Category: Uncategorized

Reference:          Author of WSJ Op-Ed on Jill Biden Denounced by Former Employer, Has Profile Removed From Northwestern Website (msn.com)

                Of all the things to be concerned about in the world, some former Northwestern professor has attacked Dr. Jill Biden, who has a doctoral degree in education, for having the presumption to refer to herself as “Dr.” Jill Biden.  Dr. Joseph Epstein (we added the Dr.) actually does have some academic chops, which makes his desire to create a controversy so he can get another 15 minutes of fame somewhat curious.  He’s been surrounded his whole working life by academics who call themselves “Dr.s”, but suddenly it’s a problem meriting a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece.  Our father, 30 years a college professor, also used “Dr.” and didn’t seem to suffer any ill effects, nor did anyone else of which we are aware. 

                Dr. Epstein says only medical doctors should be allowed to use the title, never mind the years of work and sweat that go into earning a doctoral degree.  This fellow should know, but apparently doesn’t, that credentials matter, especially in snooty and elitist academia.  And people who earn a doctorate should rightly be proud of their achievement.

                Surpisingly, the Associated Press “stylebook” agrees with Epstein and plainly states that:

“Use Dr. in first reference as a formal title before the name of an individual who holds a doctor of dental surgery, doctor of medicine, doctor of optometry, doctor of osteopathic medicine, doctor of podiatric medicine, or doctor of veterinary medicine. . . . .Do not use Dr. before the names of individuals who hold other types of doctoral degrees.”

                In this world of hims are thems or hers or nongendered, and hers are thems or hims or nongendered, and the media being willing to call any egotist just about whatever they decide they want to be called (for example, “the artist formerly known as Prince” – c’mon), it is particularly surprising that the AP here is willing to make an editorial judgement about the value of a hard-earned Ph.D degree.  And that value judgment apparently is that it has no value, so even if you have a doctorate you can’t call yourself a Dr. 

                The hypocrisy here is redolent with media elitism (or more accurately, the media’s intellectual inferiority complex, which is well earned, by the way), since it exceedingly rare to find a so-called “journalist” that has a doctorate.  “Those that can’t do, teach” is the rule apparently. 

                We are willing to call Dr. Epstein a Dr., whether he likes it or not, he earned it, though there are lots of other things we could call him.  Narcissist comes to mind, as if anyone really gives a hoot what he thinks about anything.  If he doesn’t want to be a Dr., then fine, but his attempt to undermine the value of a higher degree is insulting to his colleagues and everyone else who thinks getting a doctorate is an actual achievement.  But to raise this sort of a phony issue in an attempt to get himself into the news does nothing but show how big a jerk he is. 

Let’s abbreviate “jerk” to “Jk.”  So he can be Jk. Epstein going forward.  He’s earned it.

Reference:          Shawn Mendes Apologizes To Sam Smith For Misgendering Them (buzzfeed.com)

                Not that we have the slightest idea who Shawn Mendes or Sam Smith are, but they apparently had a little contretemps about Mendes “misgendering” Smith.  Both are biological males, by the way, but Smith apparently is confused about his gender and has adopted “they/them” pronouns in reference to “them”self (“himself” to normal people).  At some music industry get-together Mendes introduced Smith as “him”, which led to Mendes apologizing to Smith for “misgendering” him (or them, or they, whatever).  And Smith’s response was “We’re all learning together.”  Smith, of course, is now a hero for being gracious about the “misgendering.” 

                OMG!  We’re not sure what we’re supposed to be learning together, but it certainly seems quite fashionable these days among a certain crowd to pretend you aren’t what you are and that you are what you aren’t.  In our experience that’s generally called “acting” and belongs on the stage or the set, not incorporating it into your real life. 

                But this nonsense is becoming insidious, along with being idiotic.  It’s now potentially an insult to refer to a him as a “him,” or to a her as a “her”, as if we’re all supposed to keep track of the phony gendering that these morons think is so cool these days (not to mention it apparently gets your name in the media, as in “there’s no such thing as bad publicity”).  

So now how do we ever know who is referring to whom?  Using the plural to refer to the singular is just silly.  “And now let me introduce Joe Schmoe, we’re happy to have them with us tonight.”  OK, so where’s the other one, or two, or three?  And we all are expected to cater to these foolish whims as if it’s normal.  The media, of course, is all over it like white on rice, and is happy to refer to people by whatever they want to be called.  Much of it seems to have started with Prince deciding he wanted to be referred to as some unpronounceable symbol – you remember, “the artist formerly known as Prince.”  Yikes.  Now the “gender non-conforming” crowd as apparently adopted that approach, and we fear we haven’t seen the last of it.

