This is the story of the first graduate.

A man is seated in an airliner, which is about to take off when another man with a Labrador retriever occupies the empty seats next to him.
The lab is situated in the middle, and the man is looking quizzically at the dog when the second man explains they work for  the airline.

The airline rep said,”Don’t mind Sniffer; he is the best sniffing dog  there is. I’ll show you once we get airborne when I put him to work.

The plane takes off and levels out when the handler says to the first man,”Watch this”. He tells the dog, “Sniffer search”.
Sniffer jumps down, walks along the aisle and sits next to a woman for a  few seconds, then returns to its seat and puts one paw on the
handlers arm. He says “Good boy.”

The airline rep turns to the first man and says, “That woman is in possession of marijuana, so I’m making note of this and her seat
number for the police who will apprehend her on arrival.”

“Fantastic!” replies the first man.

Once again he sends Sniffer to search the aisles. The lab sniffs
about, sits down beside a man for a few seconds and returns to its seat,and places two paws on the handlers arm. The airline rep says,
“That man is carrying cocaine, so again I’m making note of this and his seat number.”

“I like it!” says the first man.

A third time the rep sends Sniffer to search the aisles. Sniffer goes up and down the plane and after a while he sits down
next to someone. He then comes racing back, jumps up onto his seat, and poops all over the place.
The first man is really grossed out by this behavior from a supposedly well trained sniffing dog and asks,”Whats going on?”

The handler nervously replies,”He just found a bomb!”

_________________________________________________________________________

In regard to the now pending rather nebulous health care bills, Washington is wondering which statement of a former President of the United States is President Obama following — Abraham Lincoln or George W. Bush:

Abraham Lincoln: You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time. or

George W. Bush: “You can fool  some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.”

(I’m not sure Pres. Bush ever said those words, but it is urban legend that he did, so who am I to argue with that.)

Las Vegas is laying 10 to 1 that Obama is following the quotation of President Bush – hard to believe. He may deny it, but facts are facts.

In a remarkable example of how not to represent a client, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has filed a brief in the case of a gay couple suing the federal government to invalidate the Defense of Marriage Act which was enacted by Congress in 1996. 

The DOJ position will satisfy neither those in favor of gay marriages nor those opposed to them.

The DOJ has said in their brief that they are required by law to defend federal statutes as long as reasonable arguments can be made for their constitutionality (Score One Point for those opposed to Gay Marriage). They also said  that, although it is required by law to support the law, “even if it disagrees with a particular statute as a policy matter, as it does here” (Score One Point for those in favor of Gay Marriage).    

It’s a tie game – now we go into overtime – where we citizens get to ask a question. “What gives the DOJ the right to disagree with a law as a matter of policy?”  The DOJ is the attorney for the United States of America. While individual attorneys employed by the DOJ may have a right to disagree with any law they choose, the Department itelf should have no right to agree, or disagree, with a law. That is not its function. It is the attorney for the government. The opinion of the DOJ, as a matter of policy, should be totally irrelevant and, eGrumps submits,  should not ever appear in a legal brief it is filing with the Court.

If it feels it cannot represent the United States in supporting a law duly enacted by Congress because it doesn’t agree with it, it should recuse itself and hire independent Counsel.

As the President said – he believes the act should be repealed by Congress. That’s fair enough – with an overwhelming majority in both houses of Congress, go to Congress to have it repealed. Mr. President, don’t have your DOJ say we don’t agree with the law, but we are required to enforce it (that’s our duty under the Constution), and oh, by the way, learned Judges, you shouldn’t rule in our client’s favor just because Congress wrote the law we are sworn to defend. Frankly, we don’t believe in the law, no matter what we say in our “objective” briefs filed with the Court. (“Justices, thanks for your understanding”)

It is a slippery slope where the DOJ, or any Governmental Agency, can enforce, or decline to enforce,  a law with its fingers crossed behind its back.

