(A Rita Reminder: The Tehno-Contest Expires TONIGHT at midnight)
Fair warning to my neo-faithfuls: IF YOU THINK THAT THE MAN WHO SIRED MEL GIBSON IS A REAL PEACH, GO READ SOMETHING ELSE.
I have a secret which my in-person human friends don’t know much about: I love to play bridge. You know, the card game. I tried finding other humans my age-ish with whom to play, but couldn’t. Now, it doesn’t bother me to play with the “elder set,” as I learn so much from them. But, for some odd reason, it bothered them (probably because the only place to find a game in town is at the Senior Center, and that’s their “hang-out”). So, I did what every red-blooded American, Ukrainian, Australian, etc…does – I started to play online.
There are 8 of us, and we’ve known each other for years. We set up games, chat about everything, and compete like rabid dogs. Occasionally, if one of us can’t make the game, we allow a newbie to play, given that each virtual table needs 4 players. That’s led to some interesting situations over the years.
When newbies come on, we love to look at their their “profile.” One of the profile categories that we always love to read is “favorite quote.” So when we got a newbie playing one day, we all checked his profile, and his motto was “Arbeit Macht Frei.” Even I, a uni-lingual, knew what that meant, and where it came from, but nobody else at the table did. So I immediately told that day’s table host to “boot him.” NOW. When the host asked me why, I explained that the expression was the “welcoming sign” that hung at the entrance to the Auschwitz/Birkenau/Monowitz Concentration Camp – “Work Will Make You Free.” Within 3 seconds, we were Italy and he was Sicily – the big boot of “bye-bye” kicked the insolent idiot immediately.
After 2 or 3 minutes, I had a change of heart. After all, I believe that the best of teachers are the most curious learners. I asked my buds for a 20-minute “brb,” and sought out Mr. “Arbeit.” Deciding to take the diplomatic approach, I blamed my buds for the boot he got - after all, what are friends for? Perplexed, he asked me why he was booted, and I explained that we didn’t understand his “favorite quote.” Would he mind explaining what it meant? And he did…for over 2 hours. In short, he told me that the Jewish “race” needed to be eradicated (my word, not his), and it was too bad that Hitler didn’t finish the job. Then he told me that the Holocaust didn’t happen anyway: it was just a Jewish conspiracy. Hmm…a history revisionist who wanted to eat his hate and have it too.
I kept playing dumb – a game I play even better than bridge. Why would the Jews make it up? What was so bad about being a Jew? (Not to mention a homosexual, gypsy, a Jehovah’s Witness, communist, physically or mentally disabled and others that Hitler targeted for his Aryan Racial Purity campaign – but I left those out of the conversation, not wanting him to think I knew anything.) I got a 19-year-old’s neo-mouthful of the usual: “Jews are filthy, Jesus-killing rodents who are only interested in making money”…we’ve all heard the rest. But, of course, “the Holocaust never happened, so what’s the dif?” He and his “militia” were going to do the job – and do it right. Would I join their “crusade” (the ONLY word out of his screen that was TRULY used appropriately)? He could send me all sorts of literature about how to become a “member” and help get me involved in their “true cause” of finally getting rid of “the scum of the earth - The REAL FINAL SOLUTION.” (As opposed to the “Not Real Enough Final Solution?”)
“Sounds righteous, man,” I said. “Can I just ask a few questions?” “Sure, no prob.” So the questions came – quick like lightening. “Where’d you learn about this stuff?” (My parents.) YIPES! “Ever meet a Jew?” (Hell, no – I’d smell their big-nosed, money-grubbing stench from miles away.) “How do six million people of one religion and culture disappear, leaving behind families miles - or thousands of miles - away, without anyone noticing?” (A lie, never happened.) “How were entire TOWNS wiped off of the map? (Lotsa places changed names afta the war.) What about the pictures of corpses and gas chambers and synagogues that were once there, and no longer exist?” (Man, those pictures were all made up on the computer.) “But there WERE no computers then.” (Sure there were – the Jews controlled them.) “How about the diaries, paintings, witnesses, trials…” (All made up by the Jew-swine who wanted to make a buck.) “Babi Yar?” (Barbie who?) “The tattoos?” (Jews did ‘em to themselves to get attention.) Two hours of this: on and on, up was down and down was demented.
