Brainstorming Fingernail Advertisements (Mental Calisthenics)

As if we are not already overwhelmed with advertisements, I am told that one can now earn money by placing advertisements on one’s fingernails. I am not quite sure how that would work. Would one be paid so much per square inch? Would those whose fingernails are more in the public eye, such as piano and guitar players, earn more than a person who has to wear gloves all day at work? Would women with attractive feet be able to wear open-toed shoes and get paid for placing advertisements on their toenails? Would the sale of anti-fungus products for fingernails and toenails increase? Would extra-long artificial nails increase the value of the rental space? Would manicure and pedicure shops have an increase in their business? Would payment for such services be tax deductible as a business expense? What kinds of products might be advertised? Would Onychoschizia (the splitting of nails) qualify one for worker’s compensation? As you can see, it gets complicated. Would fingers and toes of celebrities be insured for millions of dollars?

If fingernails and toenails could be rented out for advertising, how about other parts of the human anatomy. Imagine going to the beach and seeing scantily-clad, nubile women who rent out their boobs and butt cheeks for advertisements. Since the purpose of advertising is to draw attention to the product advertised, what better “billboards” are available? Would the rental space be sold by the square inch, so that a well-endowed young lady might be able to retire after a few years of acting as a billboard? What kinds of products would be advertised on boobs and butt cheeks? And don’t forget that huge space on the back that would be suitable for advertisements. Women wearing evening dresses without backs could earn extra money while on dates.

Male hunks could walk around shirtless and sell advertising on their biceps and pecs. They would be sure to draw the attention of the ladies. What kinds of products might they advertise?

Baldheaded men could rent out all that space going to waste on top of their heads. Would they be paid so much per square inch of space? Of course they couldn’t wear caps or hats. Would the sale of sun protective screen products increase as men try to protect their “billboards”? Would the sale of toupees decrease as men start to cash in on all that valuable space up there? What kinds of products would be suitable for advertising on a man’s bald spot? Would men start shaving their heads so that almost every male looked like Andre Agassi? Would a man with hair on his head start wearing a cap or a hat to cover up his embarrassing hirsute condition?

And, of course, nudist camps and nude beaches would offer up still more possibilities.

If you wish, feel free to continue this brainstorm on fingernail advertising.

Getting the Last Words

“And these are the last words I have to say
It's always hard to say goodbye
But now it's time to put this book away
Ain't that the story of my life”

(From the lyrics to “Famous Last Words” by Billy Joel)

“Don’t let it end like this. Tell them I said something.” (Last words of Pancho Villa)

When I was fourteen years old, I saw a man die. He was the father of a friend of mine, and I was visiting the friend in his home when the father had a heart attack. A doctor was called and soon arrived. The man was lying on a sofa, and the doctor shouted, “Get his wife over here quickly. He has something he wants to say to her.” They talked for less than a minute, and his last words to her were, “I love you.“ Then he was gone. In a way, the man was fortunate; not everyone gets an opportunity to say last words.

When the grim reaper comes, I find it fascinating to read the last words of people from all walks of life at different periods in history. These are some of my favorites because the last words of these individuals usually reflected their outlook on life as they were living it.

I can't sleep.
~~ James M. Barrie, author, d. 1937
Now comes the mystery.
~~ Henry Ward Beecher, evangelist, d. March 8, 1887
I am about to -- or I am going to -- die: either expression is correct.
~~ Dominique Bouhours, French grammarian, d. 1702

Now I shall go to sleep. Goodnight.
~~ Lord George Byron, writer, d. 1824
I must go in, the fog is rising.
~~ Emily Dickinson, poet, d. 1886

I’ve had a hell of a lot of fun and I've enjoyed every minute of it.
~~ Errol Flynn, actor, d. October 14, 1959
Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.
From Luke 23:46
~~ Jesus Christ

