The BEST words


History lesson courtesy of Donald J. Trump, regarding Honest Abe's Gettysburg Address : 

Lincoln was “ridiculed” after giving the speech by the “fake news” of the time. But, Trump added: “Fifty years after his death they said it may have been the greatest speech ever made in America. Pretty good. Pretty good. I have a feeling that’s going to happen with us.”

Here, then, via Rex Huppke in the Chicago Tribune is Honest Donald's own Gettysburg Address:

Forty tweets and seven “Fox and Friends” episodes ago, Sean Hannity brought up a really great point about my Electoral College win. It was so huge. Really, nobody has ever seen such a massive win, and they said it couldn’t be done. Couldn’t be done. But I did it.

And Hannity — how much do we love Sean Hannity, really? He does such a fantastic job, nobody better. And Hannity said my huge Electoral College win, which they say was the biggest ever, was dedicated to all of you, the forgotten men and women of America. Don’t we love America? Don’t we love our flag? And Merry Christmas. People are saying Merry Christmas again. Nobody was saying it before. Nobody said it!

So we are dedicated to the proposition that all men — and women, don’t forget the women. The women love me so much. I won big with the women. The women love Trump.

The proposition that all — I’m just going to say “all,” otherwise the Fake News will call me sexist or make up some other lies. That’s all they do. You see them back there. Just the worst, most disgusting people you’ll ever meet. Not all of them, but really all of them. Terrible. Enemies of the people.

Click here to read the rest, but don't wet yourself! 

Write your own instant Donald Trump song or short story or screenplay (yes, you can!)

Here's a fun sandbox you can play in all day.

It's called the Plot Generator, simple enough, and its algorithms let you craft short fiction or songs lyrics, in a variety of styles, in no time flat. Here's what the interface looks like:

After clicking song lyrics generator, I selected summertime song and filled in the text fields. (It's a long list, so a few at the bottom are cut off in this screen grab.)

And here is the result:

Catchy as hell, huh?

Can't wait to get started next on a work of horror fiction.




New restaurant chain will allow Christian workers to exercise religious freedom without fear of legal backlash

A new Christian-themed restaurant chain will soon launch nationwide that will allow its employees to practice their religious convictions without backlash or penalty.

Called Smite, the family-dining chain will provide detailed instructions on how Bible-worshiping servers and other employees can stay true to their deeply held religious values while still providing quality service to patrons, announced Larry Craig, a former United States senator and president of the new chain funded by Cruisecock Inc., a joint investment by Senator Ted Cruz and the Koch brothers.

"At Smite, employees will not have to fear they will be terminated or face legal action if their beliefs prevent them from fulfilling requests that run counter to the Holy Bible," Craig explained.

For example, if a customer orders lobster, a Christian employee is instructed to respond, "I'm sorry. I can't serve you shellfish today. Might I interest you in unleavened bread instead?"

Similarly, a waitress who notices that a male customer sports a five o'clock shadow can reasonably object that the gentleman is in violation of Leviticus for shaving his whiskers and say, "I'm sorry, I won't be your server today," Craig elaborated.

Craig said there will be no restrictions on questions that employees may pose to patrons in order to determine whether service will violate their religious principles, such as whether a woman did not bleed when she lost her virginity, if a man ever had sex with his daughter-in-law, if the couple has murdered a slave, or whether a man is circumcised.

If a customer orders a cheeseburger, forbidden under some persons' religious liberties because it mixes meat and dairy, servers can recommend the alternate "Santorum," a sandwich consisting of black truffle oil, ground sausage, and frothy corn.

A minister will be on duty at Smite all hours to hear confessions.

Vaughn Spencer says stupid ethics rules are "flawed and unenforceable"; Boscov coldcocked by where his money went

 "I'm shocked — SHOCKED! — that this money all went toward a political campaign.

"I'm shocked — SHOCKED! — that this money all went toward a political campaign.

Hell did not freeze over, last I checked, but the morning newspaper did get around to addressing the suspicious contributions to Mayor Vaughn Spencer's reelection campaign from the paper's dear and favorite patron, the Honorable Albert R. Boscov, whose advertising dollars are keeping the paper afloat and thus is not a person the paper wants to piss off.

So let's follow the money.

Boscov says his three contributions, totaling $70,000 to Spencer's war chest were actually personal loans that Spencer signed a legal document vowing to repay in full.

"He never said this would be for the campaign," Boscov said out of one side of his mouth. Out of the other, Boscov said that he figured some, but not all, might be election-related.