When he asked me for my address, I was conflicted. Give it to him and get on all sorts of hate lists? Or say “no thanks.” Big dilemma. So, I’d try a new tact. “Ever talk to a Jew for 2 hours?” “no.” “How would you know?” ”I’d know, man. All they’d want is my money - not like you, who wants the truth.” Time to start being his worst nightmare. Time to come clean and put the foot in HIS tasteless mouth. I told him who (or WHAT) I was. That I’ve been teaching the subject of The Holocaust for (mumble, mumble) years. That he was an ignorant ass. That I wouldn’t even waste my breath TRYING to convince him of his useless arrogance and ignorance.
In bridge, that’s what we call trumping the Ace of Spades. And when I tell my students this story every year, the inevitable question is “Would you ever talk to him again?” My answer: NEVER AGAIN!
It’s true. I’m running a contest. And THIS contest isn’t for a “can” of anything. This prize is a GORGEOUS 14K gold Opal Ring, brand new, just waiting for a finger to be put on. Has Bloggrrl lost her beans? Nope. But there is a catch, of course: you have to come up with the RIGHT answer to the question, based on the article in which Bloggrrl read it. And Bloggrrl reads a LOT of articles. But I’ll give you a clue: this article was written in a top-10 circulation magazine, so that should narrow it down a bit.
The contest rules:
1. Your answer MUST be specific;
2. If two people get the answer correct, the FIRST right answer submitted wins;
3. Your answer MUST be the correct one…it must be the answer from the article that I read;
4. You MUST provide proof that you are 18 or older.
That’s it. No small print.
Now, I know what you cynical readers are thinking: www.BLOGGRRL.com readership has gone down, so she is desperate to bring new people in, and bring the numbers up to their once-higher strength. NOPE. The numbers are incredibly stronger than ever. I also know what you lazy readers are thinking: Bloggrrl is getting tired already, and this way, with the weekend coming up, she will have TWO blogs to post without having to think of something new. “HAH,” I say. I have lists and lists of things I wish to post on my blog site that often I want to write TWO blogs in one day. Furthermore, we’re in an Election Year, have thousands of troops fighting overseas, and news outlets provide at least 10 stories a day just screaming for blogging.
So why am I running this contest? First, it’s a cool way to connect with my readers. Second (AND HERE’S YOUR FIRST CLUE TO THE CONTEST ANSWER), this is the PERFECT time of year to run the contest.
Okey-dokey. Here we go. Here’s the “Rita’s Digest” version of the contest question. The article I was reading was in the “technology” section of the magazine (YOUR SECOND CLUE). The author was writing about “The Most Important Technological Inventions of the 20th Century.” Or some such similar title. He then gave his answers: backwards to number 1. Before I read his choices, I put the magazine down, and put myself to the test. This was a toughie, but really, HOW hard could it be to come up with something AT LEAST in the top 3? I mean, the 20th Century WAS the “AGE OF TECHNOLOGY.” So I sharpened my keyboard, and came up with my “top 5 choices for Number 1.” My answers, in no particular order were:
1. Computers/the Internet (OK, I cheated here);
2. Putting Man on the moon;
3. Television;
4. Nuclear (or, as our Supreme-Court Appointed President would say “nucular”) weapons/energy;
5. Jet travel.
And then I picked up the magazine again, and read this gurus answers. WELL, SON OF A GUN (both sons and guns have been around too long to apply). I wasn’t even in the TOP 3! Hell, I wasn’t even in the top 5! And when I read this guy’s answer to #1 I was immediately outraged. WHAT? But WHY? And then he explained why. And I got it. I really, really got it. It made TOTAL sense, but there was NO WAY I would have thought of it, not in a million years.
Amazingly, we are now 8 ½ (or 7 ½) years into the 21st Century, depending on your definition of when the Century began. So here is the question:According to the article I read, WHAT WAS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT TECHNOLOGICAL INVENTION OF THE 20TH CENTURY? (Please note: the author himself is exempt from the contest!)
Answers are due in no later than Sunday, 7/02/08, by MIDNIGHT. Good luck folks. I’m rooting for you! And so is the ring.
A RITA’S DIGEST UPDATE: THE “TECNO-CONTEST’ HAS BEEN EXTENDED UNTIL MIDNIGHT, JULY 2nd. KEEP THOSE ANSWERS COMING! THERE’S A GREAT PRIZE AT STAKE! JUST SCROLL BACK TO THE JUNE 27TH ARCHIVES FOR THE QUESTION - AND PRIZE. CORRECT ANSWER WILL BE POSTED ON JULY 4TH WEEKEND! REMEMBER, THIS IS ONE HOT (A FINAL CLUE) CONTEST!