Bowing to popular pressure, President Obama, after stating that there were no “Death Panel” provisions in any portion of the proposed Obamacare health bills, has ordered the non-existing provisions deleted from the proposed law. No longer  would “dying with dignity” be considered, rather “dying without dignity” would be the operative criteria.

In lieu of the removal of such non-existent provisions, he has announced that the new Law, whatever its final form, would establish “End Game Commissions.”     

 All senior citizens, together with those entering nursing homes, hospitals, hospices, assisted living facilities and those moving in with their children or grandchildren would be asked to be interviewed by one of the End Game Commissions that would be established. Each commission would be staffed by at least one medical doctor, one nurse practitioner and one trained hospice person. Cookies, cakes and coffee would always be available. No law would be signed, he stressed,  that did not contain the free cookie provision.

At the meeting, the Senior would be explained the disadvantages of Dying Without Dignity and the effect it would have on the surviving relatives and friends, not to mention society-as-a-whole.

Because of the fact that Seniors may have trouble getting to the Commission locations, he was recommending that each Commission have a “Dying-Without-Dignity Motor Home” which could go the the location of the Senior. This was really ecologically very sound since no longer would hundreds of cars go the Commission meeting places, wasting gas, emitting pollutions into the air, and doing hundreds of other bad things to the environment, but now one vehicle would be able to travel to visit many Seniors. The concept was quite similar to the dog washing vans that go to pet’s homes, rather than having the dogs come into the vets. He stated this was a stellar example of the cross-pollination of good ideas to benefit society.

The Administration did give some consideration to combing the dog-washing vans with the “Dying-Without-Dignety Motor Homes”, but it was felt this would have a very bad psychological effect on the dogs, so the idea was scrubbed.

He stressed that attending the Commission hearings would be totally voluntary. Despite, the fact that the names of the Seniors that would be contacted would come from the IRS records, there would be absolutely no follow-up inquiry by the IRS if the Senior did not attend, although further inquiry could be made by the IRS by checking the Senior’s, or their children’s or grandchildren’s  tax returns if he or she did not attend. Compliance by the Senior would be totally voluntary

The House of Representatives has decided to spend $550,000,000 to buy about 8 Gulfstream Jets (The exact number proposed is not quite clear). The Air Force had requested only 1 Gulfstream Jet. Several months ago, Congress axed the F-22 program to buy additional fighter planes. The cost of the F-22 depending on who is calculating and the methodology used, is about  $550 million (+/- a little) for 3 F-22s. . For the cost of the Gulfstreams the Air Force could get 3 F-22s.  

In order to compensate for this loss of capability in the Air Force, Congress has decided to arm the Gulfstreams that they are receiving. They can, conservatively, accommodate 8 machine guns, 2 canons and 14 missiles, all without substantially increasing the price, except for the cost of ammunition, a disposable item. That cost may cut into other disposables that would be used on the Congressional jets, like toilet paper, but Air Force experts considered this a good trade off. “Let them bring their own TP” was the official position.

Speaker Pelosi has stated that seemed fine to her, so long as the Congressional jets were not in use by Congress when the Air Force needed them. She saw no problem so long as the Air Force gave at least 14 days notice when they wanted them, and the Congresspeople would do their utmost to release the planes for combat duty within that 14 day window, so long as they were not unduly inconvenienced. She was sure the Air Force would understand the needs of Congress and their families.

It seemed to be, she said, a win/win situation for the Country.  President Obama has signed off on the deal. His spokesperson said that so long as this doesn’t interfere with the appropriations for ACORN, the President was all in favor of it. “It’s a wonderful solution to make the Country safe, yet accommodate the needs of Congress. Is America not a wonderful Country where its government could come up with such a practical solution? Our colleges and universities continue to turn out the finest thinkers in the World. What other country, but America, could have solved this problem in such an ingenious way” the spokesperson said. “The President is so proud of the responsible way in which Congress and the Air Force cooperated to satisfy everyone’s needs.” He went on to say. The Air Force refrained from commenting.

