 |
Reid, Pelosi & Obama Planning Genocide aka
The New Democratic Job Creation Program
December 21, 2009
Murder is defined as “the premeditated killing of
another human being (murder in the first degree), or the
killing of another human being by intent but without
premeditation (murder in the second degree).” For the
purpose of this article, I will exempt war, lawful execution
and elective abortion from the definition of murder. We can
debate those controversial issues another time.
Self-defense is generally viewed as “the force
someone uses to protect themselves because of a reasonable
belief that another party intends to inflict great bodily
harm or death. The popularized (and legally supported)
justification for the use of deadly force in self-defense is
a person’s belief or perception he or she is in imminent
danger of great bodily harm or death.
In simpler terms, murder is killing someone against their
will, and self-defense is killing first to prevent an
assailant from murdering you. The use of deadly force in
self-defense is an inherent right of Americans ever since
the revolutionary war. That right has been sustained in
countless court cases for hundreds of years.
Enter the Democrats with a new government health care
proposal that poses an imminent threat or danger of great
bodily harm or death to millions of Americans. Do the
Democrats want you to die? Do the Democrats intend to kill
you? Yes they do, provided you are older than 55; afflicted
with AIDS; a woman past child-bearing age with breast
cancer; or a person suffering from any number of possible
medical conditions that necessarily require expensive
medical treatments and follow-up over long periods of time.
Are the Democrats taking considered and premeditated action
to murder people? Yes they are.
The health care bill currently being inserted up our
collective evacuation chutes by gloating Democrats lays the
foundation for this mass genocide. For the record, genocide
is viewed by most rational people as “murder.” How will the
Democrats facilitate this mass genocide? Quite simply by
establishing federal and state protocols that deny or limit
medical treatment for people categorized as “undesirables”
in the previous paragraph. The undesirables categories will
be subject to modification based on political expediency.
The potential benefit of a campaign of genocide against
seniors and sick people by the Democrat-controlled
government is obvious. Deaths create job openings and the
Democrats have promised more jobs. Better yet, deaths create
revenue for the government in the form of death taxes. As
you should know, the Democrats have already resurrected the
full death tax. Now they merely need people to die. To the
Democrats, there appears to be no downside to genocide;
unless of course you happen to be one of the potential
victims.
For a historical perspective, look at the Nazi campaign of
genocide against the Jews. Murdering the Jews eased Nazi
debt owed to Jewish-owned banks; freed up estate property
to be confiscated for the coffers of the Nazi
government and created sorely needed jobs for other Germans
at a time when unemployment was a serious problem in the
country. True, the Nazis didn’t murder Jews by denying them
medical care (arguably). The “denial of service” attack is a
new paradigm being tested and refined by England,
Canada, Cuba and other countries looking for ways to bump
off senior citizens, people with costly illnesses and
possibly even other undesirables who don’t fully support
their standing government.
As everyone has probably noticed, our “Unholy Trinity”
(Obama, Reid & Pelosi), points repeatedly at countries with
government-run medical insurance as an example of effective
socialism, despite an overwhelming body of evidence that
shows how those countries systematically discriminate
against various classes of people by denying them
life-sustaining medical treatment. You could call it
government enforced survival of the fittest, with the
government deciding who best meets the description of
fittest.
Which brings us back to the concept of self-defense. What
follows is a fictional story. Any similarity or resemblance
of the characters in this story to real people is
coincidental and unintentional. I do not personally
recommend or endorse the story’s ending.
Envision if you can, an elderly woman walking from the
supermarket to her car in the parking lot. She is accosted
by an assailant who demands her purse and her car keys. She
panics and repeatedly screams “help,” at which point the
assailant pulls out a knife and and threatens to kill her if
she doesn’t shut up. Grandma concludes the assailant really
does intend to kill her. In an act of desperation, she drops
her groceries, pulls a .25 caliber pistol out of her purse
and shoots the assailant. The entire incident is recorded on
parking lot surveillance cameras.
It isn’t important whether or not the assailant is killed.
Grandma acted in self-defense in the purest sense of the
concept and a court will acquit Grandma of all wrong-doing
(provided she had a license to carry the concealed weapon).
In fact, lets ditch the gun. Grandma needs it later. It was
raining, Grandma was carrying an umbrella and she stabbed
the assailant with it. When this case went to court, Grandma
didn't even need a “good” attorney. Her court-appointed
defense counsel got her off easily.
Now consider the same scenario, but an alternate ending.
Grandma stabs with the umbrella and misses. The assailant
runs away and Grandma (in all the excitement) trips and
falls down. Grandma is after all, old and fragile. She
breaks her hip when she hits the pavement.
Off to the hospital she goes in an ambulance. After a few
days of medical evaluation and several X-rays (the insurance
company won’t pay for an MRI), Grandma’s doctor recommends a
hip replacement if she ever expects to walk again without
assistance.
Grandma’s government regulated health insurer disapproves
the surgery on the grounds Grandma is too old to justify the
expense. What they don’t tell Grandma is that (in their
subjective opinion) due to Grandma’s advanced age, her
potential for further positive contributions to society
doesn’t justify the expense. The only medical procedure the
insurance company is willing to reimburse is “supervised
pain control,” and a cheap walker.