By now, many of you have seen the horrific tape of the Mexico City stampede, in which both teens – and police officers - were killed. The police, supposedly, went in to a club to “weed out” underage drinkers celebrating their last day of school, and a riot ensued, resulting in the stampede. Who took the video? The police, themselves. It’s gotta make you wonder: why didn’t the videographer put the camera down, call for more help, or even help himself, rather than filming young teens and his fellow officers get trampled to death? What was he thinking? No – check that. He couldn’t possible have BEEN thinking.
We live in an age where amateur videographers sometimes “get lucky” and get a great tape of a horrific accident, a mugging, a beating, a murder and many other types of mayhem. And while the camera rolls, you NEVER hear the videographer pick up his cell phone and call 911. Because then he might lose his shot. And then he won’t be able to sell his film to the highest bidding news-outlet, who will then sell it (or loan it, for “courtesy of” advertising) to the OTHER news outlets. We’ve lost too many “would-be heroes” for the sake of “could-be dollars.”
A number of years ago, I was invited to a black-tie wedding of a friend/acquaintance’s daughter. No expense was spared. The flowers, the bridal outfits, the live music trio, the videographer, the photographer, the valet parking: all that and more. Though it’s said that all brides are beautiful, this bride wasn’t – she was GORGEOUS. And when her father gave her away, the love in the soon-to-be wife and husband’s eyes said it all: they weren’t going to be another divorce statistic…they were soul-mates. As the vows were recited, the crying from the front of the room was thunderous.
When Mr. and Mrs. Just Married walked back down the aisle, an announcement was made: all guests were asked to leave immediately for the reception hall 4 miles away, so that the new couple could make their formal entrance as husband and wife. The valets brought us our cars so fast, that you’d have thought that only 25 people had attended the ceremony, instead of 250. And as we left, we saw a white gown and a black tuxedo just waiting in the back of their limo, and toasting each other with crystal champagne goblets.
To make a short story long, we “guests” arrived at the reception hall, and awaited the couple. Of course, we all lost track of time, “oohing” and “aahing” over the hall, getting our table cards, looking at the magnificent centerpieces, chowing-down on chocolate-covered strawberries and caviar, deciding which “station” to eat from first, and just generally having a good – and VERY classy – time. Finally, we were ushered into the main room, took out seats, and waited. And waited. And waited. After what seemed like hours, the bride’s and groom’s fathers went running out of the hall, we assumed, to greet the couple. So we waited. And on and on it went, until the brother of the groom got up and tapped the microphone. He was hysterical crying – who wouldn’t be on such of a momentous occasion as his baby brother’s wedding night? But after a second, we realized that these were NOT tears of joy. And his speech was one sentence long: “I’m afraid that everybody is being asked to leave at this time.” Huh? Leave? We hadn’t even had our “Fresh Hearts of Palm over Arugula with a Simple Raspberry Vinaigrette Dressing.” As the murmuring continued, we all got our coats, our cars, and went home, figuring that the honeymoon had started WAY too early, and the newlyweds had decided that Aruba was more important than wasting time pretending to eat food and enjoy the evening, when all they had on mind was “consummation” and not “consommé.”
As we arrived home, the phone was already ringing. Bad news DOES travel fast. It turns out that the limo taking the new Mr. and Mrs. to the reception hall got caught-up in a drag race on a strip notorious for such action. And there was an accident. And now, a man who had been married for 23 minutes was now a widower. But all was not lost. There just happened to be a woman with a video camera passing by, who captured the whole accident on film. Including the crash, and the heart-rending screams of the widower screaming “SOMEBODY HELP ME. SHE’S STILL BREATHING.” Over and over again. And our “good Samaritan” videographer did just what was expected: she kept video-taping the entire scene, including when the dads showed up in shock, the police and ambulances finally arrived, the very clear sound of a groom/daughter/daughter-in-law’s EMT pronouncing her dead on the scene, and the sorrow that followed. She had captured the entire end of a life that was just beginning. And then she left, no one else the wiser.
The next day, news stations were showing clips of the tape, and the newspapers were showing the most horrific “stills” of the accident. A “could have been, SHOULD have been” heroine was safely at home, counting her mucho bucks for the sale of her tape to the highest bidder, when the couple SHOULD have been counting their wedding booty, and enjoying each other’s booty. And I was reminded of this with today’s news story, and the many others that we’ve seen over the years by the amateur “photo-wannabes” and started to wonder: have these parents EVER been able to view the tape of the ceremony, the last tape of their daughter alive? AND WHY DIDN’T THE SHOOTER EVER PUT THE DAMN CAMERA DOWN AND TRY TO HELP? And “shooter” is definitely the right word. Because she might as well have had a gun and pulled the trigger on the newlywed’s head, for all of the “help” she provided.
