Well only Boob Allen could confuse me that much that I still have nothing
more than a vague idea of what the hell he was trying to say...and Mr.Allen
why do you piss vertically? (I don't get it)
KMR (de suf noc)
>NOTICE: Gentle readers with a more myopic view of this list may wish to
employ
>the delete key now; LBC content may not meet minimum standards.
>******************
>
>What a difference a weekend makes. A few days on the road changes your
>perspective a bit but, man, who the hell was responsible for monitoring this
>list?
>
>First off, Debbie checks in with a testomonial that "real" females beat
"Queens"
>hands down which raises concerns of her testing objectivity. I mean, I don't
>question her veracity or observational accuracy; she may very well be on
top of
>the data. I am just inclined to think her perspective might be somewhat
oblique
>from my own.
>
>None-the-less, I see that females can now be categorized as "real" which then
>implies that there is another type. On further pondering, as I run a few
classic
>reels through the mental VCR, I an now enlightened and will admit that she is
>absolutely correct. As for the matter of "Queens" however, I must succumb
to her
>expertise as, although I admit to once working for the airlines, I made it a
>practice to steadfastly look straight ahead and mind the project at-hand;
>oblivious to my surroundings.
>
>Then Susan brings up some problems with the term "Mark" and starts
categorizing
>groups, seemingly in a derogatory fashion, as "vertical urinators". Susan
later
>admits (Actually, we have never been introduced. Maybe I should address
her as
>Ms. Hedman?) that her person lacks protuberancy (or, at least, pleasent ones)
>so perhaps only her bias is visible.
>
>But I pause to ponder this new term: Vertical Urinator. Is this a measure of
>performing or performance? I mean, although I may brag that in my youth
the hood
>ornament could be washed from a position behind the boot, I have not yet
>degenerated to the point of needing waterproof footwear. OTOH, I always
thought
>that it was somewhat of an advantage for the gender. Besides the obvious spot
>employment for fire supression and winter autographs, it releases me from
>worrying too much about loading the process. That is, I have observed that
the
>other gender, when offered another cylindrical beverage, may decline soley on
>the basis that a suitable comfort station may not be available at some
>unspecified time in the future. That whole psychosis seemed somewhat
>self-defeating to me.
>
>But I don't mean to constipate the bandwidth with useless banter. To
contribute
>to this body of knowledge, let me clear up this misunderstnaing of the
moniker
>"Mark." It actually predates the automobile and came from the Indians. (I
would
>say "Native Americans" but I am not actually certain the Indians lived here.
>They may have lived in Canada or Mexico for all I know.) Indians often
observed
>the custom of naming a child based upon the first observance at its birth.
Thus
>it happened that, at the instance the long-ago child entered the world, at
the
>flap of the teepee was a hairlip dog: "Mark, mark! Mark! Mark, mark, mark
mark!"
>
>It was the luck of the draw the baby was male.
>
>Obligatory LBC content: Did Adrian ever get his Midget to spin faster than my
>Lawn Boy?
>--
>Bob Allen, Kansas City, '69CGT, '75TR6, '61Elva(?)
>"The difference between a barking dog at the back door and a bitchy spouse at
>the front door is that if you let the dog in it will shut up."
>
>
>
>
Kai Radicke -- mowogmg@pil.net, 1966 MGB @ http://www.pil.net/~mowogmg
Dialogue Internet - Intelligent Internet Solutions
IRC: irc.voicenet.com, #inet-access (my nick: ActiveX or KMR)
|