I knew it. I knew it. Born in a hotel room - and God damn it - died in a hotel room.
~~ Eugene O'Neill, writer, d. November 27, 1953
Either that wallpaper goes, or I do. (Note: The wallpaper didn’t go.)
~~ Oscar Wilde, writer, d. November 30, 1900

How about this for a headline for tomorrow's paper? French Fries.
Executed in electric chair in Oklahoma.
~~ James French, d. 1966
I'd like to thank my family for loving me and taking care of me. And the rest of the world can kiss my ass.
Executed by injection, Texas.
~~ Johnny Frank Garrett, Sr., d. February 11, 1992

I should never have switched from Scotch to Martinis."
--Humphrey Bogart, actor, 1899-1957
"What is the answer? ... {Silence} ... In that case, what is the question?"
--Gertrude Stein, writer, 1874-1946
Crito, I owe a cock to Asclepius. Will you remember to pay the debt? (Socrates).

"That guy's got to stop... He'll see us." - James Dean (1931-1955)
It has all been very interesting. -- Lady Mary Wortley Montagu
Make my skin into drumheads for the Bohemian cause. -- John Ziska
"Doctor, do you think it could have been the sausage?" Paul Claudel(1868-1955)

It has been said that some people plan their last words with the goal of coming up with something memorable. Assuming that I will be in a position to offer last words, I think mine will be, “I’m just a whit tired. I think I’ll rest for awhile.”

Can you think of any last words to add to this list? Have you rehearsed your own last words? What are they?

There Is a New Word for It

Remember when the word “couch potato” first arrived in the 1970s. Very few words have a birthday so precisely known as couch potato. It was on July 15, 1976, we are told, that couch potato came into being, uttered by Tom Iacino of Pasadena, California, during a telephone conversation. He was a member of a Southern California group humorously opposing the fads of exercise and healthy diet in favor of vegetating before the TV and eating junk food (1973). Because their lives centered on television--the boob tube (1966)--they called themselves boob tubers. Iacino apparently took the brilliant next step and substituted potato as a synonym for tuber. Thinking of where that potato sits to watch the tube, he came up with couch potato.

And now the editors at Webster’s New World College Dictionary and Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary have given a release of some of the new words to be featured in their dictionaries in late 2006. One of the new words is - take a guess - you got it! -“mouse potato”. One doesn’t have to strain the brain to deduce its meaning as “one who vegetates before a computer monitor surfing the web or blogging”. Are you a “mouse potato”?

Another word of interest to appear in the new edition of the dictionaries is “himbo” meaning a young, handsome hunk of a man, but one who is foolish, inept, stupid, inconsequential, or contemptible. This word, I presume, is the male version of “bimbo”, a young woman, especially one who is promiscuous or unintelligent and is viewed as just a sex object.

Do you live in a “slurb”? There is another word that deserves a second glance. What is a slurb? A slurb is “a suburb of wearisomely uniform and usually poorly constructed houses“. And Lord knows, we have lots of those around here.

And here is a new word for the 21st century - “polyamory - the state or practice of having more than one open romantic relationship at a time.” Here is a post I did earlier this year titled “Jill’s Dilemma”. It involves a polyamorous relationship:

Jill is faced with a dilemma. She has two menfriends, Jack and Zack, who love her and want to marry her. Jill loves Jack, but she says she is not in love with him. She is in love with Zack, but she says she is not sure she loves him. What is the difference between loving someone and being in love with someone? Which man do you think Jill should marry and why should she make that choice?

The first time I heard the word “wasband” used to refer to an ex-husband was by Carla on her post titled “The Valkyrie”. This term is a clever and euphonious blend of the words “was” and “husband“. I think the word was first coined somewhere around 1990. Another clever woman refers to her two exes as “hasbeends.

Another new word that reflects today’s scene is “dirt pill”. Today’s indoor children are given a dirt pill containing a mixture of different strains of probiotic bacteria and antioxidants to replicate the missing childhood exposure and help them develop the immunity they missed by not eating dirt. When I was growing up, we didn’t have a dirt pill. My parents just told us to go outside and play in the dirt.