                But if we’re going to go down this road, our suggestion is that anyone who claims some sort of gendering issue and doesn’t want to be referred to as a “him” or a “her” simply be called an “it.”  Like references to a baby still in the womb when the gender isn’t known.  That should be the rule going forward and forget letting these clowns determine and try to impose every goofy thing they want to be called.  That should satisfy them (would be “it” in the singular, but in this formulation plural and singular still matter) since their gender is still a mystery, and it keeps the normal singular/plural of the language intact. 

                So next time, let’s have it be “”And now let me introduce Joe Schmoe, we’re happy to have it with us tonight.”  Let that be the rule and perhaps this foolishness will abate.

Reference:         Tulsi Gabbard introduces bill to ban trans athletes from women’s sports; faces backlash over ‘blatantly transphobic’ legislation (msn.com)

                Transphobia, like beauty, is apparently in the eyes of the beholder.  You’ve all likely read about one or another guy who thinks he’s a girl whipping the pants off the girls in sports like field hockey and track and winning state championships so they can ace the girls out of college scholarships meant for girls.  The real girls, naturally, generally think that’s unfair.  The homosexual/lesbian/trans etc. crowd thinks that is fair.  School officials, terrified of (1) getting sued for discriminating against that crowd, and (2) the woke publicity and likely other PR fallout, go along whether they think it is fair or not.  Actually, the only ones on record as thinking it is fair is the homosexual/lesbian/trans etc. crowd (at least until some lesbian gets beat by a guy-girl in the 100 meter dash – then some feathers will fly).  This is some of the collateral damage of the anti-discrimination laws that to be fair was pretty unforeseeable at the time of enactment.

                So, in a brave attempt to legislate some common sense into the world, Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D. Haw.)(first Hindu in Congress and the first Samoan-American voting member) and Representative Markwayne Mullin (R. OK)(a so-called Native American, likely no stranger to discrimination himself), have co-sponsored a bill that would ban so-called trans athletes from participating in women’s sports.  Put another way, people with penises would not be allowed to compete in sporting contests of physical ability against people with vaginas.  Geez, seems pretty basic to us.

                The bill, called the “Protect Women’s Sports Act of 2020”, would limit federal Title IX  protections based on “biological sex as determined at birth by a physician.”  Title IX is the law prohibiting sex discrimination in education programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.  In a press release, Representative Gabbard said the bill “protects Title IX’s original intent which was based on the general biological distinction between men and women athletes based on sex” in athletics among other areas.

                Perhaps the most remarkable thing about this bill is that one of its writers is a Democratic Representative (along with a well-known anti-queer crowd Republican representative).   It took some balls (pun is absolutely intended) for Representative to put her name on this bill, and she should be congratulated for exercising some common sense and being apparently willing to take the heat that is coming her way.  Makes one wonder if she plans to run for re-election or if she’s already given that up.

                Unsurprisingly, the “boys can be girls if they want to be, and girls can be boys if they want to be” protest freaks declared war instantly.  According to the above article, “Charlotte Clymer, a former press secretary for rapid response at the Human Rights Campaign, called the bill a ‘blatantly transphobic piece of legislation aimed at trans and non-binary young people.’ . . . . Sarah McBride, who made history in November when she was elected the country’s first openly transgender state senator, for Delaware [home of Joe Biden, by the way], used fewer words to criticize the Democratic lawmaker: ‘Tulsi Gabbard: assigned Republican at birth.’” (which we have to say is an excellent riposte).

                Of course the bill is “a blatantly transphobic piece of legislation aimed at trans and non-binary young people”.  That’s the whole point of the thing.  Not at the “trans community” generally, but just those in it, and their “allies,” who think it’s OK to treat girls unfairly by making them compete against boys.  Whether this bill actually goes anywhere remains to be seen, as will whether Biden supports common sense or folds under the likely woke pressure. 

                In any event, kudos to Representatives Gabbard and Mullin for finally noticing that the Emperor has no clothes. 

Reference:          Johns Hopkins Founder Owned Slaves, Disrupting Belief He Was An Abolitionist : NPR

                Researchers apparently working for Johns Hopkins University as part of a perhaps suicidal university-led project on the school’s history have – shock and surprise – allegedly found “evidence” that Mr. Hopkins owned slaves:

“Historians for Johns Hopkins University discovered that the founder of the Baltimore-based school owned slaves, contrary to the long-held belief that the wealthy philanthropist was a staunch abolitionist.”