Washington, D.C., August 5, 2009 (Commentary by Grumps)

Renaming the White House:

In a momentus and unprecedented announcement from the White House (the “WH”), in view of the racial “controversy” surrounding  Sonya Sotomayor, Professor Gates, Barack Obama and others and  in view of all of the various ethnicity’s residing in the US (legally and illegally), the Obama Administration announced that in an effort to bring racial harmony to DC, the WH would no longer be called the WH. It announced that six interior and exterior decorators, of various nationalities and religions, had been hired (as part of the Stimulus, Cash for Clunkers and TARP programs) to repaint the WH in different colors. “It will better reflect the true diversity of the United States” an Administration spokesman said. “Every wing, wall, roof section, and column will be of a different color. The various hues to be used will be in direct proportion to the hues of our population, i.e. X% White, Y%, Black,  Z% brown as determined by the census to be conducted every ten years.Regardless of the census, however,  at least a 1% color will be allocated to each group, even if that percentage is not reflected in the census figures.”

The ex-WH will be repainted every ten years to keep the color arraingment current. There was some controversy because  the Administration Diversity Czar, Religious Czar and the Freedom from Religious Czar felt the colors should be based upon the percentage of religious beliefs held by various religious and non-religious groups in the US. This was not adopted because of a dispute as to what color would be allocated to the atheists.

The matter of which color will be placed where was still under discussion. A major point of controversy was the new name for the WH, since WH would no longer be appropriate. Because of the cost of reprinting stationery, business cards, maps, web site names, etc. it was decided to keep the “H” in place so everyone could merely white-out the W. Someone suggested it should be called the “Ex-WH,” since all that needed to be done was to stamp “Ex” before “WH,” but a number of the committee members said that reminded them of their ex-wives, which was not good. It was almost decided to call it “The House of Ill-Repute,” or HIR, even though it did bring to mind the number of other houses of ill-repute in DC. It was clear that some confusion would arise since when someone said I’ll meet you at the House of Ill Repute, it was ambiguous, to say the least., as to where they would meet – not to mention with whom.

Finally – the Committee decided to call it “The President’s House of Ill Repute,” or “PHIR” for short. In view of what had gone on in the WH in previous years, the Committee felt the new name was quite appropriate.

“I could’ve calibrated those words differently.” so sayeth the President. Actually, several learned scholars have said that what he really should have said was “I miscalibrated those words.”

The scholarly semantical journals have said that the whole controversy would have gone away if (i) he uncalibrated the words first, (ii) then recalibrate the miscalibrated words, and (iii) say what he really should have said, thus doing away with the great debate that will fill the halls of academia for decades, thus doing away with such arcane words as “calibrate,” “miscalibrate,” “recalibrate” and “uncalibrate.” However, the entire subject could provide grounds for a substantial government grant to study this problem so do not look for the controversy to go away.

A simple “I could have put the matter a little differently. I misspoke,” if he felt he did, would have been just fine, we all do that, even eGrumps.  Nothing to be ashamed of. No big deal to say what you really meant to say. It happens to eGrumps all the time, especially when talking to police officers when they are giving him a traffic ticket.

As my good friend Hamlet said (more or less)

“To calibrate differently,  or not to calibrate differently: that is the question:
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep….”

In an effort to revive public approval of his Health Care Plan, and to reassure the American people that they would continue to receive prompt, quality health care,  President Obama announced that he was recruiting senior executives from inside government departments. Their experience, he announced, should silence all criticism of the way Obamacare would be managed and should reassure the American people that he had their best interests at heart.

He announced a nine (9) person Management Committee with complete oversight of America’s entire health programs including medical personnel (doctors, nurses and technicans), medical and nursing schools, medications (legal and illegal), hospitals, nursing homes and cemetaries, medical devices  and medical manuals and books.