From Spencer's mouth hole emerged a giant thank-you to Albert Boscov as well as a swipe at the city ethics code which Spencer himself signed into law: "The city solicitor and others have described the rules as flawed and unenforceable, which is why most of the candidates could be in violation of the law depending on interpretation."

The paper said the mayor did not answer questions about why Boscov thought some of the loans were for Spencer's personal needs and not all for the campaign.

One does have to admit that is is nice for a rich guy like Boscov to loan a fellow like Vaughn Spencer $70,000, especially when Spencer stands to lose his $81,322 salary once he gets trounced in next Tuesday's primary.  But, hey, if a promissory note is good enough for Alby, I could use a little dough to spruce up my crib. Where do I sign? I'd even spend the $70,000 in Boscov's Department Store to buy all the fixings.

The Eagle's he-said, he-said account of the flap provides plenty of wiggle room so as to not offend its Great and Noble Advertiser, but there is no explanation offered for why a "personal loan" needs to be included on official campaign documentation.

If Vaughn Spencer prevails in next Tuesday's primary (which he won't), he could have ethics complaints coming out his ass

So just because the city of Reading has a code of ethics, and just because Albert Boscov contributed roughly 26 times the legal amount to Mayor Vaughn Spencer's reelection campaign, what does it all mean?

Has somebody broken the law and now faces the risk of jail time? Is throwing gobs of money at the incumbent merely the price of doing business with the city (pay-to-play, wink, wink)? Will Spencer merely be required to promise to play nice the next time he runs for office?

After all, it's not like Spencer has ever been called on the carpet on ethics charges before.

Here's how it works.

City clerk Linda Kelleher said any citizen can file a (confidential) complaint alleging misconduct under the code of ethics. The evidence then will be decided by a board of five citizens. Penalties can range from censure (naughty mayor) to a directive to return the campaign contributions to the donor (sorry, spent).

Of course, none of this will ever be considered until well after Tuesday's primary, which leaves it up to the morning newspaper to report this week on these financial shenanigans involving the paper's biggest and bestest advertiser.

That is not how it works in the world of journalism, Reading Eagle style.

Before you sigh away your cynicism and pour your first drink of the day, it does not all have to be moot, citizens of Reading.

Complaints, meet Vaughn Spencer's ass.

Here is the link where you can download a copy of the form and file your very own complaint.

While you're filling it out, you may want to hum "Did you Boscov today?"

Why is Albert Boscov throwing all that cash at Vaughn Spencer (and whatever will the mayor do with all that loot)?

Seventy-thousand dollars can come in quite handy, if you are a politician. If you are Chris Christie, for instance, it can pay for a month's worth of refreshments at the ballpark. It can even place a down-payment on a United States Senate seat from the state of Illinois, where a Senate seat is "a fucking valuable thing."

But what if you are Vaughn Spencer, incumbent mayor of the city of Reading, facing a steep climb in next week's primary? Seventy-thousand fungolas is some serious coin. In fact, it would translate into $32.77 from each of the 2,136 people who voted for Spencer in the 2011 primary.

An army of small donors would be required to pump up that kind of war chest.

Or only one fat cat:

This is a portion of a Spencer expense report on file in the Berks County Courthouse. It shows that the Albert Boscov money spigot is at full guzzle feeding the mayor's campaign coffers. Naturally, some might question whether one individual should have such influence in a municipal election. What might Albert Boscov be hoping for in return? Should there not be some law against it, Citizens United be damned?

Oh, wait...


The above is a screen grab from the City of Reading website showing there is indeed a Code of Ethics limiting contributions by individuals that candidates can accept during each election cycle — roughly 1/26th of Albert Boscov's largess.

So how can the mite retailing mogul pull a Koch brother in our precious mayoral primary? Is someone breaking the law? Will Spencer have to return the loot, even if he has already spent it? It is not like he will need any more cash after next Tuesday anyway, once Wally Scott hangs his big, bald head up like a trophy.

It is too bad there is not some watchdog in the community that can get to the bottom of this potential scandal. Like one of those obsolete objects from the 20th century that were made of ink printed on paper… what do you call them?…oh, right, a newspaper.

If there were a newspaper like that still in existence, it would have to be one with a streak of fierce independence, not one whose primary source of revenue comes from a certain department-store chain, and, without it, would lurch into bankruptcy faster than you can say "Peter Barbey is a spineless dickhead."

Such days may be gone forever.