                It’s probably only a matter of time until Mr. Hopkins is cancelled and his name consigned to the dustbin of history by the baying woke crowd.  Wonder what they’ll call the school now?  Woke U? Looking at the “evidence” presented however, it certainly seems far from overwhelming.  And there is also evidence that he once bought a slave for the sole purpose of freeing him.  What an evil man! But even just having walked past a slave on the street two hundred years ago is more than enough “evidence” to cancel anyone these days.  Well, people going digging for trouble are more than likely to find it.  Presumably the university will take some idiotic appeasing action to appease the jackals. We have two words to say about appeasement: Neville Chamberlain. Look up how it worked out for him.

                Anyway, to all of this we say, so what?  This identity politics cencellation business has gotten way far out of hand.  Someone who generations ago allegedly owned a slave, or may have had “racist” views, or thought a woman’s place was in the kitchen or that queers were, well, queer – these all have to completely cancelled.  It just doesn’t matter what they did with the rest of their lives, what they achieved, who they helped or didn’t, what they built; that one thing is enough to ruin them.

                Who among us is so pure they could stand to have their entire life minutely examined by these woke morons?  Did you kick a dog once when you were a kid?  Did you push your cat off the dining room table? Did you call someone a “bitch” (or worse) once?  Did you get drunk or high once and do something stupid?  Would you want every stupid or vicious or evil thing you ever thought or said or did, or view you had, plastered all over the internet so people can chase you down and try to ruin you?  Isn’t every single one of us a mix of good and bad, the proportion being the only variable. Do we all want to be entirely defined by just one thing or one thought or one action? Or even two, or three, or four? And just who decides? Do you want some woke snot-nosed college kid who never had to pay a bill in his life or have a job and knows nothing whatever but what his “progressive” college professors have filled his wooden head with, making those decisions? Not us.

                Wasn’t it Jesus himself who said those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.  Or even more eloquently:

                “[N]ever send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee”.  John Donne, Meditation XVII (1623)(popularly and typically misquoted as “ask not for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”). Think about it.

References:        Massachusetts Exits Getting New Numbers, Based On Mileage – CBS Boston (cbslocal.com)

For some businesses, state’s changing exit numbers add up to a headache – The Boston Globe

                So Massachusetts is finally changing over its exit numbers to mileage numbers.  That is a federal mandate for which federal highway money is the carrot.  But why exactly is this necessary?  Well, it isn’t actually, this is the classic solution in search of a problem.

                Several reasons have been offered:

“MassDOT said there are several benefits to the change, including making it easier for drivers to calculate the distance to their destination, better emergency response and bringing Massachusetts in line with how almost every other state does exit numbering. The agency said 90% of the project will be paid for with federal funds.”

               It is difficult to believe this is being taken seriously.  With the prevalence of GPS and the mapquests of the world, who even needs or uses road signs to figure out mileage calculation?  When’s the last time you used a Rand-McNally Road Atlas?  Or even saw one?  So that’s nonsense.  Better emergency response?  C’mon, that’s pretty doubtful – local emergency responders know the local roads, so just changing the signs and knowing the mileage from one exit to the next seems pretty unhelpful and completely irrelevant anyway, not to mention they have GPS too.  When’s the last time you saw an article about how someone died because some first responder didn’t know how many miles until the next exit?  Ever? C’mon. 

                Bringing Massachusetts in line with other states?  Who cares?  Keep getting federal money?  OK, maybe that works if the feds insist, but if none of the actual substantive reasons is valid, why are the feds still pushing this?  This is a complete waste of money and burden on businesses and people who have relied on the current numbers for years with absolutely no ill effects whatsoever.  And it has no discernable benefit except making work for someone.  In fairness, this mandate from the feds likely predates widespread use of GPS, but even so, what the heck was the urgency in the first place?  There wasn’t one, that’s the answer.  Just another pork boondoggle for someone courtesy of your elected “representatives.” But someone should have rethought this given the “advances” in technology, rather than move forward with something that, to put it charitably, is just stupid.

Reference:         Divided Legislature passes police accountability bill, sending controversial measure to Baker – The Boston Globe

                Once again, our arrogant Great and General Court and its “leadership” have slathered themselves in shame and completely abdicated their responsibility to both their members and the public.  Whatever the merits of the just-passed police “reform” bill, this is just another in an endless string of shameful attempts by the House and Senate leadership, with the ovine consent of the membership, to ram an undigested and complex – and politically sensitive – bill down the throats of their members with little or no notice after months of inaction and/or months of secretive drafting. 