The nine (9) person Committee would be appointed by him – three (3) from the Board of Directors of Amtrack, three (3) from the Management of the Postal Service, and three (3) from FEMA, all of whom will have had experience with the Katrina rescue mission.  I hope to have a racially diverse group and a gender neutral group (although, unless we use a transgender cross-dresser, it may be difficult to divide two sexes into a nine member Board.) If I have trouble on selecting these members, ACORN has promised to help and their reputation is unblemished, almost.

The outstanding way these departments have performed over the years should give rest to any rumors that I will not appoint experienced executives to run 1/6th of the American economy. Their background cannot be matched by any Board of Directors of any corporation or labor union in the country, no matter what the industry.

He stated that this my fellow citizens is a win/win situation. Any criticism of Obamacare should now stop – right now – I mean it. I’ve done my best for the American people and there now can be no legitimate criticism of Obamacare. Partisan politics have no place in this situation. Anyone who has the temerity to criticise this plan is, as Joe Biden once said about not paying taxes, simply not patriotic.

The ethnic clash in the so-called Western Autonomous Region of China has been largely ignored by America’s Major TV Networks and Main Stream Media.

Why?

What is going on over there is a very serious clash between two ethnic groups. but not much of it is reported in America.

The answer as to why it is not reported is simple.  The region is called the Xinjang Region. The Capital City is Urumgi and the second city is called Kashgar. The ethnic dispute is between the Uighurs (ethnic Muslim’s) and the Hun Chinese (not ethnic Muslims).

None of the people on TV can pronounce any of those names, yet alone find the area on a map of China. No one in print media can spell any of those names, yet alone find the area on a map of China.  America remains ignorant.

Too bad it wasn’t like Tibet – there our media was right on it – they could spell it, pronounce it, and find it on a map..  I wonder how President Obama and  Mrs’ Clinton’s State Depatment feel about this conflict. I suppose it’s like Iran (without nuclear weapons) – America will not meddle. Maybe Obama will appoint another Czar to analyze it and determine what position America should take on this ethnic conflict. Probably nothing – he will not be able to find it or spell the names either.  

Barbara Boxer, Senator from the Great Insolvent State of California, has stated that if the bill to cut global climate change (no longer called the bill to eliminate global warming) is not passed there will be dire results: (1) droughts, (2) flood,  (3) fires,  (4) loss of species, (5) damage to agriculture, (6) worsening air polution and (7 t0 10) ”more.”

eGrumps noted the similarity to the 10 Plagues that would be inflicted upon Egypt if the Pharoah refused to let the Hebrews go. The divine inflicted plagues were :  (1) Water to Blood, (2) Frogs, (3) Gnats or Lice, (4) Flies, (5) Livestock Diseased, (6) Boils, (7) Thunder and Hail, (8) Locusts, (9) Darkness and  (10) Death of the Firstborn. (see the Old Testament for complete description).

One can only speculate if the Firstborn will be killed if her bill is not passed, but what did she mean by the use of the word “more?”  Has the good Senator got a direct line to the Almighty?

 Since China has refused to endorse the bill to cut climate change, and since they only have allowed one birth per family, does this mean that the entire Chinese population will be will be wiped out within one generation if the dire consequences of Senator Boxer includes Death of the Firstborn? Is that what she wants – doesn’t seem too ecologically sound – I thought one of the purposes of the bill was to prevent the loss of species.

As a matter of fact, this might be one of the law of unintended consequences – America’s debt to China would be wiped out since there would be no one left to collect it.

Senator Boxer (who doesn’t like to be addressed as “Ma’am”) might be smarter than anyone thought. Way to go, Barbara, change the “dire results list” to specifically include the Tenth Biblical Plage – Death of the Firstborn. Look, if it was good enough to be used in the Bible as a Plague, it’s good enough for you to use as a scare tactic to pass the law to cut global climate change.