By: Rita’s Digest
Newsflash: It’s an Election Year. And not just ANY Election Year, but one of the Biggies. As a matter of fact, this may even be THE biggest Election Year EVER: we are finally getting rid of the first U.S. Supreme Court-appointed President. So, it’s time to begin addressing the candidates, the issues, and where I stand. But first, I need to get my big toe into the political waters with an overview – and get a few things off
my chest in the process.
First, to all of you Bush-loyalists, I’m sorry to tell you that I’m not one of his fans. As a matter of fact, I can’t stand the sound of his name, his voice, his policies, his background, his family, his ex-baseball team…you get the point. But what irks me the most about the Bush-man is that he wasn’t elected by the American People. The Supreme Court took care of the “hanging chads” issue by hanging up the country for almost eight years with a man who can’t even pronounce the name of THE big button he’s supposed to activate in the event of Armageddon.
Now, Alexander (”I’m in charge here”) Haig notwithstanding, I thought that the U.S. Constitution makes it pretty clear in Amendments XX and XXV how a President should be elected. If you actually READ the Constitution, there’s nothing in there about the Supreme Court making any decisions about the Executive Office. I know, you can still respect the Office without respecting the Occupant of the Office, but not this time. I can’t respect the Office because the Highest Court in the Land decided the election, rather than the Electoral College. That not only violates our excellent system of “checks and balances,” it offends my sensibilities and makes me never want to spend a penny of my vacation dollars in a particular state that rhymes with “Blorida.” (No offense, as some of my best friends and most of my family lives there.)
If you haven’t stopped reading by now, thanks; because I know that this is OLD news. So, onto the “NEW news.” It appears that there are 2 or 3 “front-runners” (depending on what you believe) who have emerged so far: Barak Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain. So let’s give a “Rita’s Digest” condensed version of my initial impressions of these three politicians, without getting into their “politics.”
First Obama. When he first threw his hat into the political ring, most people (including
those who HAD heard his name) thought he had no chance. As we learned more about him, we saw a smart, soft-spoken man with a lovely wife who seemed to be the “political un-politician.” As the other Democrats dropped like flies, Obama’s popularity kept growing. He was refreshing. He would bring change much-needed change. He was pleasant to look at (hey, it worked for JFK, so don’t knock it) and refreshing to listen to. The problem: no experience. He was either four or eight years before his time. So over the months, his voice became stronger, his stands became firmer, and he became more “polished.” And before long, he hooked up with “the three stooges” – I mean “compadres”: Ayers, Doerhn and the Rezko. So now I see or hear this “once-upon-a-time sweet candidate,” and ask: who is this man, and what did he do with Barak?
Then there is (or was) Hillary “let’s buy a Senate seat” Clinton. Most people (especially 
women) either love her or hate her. For now, I’m wondering how a wealthy woman is unable to balance her “campaign finance checkbook.” BUT, Hillary has experience. She lived in the White House for 8 years, stood by her husband in troubled times, tried to tackle “health care,” and took no crap from Barbara Walters – a feat worth admiring. BUT, there were the scandals. Oodles of them. She’s married to a man who doesn’t know what “is” is. On the other hand, most people believe that the person who best influences the President is NOT the VP, but the one who shares his bed (or closet). If that’s true, given that Hillary’s now out of the race (today, at least, except according to the “conspiracy theorists” who think she’s still in), then it should have been Monica Lewinsky running for President, not Hillary – but that’s a can of worms I’ll keep tightly shut henceforth.
Finally, there’s John McCain. A man who fought for his country. A “middle-of-the-road” conservative. There is so much to say about McCain, but again, I’ll save that for later. His biggest plusses are his experience and his…well, his experience. The only negative I’ll share now: he’s a Republican. Scratch that.
Now remember, this is a BIG election. Not only are we voting for President, we’re voting for a LOT of congressmen/women. So no matter who wins the Presidency, if we have a Congress of a different party, not much will get done. Few laws will be passed. Filibusters will go on and on. Because we need a decisive and PROgressive Congress. And therein lies the lesson of the day: if the opposite of “pro” is “con,” then we can easily see the misnomer of our two Legislative bodies. During that long summer in Philadelphia when our Constitution was drafted, the horrific heat must have gotten to the delegates. Because if they REALLY wanted to make things clear, our CONgress should have been called PROgress.
By: Rita’s Digest