                A 129 page “reform” bill, drafted in complete secrecy by a handful of members, is unveiled to the world, and to most of the House and Senate members, less than 24 hours before the leadership intends to, and does, put it to a vote.  This is after the leadership cabal has spent four full months working on it because it is so complicated and sensitive.  And then their members get not-even 24 hours to read, digest, and think about all its provisions and whether or not they are good public policy.  And rather than put on the brakes, they vote the way their “leadership” tells them.  Kudos to those who did not go along and voted against the bill, though it is unclear whether “no” votes were on the merits or because of some principled grievance about the process and timing.

                This is not representation of the citizenry in any sense of the concept.  The American colonists in the 1770s had more to say about how they were taxed than the people of the Commonwealth, and most of their elected representatives, had to say about this bill, and many, many others.  This is the paternalistic (and maternalistic) “leadership” deciding what is going to happen and then using every slimey and rushed tactic they can to get it to pass with few people actually reading it, never mind understanding it.  Unfortunately, this is business as usual on Beacon Hill – nothing ever gets done when it should, so there is a panicked rush at the end of each term to cram legislation through the House and Senate with most members not even being able to read most of what they vote on.  There actually was no rush to get this passed once a draft was ready other than the political pressure of the progressive interest groups.  But alas, that is what passes for public-policy-making on Beacon Hill.

                According to the Globe article above, “‘It takes courage to take a vote like this,” Representative Claire D. Cronin, an Easton Democrat and one of the chamber’s chief negotiators, said on the House floor . . . . ” 

                Yeah, right.  It takes “courage” to try to hoodwink your colleagues and the public and ram something down their throats and not even give them a chance to read or think about what this bill contains.  There’s only one reason to push this bill through so fast, and that’s because if people actually had a chance to read it and think about it, that process likely would come to a screeching halt so sober minds could reflect.  (That and the upcoming Christmas holidays of course).  And of course bringing an end to the constant yapping and sniping of the interested advocacy groups.  Maybe some members want to be untroubled by thinking about the legislation they consider and vote on, but we think not – we ardently hope not, anyway. 

                The Globe further reports that “House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, referencing the push by advocates to tighten police accountability, said lawmakers had vowed to usher in change during the summer. ‘With today’s vote, the Legislature acted on its promise to ensure fairness and equality,’ the Winthrop Democrat said.”

                  Well, that sentiment is utter nonsense.  The members, unfortunately, did what their leadership demanded.  That certainly does not equate to acting on their “promise to ensure fairness and equality.”  Fairness would be publicizing this draft bill, circulating it to the public and having a public comment period, and allowing the membership to review the bill themselves and hear from their constituents.  THAT is representation and fairness, which is NOT what the General Court and its “leadership” regularly serve up. 

Reference:         The statues must go: Brown should not celebrate colonialism (browndailyherald.com)

                Yikes, we thought Brown University was a good school with smart students.  Well, sorry to disabuse those of you who might have once thought the same.  In a recent op-ed in the Brown student newspaper, several woke students with a lot of time on their hands penned an explanation for why Decolonization at Brown (DAB), a student group to which the writers apparently belong, think it’s a good idea to eliminate campus statues of Caesar Augustus and Marcus Aurelius. 

                DAB is “a student group committed to reimagining Brown by decolonizing our academics, spaces and relationships.  One of our current initiatives is to remove and replace the two copies of Roman statues, those of Caesar Augustus and Marcus Aurelius, on Brown’s campus. . . . we are calling for the statues’ removal because they celebrate ongoing colonialism in the United States and idealize white, Western civilization — both of which continue to cause harm at Brown today.”

                As you can imagine, colonialism in the US is viewed by these students as nothing more than than “the violent displacement and occupation of Native communities and land by Europeans and others. The 13 original colonies were created by European settlers through the killing of Native peoples and the systematic dispossession of Native land. These settlers did not leave following the Revolutionary War. Instead, they remained on Native land, claiming it as their own. Today, Americans continue to perpetuate this process. The 13 colonies have expanded to 50 states and many territories — an expansion made possible by further displacement, genocide and the continued denial of Native rights. This is what we mean when we refer to colonialism in the United States.“

Brown evidently doesn’t require homework before mouthing off in writing. Even a cursory review of pre-colonial American Indian culture and activities would show these kids that there is no monolithic American Indian. Rather, those peoples were made up of hundreds of tribes, some settled, some nomadic within certain bounds, many of which warred on and murdered their neighbors and took their land from them, and didn’t give it back until and unless it in turn was taken from them by some other tribe or federation, and so on and so forth over the years – very much like European history and the history of everywhere else on the planet. To demonize the white colonists for doing exactly the same thing is pretty hypocritical. And the American Indians were every bit a vicious as the colonists, if not more so; the colonists, at any rate, didn’t come over with scalping the inhabitants in mind.

