about the return of the Mahdi by triggering Armageddon,” blah blah blah. Always focus on what’s in the background when he speaks. If it’s a “phony backdrop” that looked like “a high school play”, then you can be certain the threat is not all that serious. You look at the threats America has faced in its history, the worst menaces always had terrific production values and spent beaucoup bucks on their stage management. It’s about the visuals.
I’m glad Juan reminds us that the Russians are not on board. Because he’s got the foreign policy compass I like to follow – if Vladimir Putin doesn’t like it, it can’t be good for America. That’s a man we can trust to always keep our best interest in his heart. That goes double for China – we’ve got to remember who our true friends are.
Finally, Juan puts his finger on the pulse of the issue: if we attack Iran in an attempt to stop their nuclear program, we might get hit by terrorists. Could you imagine what would happen if we did something so rash and provocative in Iran that terrorists lashed out at, say, New York City or Washington D.C.? Clearly, we have to avoid that at all costs, and do everything possible to keep ourselves in our current state, where we have no risk of terrorist attacks whatsoever.
Remember – there is no link between Iran and terrorism. And if we attack Iran, the terrorists might hit us back in retaliation. We call this policy “deterrence” – and it works in that Iran is deterring us from doing anything they don’t like.
Finally, Juan puts it all in perspective in a question to Bill Kristol:
WILLIAMS: What if it’s simply the rantings of an impotent and ineffective government, a man who is a religious fanatic, Ahmadinejad, and you are going to therefore take the risk of destabilizing the entire region and possibly kicking off World War III? I think I would urge caution, Bill.
Caution indeed. Ahmadinijad is simply the head of an impotent and ineffective government that might soon have nuclear weapons. He’s not dangerous; he’s just a religious fanatic. And if we don’t react with caution, we might destabilize the entire Middle East. Could you imagine a Middle East where there was open hostility between Israel and its neighbors, suicide bombings in Tel Aviv, terrorists getting elected to office in Palestine, car bombings in Lebanon, violence and terrorism all over Iraq, an extremist insurrection in Afghanistan’s mountains and religious extremism in Saudi Arabia? We have to do everything we can to avoid that scenario coming to fruition.
Thank you, Juan Williams. Thank you for showing us the way.
I’ll leave you with two questions:
1) Is there any truth to the rumor that this web site is going to start testing its contributors for “Sarcasm Steroids”?
2) Does anyone know where I can obtain a “Whizzinator”?
I see that those gloom-and-doom types like Instapundit, Tigerhawk and Rand Simberg are all very upset by the fact that Comedy Central and Borders have refused to have anything to do with material that upsets Muslims – fearing that their indirect support of those who offend the sensibilities of embassy arsonists could lead to firebombings and violence at their stores and offices.
Ladies and gentlemen, when life gives you a lemon, you have to make lemonade. Sure, the First Amendment has been more or less repealed, and we now have something akin to the heckler’s veto – call it, the arsonist’s veto. But I think a lot of us are missing that there’s a great upside to the collapse of the Western ideal of free expression.
As Howard Dean would say, “YOU have the power!” Ideas and arguments that we don’t like can now be removed from public discourse, if we’re smart enough to adopt the proven and effective tactics of Islamist extremists.
Let’s take, for example, Joel Stein. His proud declaration that he doesn’t support the troops bothers me, and I wish he didn’t have the outlet to say it in. Sure, many of us complained, refuted and mocked him, but he continues to write, and the Los Angeles Times continues to publish him.
Now we have another option, much more likely to get the results we need. We just need to scream like a bunch of maniacs, hold up threatening banners (I like “BEHEAD THOSE WHO DON’T SUPPORT THE TROOPS”, but I’m sure you can come up with your own) and find an embassy representing Joel Stein and/or the Los Angeles Times and burn it to the ground. Really, just a little bit of violence, and I’m sure we’ll have newspapers nationwide refusing to even consider publishing ideas we disagree with.
And isn’t that better for everyone?
Or, as many of you know, I’ve got a book coming out later this year. I hope it gets good reviews. I hope it doesn’t get bad reviews. But now, we the people have the power to force publications to only run good reviews. I’m just going to declare my work the “Holy Book” of Geraghtology, and thus any criticism of it is a great sacrilege, that can only be rectified with the purifying fire of fanatical bloodshed against the offenders in the name of the divinity. Once we’ve gotten a few heads on pikes and burned some offices to the ground, our public debates will be exponentially more sensitive – and by that I mean, more sensitive to our hair trigger tempers, uncontrollable fury, and intractible refusal to abide by Western standards of civil discourse and free expression.
If that’s not progress, what is?
It’s important to adapt to changing times. The old ways of public persuasion being a matter of evidence and facts and ideas are long gone, and no amount of wishing is going to bring time back. It’s time to wake up and smell the kerosene.
Today to win a public debate, you don’t need the more effective argument; you need the more effective arsonist.
Cam: I think you’re on to something. Not the whole “burn those who disagree with us” thing, although that might be kinda fun. No, I’m thinking the Church of Geraghtology.
See, there are these tiny little creatures that live in our pancreas and control our every thought and action. The bad creatures are called “Cretins” and the good creatures are called “Jimmies”. The battle between the Cretins and the Jimmies takes place every day, in every one of us. When we do something bad, the Cretins have won a round against the Jimmies. When we do something good, the Jimmies have won a fight against their sworn enemy.
So how do we ensure that the Jimmies win? Well, first we send $10,000 in small unmarked bills to Jim Geraghty. Then we sit back and let him wave his Holy Hands over our pancreas. The healing power of Jim puts the hurt on the Cretins, letting the Jimmies rule the pancreas with tiny iron fists.
Of course, the Waving of the Holy Hands isn’t a permanent thing. For full effect, it needs to be repeated at least once a month. At $10k a pop.
Forget “Vote to Kill”. When are you coming out with “Jimmynetics”?
Marshall: I’m a PR professional. As such, I’m paid to persuade. And I have to say, this whole persuasion by arson thing seems like a fantastic new approach. I’m going to suggest it around the office. See what everyone else thinks. But man, I think we’re pushing the edge of the envelope here. Way to be innovative, Jim.
Cam again Just think of the new ad campaigns!
McDonald’s: You’d better be lovin’ it, unless you want us to burn down your mother&*!$ing house!
Burger King: You want it your way? You want to keep breathing, you’ll eat what we give to you.
Pontiac: Drive excitement. That’s an order, not a request.
Marshall: Just think of the possibilities. They’re endless. And just think of how it will affect our markets. We’ll all be so much happier — we won’t be faced with all of those pesky choices each day. No need to worry about that annoying freedom to do things — we’ll just do what the guy with the biggest bomb tells us. And won’t all that be a relief.