“Gayborhood”. This colorful word was coined to describe a section of a city frequented mostly by gay people. Every city has such a neighborhood. In our city it is a section called Hillcrest, a “gayborhood” noted for its gay bars and clubs.

To get your attention, the last word I will present is the word “bling-bling” or “bling”, which refers to flashing jewelry worn especially as an indication of wealth. The word also can make a broad reference to expensive and ostentatious possessions. I think it is about time for me to put my bling-bling computer to bed before I become a mouse potato.

Democrats Get Mugged on Path to 11/7

If one wants to know why the Democrats protested so much the televising of the two-part filmed mini-series titled “The Path to 9/11”, only a little bit of investigation is required to discover what is really going on.

First, let us take a look at Cyrus Nowrasteh, the author of the script and producer of the two-part mini-series. Who is Cyrus Nowrasteh? A little bit of googling indicates that he is an ultra-conservative and a friend of Rush Limbaugh. In fact, he sent Rush and some of the other right-wing radio hosts an advance copy of the film, but he refused to send copies to Bill Clinton and the others who were vilified in the film.

If you want to know what is really happening, please follow me on this path. The San Diego Union Tribune, our local Republican newspaper, followed up the film with an editorial the next day, Tuesday. I am going to give you the main parts of the editorial with some of my asides in parentheses as follows.

First, the editorial begins:

“It’s hard to decide which drama was more frustrating to watch - “The Path to 9/11, “ the ABC television miniseries about events leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, (ten of the “events” in the film never happened. They were made up in the mind of Nowresteh. )or the ones behind the scenes where prominent Democrats tried to strong -arm the network to edit the miniseries to their liking or scrap it altogether.” (Clinton pointedly refuted several fictionalized scenes that he claimed insinuated that he was too distracted by the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal to care about bin Laden and that a top adviser pulled the plug on CIA operatives who were just moments away from capturing bin Laden.)

(The former president also disputed the portrayal of then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright as having tipped off Pakistani officials that a strike was coming, giving bin Laden a chance to flee. I wonder why Clinton got so upset just because what was said about him and Albright never happened?)

The editorial continues:

“It was depressing to see, as confirmed elsewhere, (Where?- certainly not in the report of the 9/11 Commission) that American intelligence officials were so hot on the trail of Osama bin Laden even before Sept. 11 and, at one point, so close to ridding the world of this menace.” (Nowrasteh's most egregious fictionalizing occurs in Act 4, which depicted a supposed strike on bin Laden's Afghan redoubt that was called off at the last second by Sandy Berger, Clinton's national security advisor, who said, "I don't have that authority." Under cover of night, a CIA agent known only as "Kirk" supposedly led a Special Forces team into the remote mountain compound where the al-Qaida chief was hiding. "The package is ready!" cried Kirk over the satellite phone but, according to the film, Berger aborted the operation because he didn't want to take responsibility. That incident never occurred. It is pure fiction out of the mind of Nowrasteh.)

(Had Nowrasteh consulted the 9/11 Commission report, he would have found no evidence to support the exciting imaginary assault on the bin Laden compound. The report states explicitly, as Clarke and other senior officials have affirmed, that Clinton and Berger ordered the CIA and the military to use any force necessary to get bin Laden. Can you see where this is going? First, the film rewrites history as fiction, and then the Republican editorial reports fiction as fact!)

The editorial continues:

“But it was downright infuriating to see Democrats, including former President Clinton and leaders of the Senate, resort to pressure or threats to try to censor material they found politically inconvenient. (Is it censorship to insist that historical events be reported factually, especially when to do otherwise vilifies those who were in office at that time?) (“Politically inconvenient“? Yes, when it is a lie designed to influence the upcoming midterm elections.)

The editorial continues:

"Other officials, including former national security advisor Sandy Berger and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, also raised objections over how they were portrayed in the film....” ( I should think so, since the portrayal is based on events that never occurred. The movie showed former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright thwarting a missile strike against bin Laden's desert camp by warning his Pakistani friends in advance. That never happened . As for Sandy Berger, that incident never occurred, either. It was all a rewriting of history, of what actually happened. It was fiction.)