                Therefore, continues the DAB dogma, “within this broader context, the two Roman-style statues at Brown are harmful because they celebrate the ongoing occupation of Native land by the United States and replace Native histories with monuments to white, Western civilization.”  This is because “the Europeans who began colonization in North America cited Ancient Rome as a guiding example for their colonial mission on Native American lands. Later, the founders of the United States would do the same, claiming Ancient Rome as part of a lineage of European civilization. This idea of a shared Western civilization led European settlers and their descendants to set up replicas of Roman statues across the United States.”

                Therefore, they have to go because their “presence shapes space at Brown and forces students to interact with monuments to colonialism and whiteness . . . . our initiative aims to remove the public celebration of colonial occupation and white superiority within the monuments of our landscape.”

                There’s a lot more of this nonsense in their excessively long op-ed piece, but we won’t tire you with it here.  But we do have to say that the scope of their ambition is admirable, though it’s a shame they haven’t put it to better use.  Yes, it isn’t just America that is run by white racists, it is all European countries, and presumably all white countries from the beginning of time.  Why they only went back to the Romans and not further back to the Greeks is something of a puzzle, but we assume that must be because they only took History of Western Civilization II and not I.  Could be they never even heard of the Greeks.  Not to mention that the concept of “white supremacy” wasn’t even a concept until hundreds of years after the height of the Roman empire.

                But you have to be careful what you wish for.  Take their “thinking” (if you can call it that) to its logical conclusion and their view seems to be that every white in the country should have to go back to Europe, every black back to Africa, every Hispanic back to south of the border (unsure we are whether or not Hispanics count as white for these purposes), every Asian back to China, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, etc.  After all, the whites didn’t leave after they defeated the British in the American Revolution, as these kids think they should have.

Call it a foot in the door, the thin edge of the wedge, pick your cliche, but if statues of Romans come down because they celebrate white colonialism, then it isn’t a long step to advocating for largely depopulating the country and leaving only those who call themselves Native Americans, even though, as these Brown students fail to realize, so-called “native” or “indigenous” Americans aren’t any more native or indigenous that you or us or probably 99% of Brown students – we and/or our forebears all came from someplace else, they just got here earlier.  An anthropology course in human migration might serve these kids well. 

                So, who’s in favor of ponying up and cancelling these kids’ student loans!?

Reference: Macy’s under fire after calling Black sorority in parade ‘diverse dance group’ | Fox News

                The Zeta Phi Beta Centennial Steppers is a group of dancing performers in this year’s Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade.  Zeta Phi Beta is a black sorority of long lineage.  During the performance, Macy’s tweeted out the following:

“What’s that sound, you ask? Why it’s the diverse dance group, Zeta Phi Beta Steppers!  Performing a special routine they put together to help us celebrate this unprecedented year.”

                Seems pretty innocuous to us; rather happy and celebratory in fact.  But boy oh boy (is that phrase offensive?  Good),  did that light up the nasty and useless crowd that apparently relies on social media for things to be offended by like the rest of us rely on air to breathe.  As the above article by Julia Musto states:

                “The tweet prompted a response from MSNBC’s “The ReidOut” host Joy Reid who explained that the Centennial Steppers are “not a ‘dance group.'”

                “Zeta Phi Beta is a Black sorority founded at Howard U in 1920 and part of the Divine Nine,” she said. The Divine Nine is a coalition of nine Black sororities and fraternities that make up the National Pan-Hellenic Council.

                Social media users called Macy’s description “reductive” and asserted that Macy’s had used the Centennial Steppers.

                “I’m tired of businesses using Black entities (including Historically Black Sororities and Fraternities) as a means to look more ‘diverse’ and accepting,” added @_AwesomeKid. “It’s clear how performative this attempt was, due to your lack of research for your own parade performers.”

