Skip to main content

When an insult isn't really an insult...

On February 10th of this year, I wrote a blog entitled, "'The difference between high school in 1970 and 2015' is common sense, research, and evolution...," which can be read here - http://thekind-heartedsmartaleck.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-difference-between-high-school-in.html?showComment=1452562538036#c178470387604326188. The blog had to deal with a viral post I read on a friend of mine's Facebook page, which tried to prove the the conservative talking point that things were much better back in the day, without political correctness, without the "coddling" of our children, without as many rules and guidelines, etc. Here's one example of what I'm talking about with regard to the post:

"Scenario 1: Jack goes quail hunting before school and then pulls into the school parking lot with his shotgun in his truck's gun rack.

1970 - Vice Principal comes over, looks at Jack's shotgun, goes to his car and gets his shotgun to show Jack...

2015 - School goes into lock down, FBI called, Jack hauled off to jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors called in for traumatized students and teachers."

Yes, it only gets better from there...

So, just recently, I received a comment on that blog, which read, "sad....the 'lovely remarks' lacked both intelligence and humor, I am glad I skipped to the end."

For the record, when I uttered those two words, "lovely remarks," it was at the beginning of the post and in reference to sarcastic commentary of mine throughout the entire duration of the blog. So, in other words, while this responder attempted to be insulting with his/her comment, he/she proved they didn't read the blog, including the "lovely remarks" he/she mentioned specifically, for how could one read all of these sarcastic remarks (from beginning to end) while also skipping past them all? I know, that's a mystery to me as well. With that kind of mindset, expect this responder to utter the following lines in the future (if he/she hasn't already):

- "War & Peace sucked! I read the first paragraph and the last paragraph and was like, 'Whatever!'"

- "Songs 2 through 13 on that album were horrible! Know how I know? That 10-second prelude to song #2!"

- "Baby, do you ever wish we could just skip to the end of this relationship because everything happening before then is so boring? Just wondering... Wait, where are you going? Honey?!?"

Nice try...

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...