Nothing gets the tongues waggin' at the water cooler like a good old fashioned recall.
And not to wander too far off the point from the git-go, but I'd be down with giving the process a different name.
Something unique.
Because recall, the act of officially calling for the return of someone or something, is, of course, spelled exactly the same way as recall, the action of remembering something.
The sole determination in distinguishing between the two being pronunciation.
One RE-calls a defective automobile. One re-CALLS thinking at the time that buying that car in the first place was a bad idea.
Then, you throw in regional dialects and the whole process breaks down.
In the South, for example, one could very easily be regaled with tales of how you RE-call that time that your P.O.S F-150 got RE-called.
And while all of this might seem a silly ol' splittin' of semantic hairs, the last couple of years have hammered home the puddiny proof that little things like vocabulary, spelling, grammar all matter a whole lot more than ever before.
He said, as covfefe held the smocking gun on the guy demanding he fork over his hamberder.
Least, as near as we can RE-call.
The RE-call that means calling for the return of something, meanwhile, always causes unpresidented concern. Because it always means that while something might be rotten in Denmark, those delightful Danes don't have any corner on screwing the pooch.
A quick Google search and one just as quickly re-CALLS a number of notable call backs.
1982. Tylenol. Supposed tampering causing deaths.
2010. Toyota. Floor mats that had the potential to cause gas pedals to get stuck.
2014. GM. Faulty ignition switches that could shut the engine off without warning.
2016. Samsung. The Galaxy Note 7 had a whimsical way of bursting into flames at inopportune moments. Although one wonders what, exactly, would constitute an opportune moment. We can't RE-call a single one.
Nothing catastrophic, per se, recalled in the year just ended and 2019 is still in training pants, although Consumer Affairs posts a nice list of current recalls, already fairly lengthy. Again, mostly food items that contain one allergen or another. We did notice that Woodlot Shop of Vancouver, BC has recalled 1500 two wicked candles, if you're reading this today and happened to purchase one or some of them. Turns out that once they're lit, there's a sizable risk that the glass jar might crack.
Not an uncommon occurrence, actually, when fire meets glass. And a big ol' "we told you no good could come from two wicks" from our more Evangelical readers.
There is, though, one consumer product that has, surprisingly, not been subject to a massive, newsworthy recall. And we feel an obligation to serve the public by making it known as soon as possible, right here, right now.
Right after this.
Nancy Pelosi wrote Donald Trump a letter that, essentially, dis-invited him from coming to Capitol Hill to deliver the yearly State Of The Union address. The what, when, why, and hows of it all are, of course, available on television, radio, online and, we're pretty sure, the back of the boxes of several best selling breakfast cereals. So, we'll spare you the mindless repetition and move on to the blowback.
Because, as you will all RE-call from our last couple of years together, nobody ever dare hint of a huff or a puff in Donald's direction without anticipating, expecting, hell, even provoking blowback.
Donald wrote Nancy a letter telling her that her planned trip overseas was being postponed, although she could still go if she wanted to fly commercial. Translation: Donald took Nancy's government plane boarding pass away from her. One might even say he RE-called it.
Pretty sure that's the correct pronunciation there because re-CALL would indicate remembering and that wouldn't apply to Donald. Dude can't even re-CALL how to spell hamburger.
Again, for more details, turn on, tune in, log on or turn that box of Captain Crunch around and have at it.
Clearly, the stage has been set, the die has been cast, the stallion has been harnessed to the sulky for a perpetual motion, no, you are, no, YOU are, no, you are, no, YOU are between the bigly executive and the lady with the gavel. We're not ready to call it for one side or the other so early in the race but we will say this.
As any married male will confirm and testify, the man may be the occupant of one House. But the woman is the Speaker of another. And when it comes to power plays, a pair of heels historically beats a single heel every single time.
Jury, and/or eventual impeachment committee, still out on that one for the time being.
Back to defective products.
Perusing through assorted posts and applicable assorted comments regarding assorted posts, I came upon, to no one's surprise at this point in the production, a number of people who were clearly congratulatory toward Donald's denial of Nancy's freedom to fly.
The language was, for the most part, reasonably legible and/or educated, but a little layer peeling revealed a very clear primal presentation. Pretty much ranging from "atta, boy" through some "way to go, dude" right up to and, frankly, smashing right on through to the "you tell that bitch where to get off, big boss man, we gotcha back, Jack."
And this wasn't just the predictable struts and grunts from the part of Donald's demographic that think IQ is that candy ass, snoflake, weird Japanese poetry shit. These "you go, guy"s were from what could ostensibly be called reasonable members of reasonable communities.
As I recall, I wasn't so much surprised by their perspective this time around as much as I was disappointed.
Because, at some point, we all really want to believe that those we respect, but have shown serious signs of defecting from the basically bright club, will realize it's time to give it up and resume their normal IQ. The quotient not the quatrain.
And that's when I realized that defective product could very easily be responsible.
Because I'm convinced beyond doubt that these people consider themselves good Americans, good and decent people, good and decent friends and neighbors, reasonable and willing to see reason, passionate in their beliefs but open minded and, more importantly, smart enough to know that whatever our differences might be, this nation is one, count it, one big boat and we are all in it. Together. Sink or swim.
But, here's how it's still playing out. And apologies for the re-hash, but backstory is key to accuracy here.
The President of the United States wants five billion dollars.
The Speaker of the House says no.
The President of the United States takes the livelihoods of almost a million Americans hostage, demanding the five billion dollars as ransom.
The Speaker of the House refuses to pay ransom.
The President of the United States refuses to end the hostage situation.
The Speaker of the House suggests that, given the unpresidented turmoil, a postponement of the State of the Union might be appropriate or, if preferred, the Constitutional requirement for a report to the nation can be satisfied by a written submission.
The President of the United States rescinds permission for the Speaker to use government aircraft. (For a trip, by the way, which she had already canceled and we'll skip over Melania using government aircraft to head for the Florida weekend)
The whole ten wrongs don't make nine rights summed up this way, earlier this week, when I posted the following.
So now we get inundated with the "by now the shutdown has cost what the wall would have cost" blather....
And again we wander off the point...
You don't hold the livelihoods of Americans for ransom for any reason ever.
You don't give into that kind of demand for ransom for any reason ever.
And holding those livelihoods for ransom would be criminally wrong if it was being done by anyone of any party at any time for any reason.
In this instance it just happens to be Donald.
Donald Trump is holding the livelihoods of a million Americans for ransom.
Nancy Pelosi is refusing to pay the ransom.
Seemingly reasonable people are cheering Donald Trump for "tellin that bitch where to get off, big boss, man, we got yer back, Jack."
The same seemingly reasonable people who obviously consider themselves good Americans, good and decent people, good and decent friends and neighbors, reasonable and willing to see reason, passionate in their beliefs but open minded and, more importantly, smart enough to know that whatever our differences might be, this nation is one, count it, one big boat and we are all in it. Together. Sink or swim.
And that America doesn't negotiate with those who hold our valuables, whatever those valuables might be, for ransom.
There's only one explanation for those people cheering someone doing just that.
Obviously, their mirrors are defective.
They look and the reflection they see is that of a patriot.
Not an enabler.
Not an accessory after the fact to extortion.
Surely they remember a time when that kind of behavior would be unacceptable to anyone, no matter what their political position.
Clearly, they're unable to recall.
No comments:
Post a Comment