                Now really, you have to go out of your way to be offended by that tweet.  Maybe the group isn’t itself diverse, but the Macy’s parade is wildly diverse if you’ve ever seen one.  But to jump on a well-meaning sponsor for this gossamer-thin reason just highlights the social backwardness and lack of proportion these morons prowling social media have in their quest to find something – anything! – to be offended by so they can clamber onto their soapbox once more and “educate” the rest of us in their wokeness.  (Sorry, that’s a pretty involved sentence). 

                There once was a rule when writing papers for school – write it, and then put it in your desk drawer and forget about it for a day.  That is, think before you speak (or write), because knee-jerk reactions are just that, made by jerks, and usually problematic.  That is our lesson for today to all those idiots who get their jollies from prowling social media for things to be offended by.  Even if they don’t learn anything from this message, they at least will have found something else to be offended by. 

                Well, here we are, near the eve of Black Friday, the annual national holiday celebrating racism and discrimination in all their varied and wondrous forms, created by the discriminatory systemically racist white supremacist rulers of the country as part of their ongoing plot to diminish and degrade and eventually eliminate blacks.  So let’s celebrate! 

                We are busy preparing our float for the Black Friday parade, complete with CSA flags, people in CSA uniforms and KKK costumes, nooses hanging from trees, etc.  Miss Black Friday will appear on our float this year as well (she will be white, of course). This year we are debuting “The Reader of Words” – a person at a podium dressed as a liberal elitist white male college professor, complete with a turtleneck shirt and corduroy jacket with elbow patches (and white hair and a goatee like Colonel Sanders), smoking a pipe.  He (yes, the patriarchy extends to Black Friday events) will solemnly read aloud each word alleged over the prior year by the BLM woke crowd to be upsetting, offensive, racist, discriminatory, or as making someone in one or another disadvantaged and historically discriminated-against group feel violated or “unsafe” and thus necessary to cancel. Those words include but are not limited to:

nigger, n-word, blacklist, looting or looters, master bedroom, housemaster, overseer (as in Board of Bar Overseers), plantation, grandfathered, guys, gals, redskins, Trump, Trumpism, poverty, dinosaur, Halloween, Christmas, divorce, disease, abuse, evolution, homelessness, “homes with swimming pools”, hunting, religion, slavery, terrorism, weapons, witchcraft, sorcery, war, violence, basket case, ladies lingerie, illegal alien, third world, lame, man up, are you deaf, crazy, psycho, long time no see, no can do, hysterical, you guys, white lives matter, all lives matter, blue lives matter, retarded. . . .

                Whew!  We’re exhausted and we’re not 10% done yet, but we’ll stop here for the nonce.  FYI, some of these are from a list of words that the New York City Department of Education wants to eliminate from standardized tests because they are “upsetting” to students.  Really.  We don’t have to make up this stuff, it’s all around us these days, often paid for by your tax dollars.    https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/03/26/war-on-words-nyc-dept-of-education-wants-50-forbidden-words-removed-from-standardized-tests/

                At any rate, we hope you can join us, wear your own costumes and bring the kids, it should be quite a show! 

                Today we have whoever invented automated voicemail and the other associated ways that companies and government agencies can avoid speaking with anyone.  Who among us has not been tortured and wasted large parts of our lives by “If you want X, press 2”?   Used to be you could bypass all that by tapping 0, but they’ve wised up on that.  Before then, an actual person answered the phone.  Those people were called “receptionists”, a position now more or less consigned to the dustbin of history. 

                We’re sure that more than one person has seriously contemplated slitting their throat while slogging through one of these diabolical devices. 

                Now they are getting more sophisticated (which in this context means being able to eliminate perople entirely from the process) and you just can’t get a real person on the line for love nor money.  Try looking on a website for a phone number to call if you need help.  You can’t find one.  Something went phlooey with our Xfinity phone the other day and there’s no phone number, no people anywhere.  Apparently Xfinity has no customer service employees anymore. 

                What you can find, and we did, are “chats.”  And now those chats many times, as in this case, don’t get you to a real person anymore, they’re just bots with fixed answers to fixed questions, and if you keep pestering them they just refer you to user forums, as in this case, so you have to hope and pray someone else had the same issue and managed somehow to get it solved.  If you want anything more than that, well, we suppose you have to go to that company’s headquarters and picket outside until the media picks it up.  Then maybe you’ll get some answers quickly, though you also will probably get cancelled the next day. 

                So for this person or persons, death by hanging and drawing and quartering is too good, but we’re hard-pressed to find a more painful sentence.  Perhaps just trussing up him or her in a filthy cell with their own automated voicemail on 24/7/365 at the highest volume possible.  Turnabout is fair play, isn’t it?