Header Image (book)


Wednesday, April 1, 2015

Midweek Political Satire

(Note: Active discussion ongoing at the blog post just below this one)

Spew Alert!


  1. I think we need a larger cup... super venti?

  2. Caspar Milquetoast is sitting at a bar nursing a Tom Collins in quiet solitude.

    Bluto the Bully walks into the bar, spots Milquetoast, invades Milqueoast's space, pushes his face close to Milqueoast's ear and snarls, "I wanna talk about religion and politics."

    Clearly Milqueoast does't want to talk to anyone abut anything. He simply wants to enjoy his drink in peace, so he doesn't respond; he just continues to stare fixedly into his glass.

    However, this doesn't deter Bluto one whit, so Bluto snarls more emphatically, "I SAID I wanna talk about religion and politics."

    "Well, I don't," says Milquetoast pulling a revolver out of his jacket pocket, and without giving Bluto time to respond shoots him through the temple. Bluto falls dead on the spot.


    1. Do you think Milquetoast is

    A. oversensitive?

    B. perfectly justified?

    C. out of his mind?

    D. acting out of fear?

    E. acting out of malice?

    2. Who is the aggressor in this scenario –– Bluto? –– or Milquetoast?

    3. Which one engages your sympathy most?

    1. I would be sympathetic with Milquetoast if the wimp weren't drinking a Tom Collins of all things.

    2. A Tom Collins? I haven't thought about one of those in decades!

      Do they still make Tom Collins mix?

    3. We can always depend on Canardo to divert attention away from the POINT, can't we? WHEW!

      What bugs me is the way almost EVERYONE follows his lead and lets him GET AWAY with it.

    4. FT,
      I must admit that the mention of a Tom Collins was somewhat nostalgic for me. A Tom Collins was the first kind of mixed drink that I ever had -- well, except for Dad's mint juleps, which he made with the mint growing in our front yard.

    5. FT,
      I think that I'll go with B. perfectly justified!

      Back in the day, when Mr. AOW was bartending at our local VFW, discussion of both religion and politics at the bar was banned. For good reason! Whenever either of those topics came up, a fight broke out.

    6. Let me tell you a little secret, AOW: I never drank Coca Cola or Seven Up or Root Beer when i was a little kid. I drank TOM COLLINS MIX.

      I have to admit I haven't seen any in years, because I grew out of that when I went to college, but now that I think of it, it would be nice to have some on hand. It's still the best carbonated "soft drink" I ever tasted.

      I'm very lucky, because i have a low tolerance for alcohol -- I must be the cheapest drunk on the planet –– it doesn't agree with me, so I never became a "drinker," thank God.

  3. The definition of WELFARE; a government program for poor or unemployed people that helps pay for their food, housing, medical costs, etc. Also, the state of being happy, healthy, or successful. A Government-provided support for those unable to support themselves. In the United States, it is undertaken by various federal, state, and local agencies under the auspices of different programs, the best known of which are Aid to Families with Dependent Children, and food stamps.
    The definition of CHARITY; the voluntary giving of help, typically in the form of money, to those in need. Also; help or money given voluntarily to those in need, as in “an unemployed teacher living on charity”

    Now, NOWHERE in either of those definitions do I see the word CAREER, or making a CAREER of getting Government-provided CHARITY and there are millions in this nation that have made a CAREER OF BEING WELFARE LEECHES, WELFARE QUEENS, CRIMINALS that rape the system, and thus the taxpayers of this nation as they lounge around the house, hang around the streets, watching TV, drinking, smoking dope, dealing dope, stealing form stores, engaging in acts of prostitution and any number of nefarious activities.

    I am talking about able-bodied men and women that are robbing YOU and ME of our hard earned dollars so that they don’t have to go to work.

    I fully understand that a person or a family can fall on hard times and as such are in need of a HAND UP, not a hand out. Food stamps can mean the difference between feeding you and your kids or going hungry.

    I understand that a needy mother or father want to improve their lot, perhaps through education, in life in order to provide a good life for themselves and their children.

    I understand that a worker can become disabled due to injury or health issues, and in some cases those individuals may need long term benefits, and in many instances they have worked their entire lives, paying into the Social Security fund and are entitled to the financial and health benefits they receive.

    Then we have the aforementioned slugs of humanity that scam the system and take money from those that actually NEED it as opposed to those that just steal from all of us. I’m talking about the phonies who collect Food Stamps, and other Free Stuff, just because they can. And make a CAREER of it.

    Advocates for the poor say there aren’t enough jobs and volunteer positions available to recipients, especially in rural areas, forcing them to lose their benefits and turn instead to their local food banks.

    According to the Obama administration unemployment is at some kind of all-time low due to the incredible leadership of Obama but this article says there aren’t enough jobs to go around.

    I wonder what all of those poor people that Maine cut off who aren’t disabled and don’t have children are going to do now?

    Putting them to work sounds good to me; hard labor, building roads and infrastructure to help repay this nation and those truly in need for all the money they stole from us.

    Twenty years on a prison road gang, doing repairs and cleaning the countryside would be very appropriate in my opinion. Sadly, that won’t happen, if they go to prison they work out, watch TV and sit in air conditioned lounges.

    If unemployment fraud, welfare, food stamps and social security fraud could be stopped in all 50 states I have to wonder; how much would that effect the budget? And just think, the government itself is guilty of massive over-spending.

    Touchy-feely Liberalism sure is awesome huh?

    1. Again, Al, as I just said over at Lisa's place: You make perfect sense, but you make an AWFUL LOT of it all in one place.

      I'm a wordy kind of guy, myself, so I understand how it can be –– after all," it takes one to know one" –– but if we want anyone to pay attention to what we're saying, it's best to take Bill O'reilly's advice and "keep it pithy."

      Besides, we're preaching to the choir here most of the time. We already KNOW these things. A hostile leftist would NEVER give any of US the benefit of the doubt, so making it snappy might help snare more favorable attention from them, who knows?

      Anyway, good luck to you, Al.

    2. FT, Great point. No way a libtard will read all that. Simply not possible fort them, which is why the libtard pols only speak in talking points. They figured that out long ago.

  4. "Idea?
    Spew Alert!"

    @ STARBUCKS, fat chance!

    "3. Which one engages your sympathy most?"
    Neither one!

    @ Trashmouth,


  5. "3. Which one engages your sympathy most?"

    Neither one!

    That's too bad.

  6. Given the pay, I don't know why baristas wouldn't want to talk about income discrepancy.

    1. Because they're not brainwashed, hopelessly indoctrinated proglodytes like you, Canardo.

      You Marxists have made "equality" a dirty word with your warped outlook and twisted thinking, damn you.


We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective