I’d like to thank Right Change (who sponsored and are planning an ad campaign to support the spot) and all the wonderful actors and crew who volunteered for the “Call Me Madam” video.

I was motivated to do something on this after I saw the video of Barbara Boxer interrogating Brig. Gen. Michael Walsh.

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

—–

I remember immediately feeling embarrassed that a member of Congress would treat an officer of the U.S. military like that.  And doubly embarrassed that back in the early 90’s I had contributed to Barbara Boxer’s campaign.  I was so outraged at the pure arrogance of that moment,  that I sat down to write the spot, highlighting the pure absurdity of our California Senator dressing down a Brigadier General for calling her “Ma’am.”  No Naked Gun or Scary Movie ever had an opportunity as good as that one for pure ridicule.  Never mind that the military personnel are instructed to call their superiors including members of congress ‘Sir’ or ‘Ma’am’, including specifically, Members of Congress!

I thought an apology would have been appropriate, but to my knowledge, none has ever been made by Senator Boxer.  This I find distressing, since apologies from public figures nowadays are the norm.  I mean, it’s not as if she texted her junk to Brett Favre.  This was just arrogantly insulting an army officer.  But I guess that’s okay with her.   

In her debate with Carly Fiorina, the subject was brought up, but Senator Boxer was quite adept at deflecting it — and still without an apology.  Let this video be my apology.  Every time I see the public record listing my campaign contribution to Boxer — I wince.   I mean, we all have things we’ve done in the past that we’re embarrassed about, but I’d rather have my being restricted to stay at least 100 yards away from elementary schools be public knowledge than that $5,000  Boxer campaign contribution.

Judging by the organization’s enthusiastic support of ObamaCare, which should really be called ObamaDoesn’tCare, it’s obvious that the only old people AARP gives a hoot about are Robert Byrd, Arlen Specter, Ted Kennedy and Harry Reid. 

Speaking of senators, I have on occasion tried to send e-mails on important issues to senators aside from California’s Boxer and Feinstein, and discovered that it can’t be done. These weasels have set it up so that they only hear from their own constituents.  That being the case, I don’t want any of these human slugs introducing or voting on legislation that affects the entire nation. If they don’t want to hear from me, I sure as heck don’t want to hear from them. 

Getting back to AARP, the first time I was aware of their disinterest in the elderly came some years ago when I pitched their monthly magazine, Modern Maturity, a piece about the legendary composer of movie scores, Elmer Bernstein. Because the man was still going strong in his 80s, I assumed they would jump at the opportunity. The editor’s candid response was they weren’t interested because he was too old and that they were seeking a younger audience! 

Quite honestly, I don’t even understand why Democrats are supporting Obama’s health plan. Assuming they’re aware that even during the presidential campaign, Obama suggested that a reasonable option for old folks in dire need of operations was to rely on pain pills, I can’t help wondering if liberals are so busy worrying about the health and comfort of terrorists down in Gitmo that they simply don’t have the time or inclination to fret over the plight of their own parents and grandparents. Or perhaps they’re simply eager to collect their inheritances. 

The idea that any sane person would be in favor of the government’s running the health industry simply doesn’t compute. Leaving such important matters in the hands of politicians and bureaucrats is beyond mind-boggling; it’s lunacy. Have they all so quickly forgotten what life is like at the post office and at the DMV?  For my part, I’m still having flashbacks from a decade ago when I had to deal with a representative of the IRS, and that was after we were told that this was a kinder and gentler IRS. Frankly, for that to have been anyone’s idea of kinder and gentler, in its prior existence it must have been run by the Marquis de Sade. In my experience, the only difference between dealing with the Internal Revenue Service and the Mafia is that the thugs who collect for the Mob dress nattier.

What’s more, please keep in mind that when the IRS screws you over, it’s only about money; it isn’t your life or the lives of your loved ones. 

A friend reminded me that back in 1940, Americans were able to choose between not only FDR and Wendell Willkie, but a third candidate, Gracie Allen. Her party was the Surprise Party and her slogan was “Down with common sense. Vote for Gracie.” 

She proposed that Congress would get a 10% bonus, but only when the country prospered. She also favored extending Civil Service to all branches of government because “a little politeness goes a long way.” 

Gracie had no vice-president on her ticket because, she vowed, she would tolerate no vice in her administration. 

About the national debt, she suggested, “It’s something to be proud of; it’s the biggest in the world, isn’t it?” 

On foreign relations: “They’re all right with me, but when they come, they’ve got to bring their own bedding.” 

When asked with which party she was affiliated, she replied, “I may take a drink now and then, but I never get affiliated.”  And when asked if she would recognize Russia, she said, “I don’t know.  I meet so many people.” 

She actually had a campaign song, with one of its lines being “If the country’s going Gracie, so can you.” 

Gracie even received the endorsement of Harvard University, but of course that was back when Harvard still had standards and weren’t employing racist numbskulls like Professor Henry Gates. 

By the time the ballots were counted, Gracie only got a few hundred votes, but she’d gotten a lot of laughs. 

In 2008, Obama just kept repeating “Hope and Change” and got 64 million votes, and now, with unemployment over 10%, inflation going through the roof while the dollar sinks like a stone, and a health care plan straight out of “Brave New World,” nobody’s laughing. 

My question is: Where is Gracie Allen when you really need her?

Generally speaking, I will call someone whatever they want to be called as long as they are willing to return the courtesy. My given name is Jeffrey but you can call me just about any variation of that you want as long as you do it in friendly manner. However,  if your name is Charles and you insist on me calling you “Charles” and not “Charlie” or “Chuck” then you will only call me Jeffrey.  If you are a Doctor or a Professor and insist I use your title when addressing you then you must address me as Mister.

I also have a few nicknames and if you know me well enough and long enough you can call me by one of those. My golf buddies can call me any number of names that are not printable here as long as they are also marveling at my shot-making ability at the same time. I also try to treat everyone I meet in daily life with respect. I address everyone I do not know with the title “Sir” or “Ma’am.” The cop who pulls me over for speeding or the person who takes my money at the grocery store get the same treatment.

I recently did a show at a military base where the commanding officer was a woman. I was unsure how to address this much decorated military person so I asked a tough-looking guy with a bunch of stripes on his arm to guide me. He told me that “Ma’am” was the proper term of address, just as I would say “Sir” if the commander were a man. Then he added some information for which I had not asked.

“Don’t address her only by her rank.” He said, “That would tell her you think she is a substandard officer.” In the military it seems that insulting an officer to his or her face isn’t tolerated very well. Military people, being a resourceful bunch, have developed a system for letting an officer know that they don’t think too much of them. They use the term of address which least fulfills the requirement of military respect which is using only the person’s title.

Imagine, for example, you are an enlisted man and you are under the command of a Lieutenant Smith. If Lt. Smith is a competent leader you would address him as “Sir,” “LT” or “Lt. Smith.”  If Lt. Smith is an arrogant moron you would always address him simply as “Lieutenant.”

So when General Walsh quickly came back with “Senator” and not “Senator Boxer” I laughed because I knew what he meant; this is a substandard person for whom I have no respect! 

Let’s all address her as “Senator” from now on.