The editorial continues:

“Here’s the good news (Depending on your point of view.) Although ABC did apparently make a few edits ...the cuts were minor (Unfortunately!) and didn’t change one of the main points of the film - that there was plenty of blame to go around (Really?) and that the Clinton administration missed various opportunities to get bin Laden. (According to Richard Clarke, White House anti-terrorism czar under Clinton and Bush, his former assistant Roger Cressey and others with direct knowledge of the circumstances, Clinton "approved every request made of him by the CIA and the US military involving [the use of force] against bin Laden and Al Qaeda. Planned operations to take out bin Laden either by ground assault or missile strike didn't happen because senior intelligence and military officials told the president that they could not be conducted successfully.)

(The script downplays the neglect of terrorism as a primary threat by the incoming Bush team -- and never mentions the counterterrorism task force, chaired by Vice President Dick Cheney, that never met for nine months before 9/11.)

Well, here we are at the end of the path. I hope you found the journey interesting and enlightening. If Nowrasteh had consulted the 9/11 Commission report, not only would he have found no evidence to support his exciting imaginary assault on the bin Laden compound, but he would also have learned that the underlying assumptions were completely wrong. The report states explicitly that Clinton and Berger ordered the CIA and the military to use any force necessary to get bin Laden. But then, again, Nowrasteh would not have been able to produce this propadrama, which is being used throughout the nation by Republican editorial writers to quote fiction as fact so that it favors their Party. If they can get the voters to think about the Clinton administration, then perhaps they will forget about all the failures of the Bush administration.

The Used War Salesman

This past Monday evening, in between Parts One and Two of the television film titled “The Path to 9/11”, I watched our President deliver his “non-political” speech commemorating the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers. Before viewing the speech, I decided to create a form which would allow me to analyze the speech.

On the form I created, I tried to anticipate the words and phrases that I thought he might use in the speech and listed those in the left hand column. The right column was reserved for tallying the references as they were made. After the speech, which was supposed to honor those who died on 9/11, this is what I discovered:

Number of References Made to 9/11: 8
Number of References Made to Iraq: 18
Number of References Made to Saddam: 3
Number of References Made to War on Terror and Terrorists: 16
Number of References Made to al-Qaeda: 1

Number of References Made to Afghanistan: 2
Number of References Made to Weapons of Mass Destruction: 1
Number of References Made to Fear: 2

Number of References Made to Evil: 1
Number of References Made to Homeland Security: 1
Number of References Made to Promoting Stability and Peace 1
If a direct reference to Osama bin Laden was made, I missed it: 0

Next, let us total the references made to Iraq, Saddam, War on
Terror and Terrorists, WMD, Evil, and Promoting Stability and
Peace in the Middle East 40

Total number of references made to 9-11, al-Qaeda, Afghanistan,
Fear, and Homeland Security 14

The President used almost three-fourths of his “non-political” speech to try to sell his failed policies in Iraq to American voters and only about one-fourth in actual commemoration of 9/11. If a relative or friend of mine had died in that 9/11 event, I would have been grossly insulted by the President’s speech. Has this administration no shame or honor, exploiting as it did for political purposes a day that had been set aside to honor those who died there on that day five years previously?

The plot that brought down the Twin Towers was hatched in Afghanistan by al-Qaeda, yet they got a combined total of only three references out of the fifty-four made in the speech. I heard no direct reference made to Osama bin Laden, the chief architect of the attack. That combined with the eight references to 9/11 gives us a total of eleven references directly related to the events of 9/11. Eleven references out of 54 at an event commemorating 9/11. Incredible - and disgusting!

During the Vietnam conflict, someone once accused President Nixon of being a “used war salesman” as he tried to generate national support for his failed policies in that war. I fear this President is doing the same.