The Whitehouse seems to think that Saddam will use human shields, but I never got the point of those. If I were going to have a shield, I’d rather have steel or something. People, on the other hand, just ain’t that good at stopping a bullet. Sure, if it hits a bone, that may work, but you know that’s not guaranteed. Instead, it will probably just go through the intestine and still be going pretty fast upon exit.
I guess the idea of the human shield is that we’d not want to kill these people. That’s just silly. The human shields are going to be Iraqis and liberal protestors, people everyone hates and wants dead. Some may say that the Iraqi civilians have never done anything against us, but, then I rejoin with, “Well what the hell have they done for us?” In these trying times, I think our standard for not getting bombed should not be so simple as someone not being a threat, but they should also have to shower us in riches and praises…. or at least buy us coffee. Only those who flatter us should not be smoten by our awesome might.
If you want a good shield, I say use puppies. Build a fortress out of kennels filled with playful puppies. Then have more puppies running around, chasing a ball or having a tug of war with a piece of rope. Then, when they give the briefing to the troops and show them video of their target, everyone will be like, “Hey, look at all the cute little puppies.” And even the most hard-hearted Marine upon seeing a thousand cute little puppies will say, “That’s got to be six more puppies than I ever thought I could personally kill.”
Of course, Rumsfeld, who swallows puppies whole for sport, will then yell, “Those puppies sympathize with the enemy! They must suffer, then die! After this operation is over, I want enough puppy skulls to shingle my roof!” That’s Rumsfeld, always the voice of reason.
The other problem with using puppies is that then the Chinese and the Koreans would want to help us.
I bet they love puppies enough to bomb America.
“Well what the hell have WE done for us?”
Is it supposed to be “we” or “they”? If “we”, it’s actually funnier because it makes no sense.
D’oh.
Dude, you have got to learn to use apostrophes correctly. Allow me to demontrate:
“That puppy is Sarah’s.” This is an example of the possesive case, the only instance where an apostrophe is used to add an ‘s’ to a word or name.
“We’ve got lots of puppies.” This is the plural case. Note that in both plural words, no apostrophe is used, because neither of them is possesive.
Now that you know the difference, I expect you to get it right. Otherwise I’ll be forced to come pay you a visit, and no one will be happy if that happens. When I ‘visit’ people, baby Jesus cries.
As long as you correcting stuff, could you also fix your second sentence. I had to read it 3 times, before I understood what you meant (The missing if and the homophone “steal” threw me).
‘Course I could just be not as quick as most of your other readers
Geez, if you keep up like this, I’m going have to open up a premium site where there’s editing. Everyone else will have to settle for what I’m able to type out in the morning before I have coffee.
And Ministrel, be a prick like that again and your banned. Where did I use the apostrophe wrong, you dumb f***?
Shouldn’t that be “you’re” instead of “your”?
XOXO,
Jamie
I managed to sneak a picture of the human shields boarding their buses in London.
Take a close look at this.
That’s it! Everyone is banned!
No, I’m not banned, you liar.
;p
Anyway, I liked the post, and didn’t notice any grammar crap. It was funny.
Elliot can stay.
Think Home Depot will have those shingles anytime soon?
Good post. As always, Rumsfeld just clinched it at the end.
“Shouldn’t that be “you’re” instead of “your”?”
XOXO,
Jamie
Actually it would be “you’ll” be banned.
People who get free ice cream should NOT be complaining.
I LOVE you, Frank J., and I will NEVER complain about your posts!
🙂
Pamela can stay as well.
Please don’t lump me with that Minstrel jack*ss. I love your stuff and only mentioned it ‘cus I thought it took away (albeit very slightly) from the otherwise spot-on observation. BTW, I wasted fifteen fricking minutes trying to find the supposed possessive error. I got to get a life!
Things as funny as this should be considered grammatically irrelevant.
Jeez, enjoy the humor. Worry about your 5th grade class’ punctuation.
I was going to post a corrected version of this IMAOism on my site in order to get some more hatred and delinking, but it looks like most of the errors have already been corrected. Drat!
