« Order Restored | Main | Thank You Monica Seles »

Hilarious

The following joke was forwarded me to this morning. It’s yet another example of why we should stay away from politics in the workplace.

Are you a Democrat, Republican or a Southern Republican? Here is a little test that will help you decide

Question:

You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, an Islamic Terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes on you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges. You are carrying a Glock .40,and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?

Democrat's Answer:

Well, that's not enough information to answer the question!

Does the man look poor or oppressed?

Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?

Could we run away?

What does my wife think?

What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand?

What does the law say about this situation?

Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it?

Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children? Is it possible he would be happy with just killing me?

Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me?

If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me?

Should I call 9-1-1?

Why is this street so deserted? We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.

This is all so confusing! ! I need to debate this with some friends for few days and try to come to a consensus.

Republican's Answer:

BANG!

Southern Republican's Answer:

BANG! BANG! BANG! ! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!

click.....(sounds of reloading).

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!

click

Daughter:

"Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips?"

Now maybe some people will find this funny, but I don’t. As a Democrat, I find the joke to be in poor taste and insulting. Southern Republicans may feel the same way, since the joke makes them out to be trigger-happy rednecks, but I won’t presume to speak for them. I am tired of the perception of Democrats as weak and lily-livered. It’s as though there is something wrong with being compassionate and open-minded, with wanting to look at an issue from all sides before forming a position or making a decision. When someone commits a crime, I do want to assess the situation that led to the person committing the act. Not because I want to excuse or condone the behavior. Far from it. If someone is guilty of wrong-doing, they should be punished, unless it’s extraordinary circumstances like the flooding in New Orleans that prompted some people to loot for supplies they desperately needed to survive. However, anyone who looted for the sake of looting, anyone who stole TV sets or computers deserves to be punished.

I recognize the need for law and order as much as the next person. What I want to know is whether there’s something that society can do to address the circumstances that lead people into a life of crime. Can we do something more for the people in inner-city neighborhoods so they don’t become criminals, so that we don’t lose a whole generation of kids to the streets and to prisons, so that people can feel safe even though they are poor.

That doesn’t make me weak on crime. That doesn’t mean I will sit there cowering in indecision as some knife-wielding maniac attacks me and my family. I would do exactly what the Republic would do. I would shoot without hesitation. What it does make me is an open-minded person with enough sense to see how we can improve society, make it safer for everyone, and make conditions better for the impoverished.

Yeah, I can see how that’s wrong of me, just like it was wrong of me to complain to the person who forwarded the joke to me and dismissed my complaint simply as the result of my being in a bad mood this person. Sure, I am in a bad mood now, but to put my reaction down to a bad mood is even more insulting than the joke itself. In poor taste all around.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.houseofplum.com/plumcrazy/lcs-tbck.cgi/2859

Comments

Some folks just ain't got no sense. I'm a Southerner, and a registered Republican, and I wouldn't'a wasted more'n two .40 cal hollowpoints on the schmuck. Anybody what brings a knife to a gunfight ain't worth no more'n that. Ammo's expensive, even reloads.

Yes I agree. The implication of poor marksmanship is a definite slap in the face to Southern Republicans.

Sure, I am in a bad mood now, but to put my reaction down to a bad mood is even more insulting than the joke itself.

Heh. That's exactly how I feel every time some jerk asks me if I'm in a bad mood because I have PMS.

"Heh. That's exactly how I feel every time some jerk asks me if I'm in a bad mood because I have PMS."

..gulp...you don't own a Glock do you?

..gulp...you don't own a Glock do you?

Not yet. Why?

That's what you get for using the Glock .40 --- you needed a heavier load. I'm fond of the .45 ACP.

[quote]As a Democrat, I find the joke to be in poor taste and insulting.[/quote]

Like all good jokes there is a kernel of truth here, perhaps you feel uncomfortable with it.

I would have wasted no more then 3 or 4 shots, he might have fellow nutcases near by to back him up.

OK, I'll make the obvious point: if Democrat policies held sway you wouldn't have the option of defending yourself with a gun.

I agree that a .45ACP is a superior round. My Kimber 1911 holds 10....plenty to spare for any other knuckleheads looking for a firefight.

I love Gun talk...sends a chill down my spine.

Maybe I should see a Dr. about that? :S

G Donovan - please don't psychoanalyze me. You don't know me.

G Kruck - that's a gross simplification of the gun control debate and is simply not true.

Who said I was trying psychoanalyze you Jon? I read your response to a joke and drew my own conclusion.

I did state "perhaps" and it is true the best jokes do have some truth to them.

This seems to bother you, perhaps you should look a bit deeper as to why.

Telling me to look a bit deeper, to look at my motivations or response, is a psychoanalytical suggestion. What bothers me is someone I have never met assuming that they know me or my reasons for reacting to something the way that I do. The joke does have some truth to it, but that's not why I reacted to it the way that I did. My reaction stems from the fact that it is a negative stereotype of Democrats, in the way that a joke about penny-pinching Jews is a negative stereotype about Jews. Would anyone suggest that I am uncomfortable with the latter because I think there's some truth to it? I certainly hope not. Because my reaction would be against something hateful said about Jews, as my reaction to this joke is. It is a hateful joke about Democrats. The truth that I find in the joke is something positive - that Democrats care enough to try to understand whether there are societal issues that lead to crime and can be corrected - not something negative.

So, I guess this means that you're also bothered when a joke is told at a conservatives expense as well?
Me thinks you doth protest too much.

A joke told at a conservative's expense? Doesn't bother me a bit. Seriously, it wouldn't personally bother me, but I would find it inappropriate. Yeah, you're right, I probably do protest too much, lending credence to what G. Donvan is saying, and should have left it alone from the start. But I'm a man whose hackles get raised easily. Just ask Lesley and me parents.

"But I'm a man whose hackles get raised easily."

As does mine on certain subjects but I have learned to laugh off jokes, that came with age and experience though.

"My reaction stems from the fact that it is a negative stereotype of Democrats"

Stereotypes exist because a large enough number of people display "stereotype behavior."

I do know enough Democrats who do display the behavior reflected in the joke.

If you are an exception then good for you, at least you can think instead of spouting talking points.

For the record I'm a registered Democrat who votes for the best man or woman for the job regardless of party.

A pity the Democratic party is intent on driving itself over a cliff. It would be nice to see some folks with common sense take over and throw out the lunatics but I don't see that happening for a few more election cycles.

Remember, elected officials are a pretty accurate reflection of the voting public at large. Yes they are. Lunatic deserve representation too. We have met the enemy, and he is us.

"We have met the enemy, and he is us."

I don't vote for lunatics, ever, no matter what party.

You know, I almost voted for Ross Perot, until I realized he was craaaazzzy.

So I voted for Andre Marrou instead. In retrospect, I'm not sure I didn't vote for a lunatic. But, hey.

Of course, I did consciously vote for a lunatic for NYC mayor in 2001. Yes, I voted for Kenny Kramer (aka the guy the Seinfeld character was based on). I just couldn't bring myself to vote for Mike Bloomberg, a decision I have not regretted once during his term as mayor. And I really, really dislike Mark Green. So I decided if I couldn't vote for a candidate I thought would do a good job, I'd vote for a candidate who would be funny. Which pretty much left me with Kenny Kramer.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)