But this may do the trick: shouldn’t “smoten” be “smitten”?
Rumsfeld needs to be more environmentally conscious with that. Only using puppy skulls? Why, when he can use the fur to make himself a new wardrobe?
Some men hunt for sport,
Others hunt for food,
The only thing I’m hunting for,
Is an outfit that looks good…
See my vest, see my vest,
Made from real gorilla chest,
Feel this sweater, there’s no better,
Than authentic Irish setter.
See this hat, ’twas my cat,
My evening wear – vampire bat,
These white slippers are albino
African endangered rhino.
Grizzly bear underwear,
Turtles’ necks, I’ve got my share,
Beret of poodle, on my noodle
It shall rest,
Try my red robin suit,
It comes one breast or two,
See my vest, see my vest,
See my vest.
Like my loafers? Former gophers –
It was that or skin my chauffeurs,
But a greyhound fur tuxedo
Would be best,
So let’s prepare these dogs,
Condi: Kill two for matching clogs,
Rummy: See my vest, see my vest,
Oh please, won’t you see my vest.
OK, so it’s not perfect, but it’s still funny.
So funny I almost pissed myself. Better keep a watchful eye out for PETA protests, though. They’ll likely try to take you out for this outrageous mockery, ninja-style.
Oscar,
“Smoten”, like Josh comment, is a Simpsons reference.
I see — thanks.
I think I enjoy the Simpsons as much as anyone, but I can never keep in mind all of these great references.
Does that mean you won’t hate me more? Great post, as usual, by the way.
Hey, I’m new to your site, and I must say that you rule, man! I haven’t laughed out loud at my computer screen very often in my life, and so today was special.
Rumsfeld’s “they must suffer, then die!” had me in stiches.
And nice Simpson references…
Oscar,
No, the past tense of “smite” is “smote.” Someone who’s smitten is infatuated, which I really don’t think was the intended meaning.
Frank,
I for one caught the Simpsons reference. Besides, people who have nothing better to say in comments than grammatical corrections should have THEIR puppies eaten by starving hordes of North Koreans.
David:
No. Yes, smote is the past tense of smite. But smitten (or smote) is the past participle of smite. I don’t think you’ll find “smoten” in any dictionary (outside of Springfield).
Oscar is right… except that he is officialy hated by this site which makes him wrong. Smoten is the past participle of smite, and smitten is an abbrevation for super mitten.
Smote! Smoot! Smeet! Smeeten! Smooten! Smatten! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!
Civilians deliberately acting as human shields are war criminals: it’s O.K. to shoot them.
And then there’s smoot, which is a unit of measurement only ever used for a bridge across the Charles in front of MIT (it’s as long as a guy named Smoot was tall), but I digress.
Lou: yes, that’s absolutely correct.
And let’s not forget moot, which only matters to lawyers.
Frank J:
You may have already read this, but I think Jonah Goldberg’s been reading (or channelling) you:
In the 2/10/2003 NRODT, he wrote (in “Soy Vey, My agonizing days as a vegan”):
“My conversations with my boss had all the conviviality of Don Rumsfeld trapped in an elevator with the defense correspondent from High Times magazine.”
That might make a good “In My World”…
Mootness doesn’t even matter to all lawyers: the state courts here in Florida tend to ignore it and, as annoying as I find them doing so, they’re probably right to (in much the same way that a stopped clock is eventually right). However, I shall now wisely refrain from anything resembling a lecture on the jurisdiction of federal courts (where mootness really does matter), and instead suggest that we should probably also mention the stoat, which is related to the weasel. Amazing, isn’t it, how all intelligent conversations ultimately default to bashing the French? (Which is a good thing, of course.)
Do those puppy skull shingles come with any kind of warranty?
Puppy problem? Call White Glenn.
Dude, Frank… I love your stuff. If the grammar bothers these people so much, why don’t they do their own apostrophe-correct blogging? I work all day typing medical reports… I want to come home and read something not pixel perfect. By the way, what’s the plan of attack on these mongrel spammers? Damned canadian pharmacy and the like.