Grandma ends up drugged into a half-stupor by medical
marijuana, the least expensive pain mitigating pseudo drug
she can afford. Grandma also has to spend a lot of time on
the couch or in bed. Her leg becomes painful and starts to
swell. She sees her doctor who confirms the presence of a
blood clot in one of the large veins in her leg.
Grandma’s doctor recommends an angioplasty, but the
insurance company won’t pay for it. They have exhausted the
annual funds allocated to Grandma’s region for her age
category. Her doctor’s only option is to place her on a
daily dose of Coumadin in hopes of preventing further
clotting. The doctor also tells Grandma to be careful
because she can bleed to death if she accidentally cuts
herself, takes too much Motrin for her pain, or sustains a
severe blow to any part of her body from bumping into the
corner of a table, falling out of bed, etc. Grandma has to
make sure she doesn’t even bite her tongue too hard by
accident.
Faced with these circumstances, Grandma suddenly realizes
she is in imminent danger of bodily harm or death. If she
can’t have the angioplasty, she’s probably a goner. And who
is the assailant threatening her life? You guessed it; the
insurance company. Just like the assailant with a knife in
the parking lot, the insurance company is taking aggressive
steps to kill Grandma with a denial of treatment. The
insurance company will undoubtedly receive a bonus from the
government for the resultant cost savings.
Unfortunately, that won't help Grandma. She doesn't own
stock in this particular insurance company. Bottom line, the
insurance company knows full well, the same as Grandma, that
denial of service can result in her premature death. Is this
what you want for your own Grandmother? Don't even think
about paying for her to have an angioplasty to resolve the
matter. That could result in stiff government fines for you,
your grandmother and the doctor who performs the procedure.
Grandma loses all hope. She takes a taxi to the local office
of her insurance company; shuffles into the reception area
with her walker; pulls out the trusty old .25 caliber she
thought she'd never need and shoots the receptionist and two
other people who come running out of their offices when they
hear the shots. (The other exec in the office suite is
cowering under his desk.) The .25 caliber pistol jams (as
they are apt to do), a wounded insurance company exec
wrestles Grandma to the ground (re-fracturing her hip), the
police are summoned and Grandma is taken into police custody
to face charges of murder.
Is this the end for Grandma? I somehow doubt it. Grandma’s
attorney only needs to introduce the generations-old tried
and tested “self-defense” defense and Grandma is very, very
likely to go free. If you disagree with me, please explain
how this particular scenario does NOT meet the requirements
for the use of deadly force in self-defense. After all,
Grandma was being threatened with imminent bodily harm or
death by her insurance company and she did fear the
impending bodily harm or death. The contract Grandma signed
with the insurance company that inferred they could deny
certain treatments is totally invalid under the law because
Grandma was coerced into signing it to begin with.
Could this happen? You answer that. The press would have a
field day. The news would circulate quickly. Grandmas
everywhere with denied treatments would begin to hunt down,
stalk and kill health insurance company executives (in self
defense). The Grandmas would be joined quickly by millions
of gays and prostitutes with AIDS, adults with autism, women
with breast cancer and other citizens and non-citizens with
no potential for further positive contributions to society.
The movement would spread to other countries. Insurance
company executives worldwide would quit their jobs out of
fear of being hunted down and killed in self-defense.
Governments would be forced to take direct control over
administration of the national health insurance programs.
Government insurance industry workers would then become
targets for self-defense. Government employees assigned to
insurance companies would begin quitting in droves. The
health insurance industry would collapse entirely. And we
could start all over.
In the meantime, all those sitting in jail awaiting trial
for self-defense would finally receive their much-needed
medical treatments for free because as everyone knows;
prisoners in American jails get better medical treatment
than Grandma ever would with her government insurance.
The solution? This is about as easy as Ron White’s
Heightened States of Awareness. See a Doctor. Doctor
bills the government. Forget the insurance companies. Nobody
really needs them or their involvement? No insurance
companies, no middlemen, no bureaucracy, no stress. Period.
Imagine the potential savings in medical administrative
costs.
If the government has a problem with unnecessary procedures
or excessive expenses, let them take that up directly with
the applicable doctor(s). Isn’t that easy? For all of us
there isn't even any paperwork to fill out besides the
customary medical history forms. No pre-approvals, no issues
with pre-existing conditions, no claims processing. Just
health care for everyone. Problem solved. See . . . I always
have a recommended solution. Mine is not a vehicle speeding
towards genocide.
If insurance companies want to stay in business, they can
issue policies to cover mental health problems, chiropractor
services and plastic surgery for cosmetic reasons. The
government will pay for "legitimate medical treatment" and
the insurance companies can handle everything else.
Yes, doctors could still be sued for malpractice, but a
settlement ruling against a doctor would have to be paid by
the government. That would force the government to monitor
and enforce the quality and qualifications of doctors
instead of leaving it in the hands of the AMA. Lets face it,
there are incompetent doctors in the workplace. Hopefully
not too many, but the AMA certainly isn't culling them out.
This way, doctors wouldn’t have to carry malpractice
insurance and we’d realize another reduction in the overall
cost of medical care.
To those who argue this type of an arrangement would be
opposed by the doctors themselves, I can only reply, “If the
doctors don’t like it, why don’t they go to Cuba, or
England, or Canada to practice. Doctors are needed
everywhere. They should relocate to a country with a system
they prefer. It’s a free country (at least for now despite
the best efforts of Democrats); so the doctors can freely go
anywhere they believe they'll be happy.”
One last suggestion to resolve the ever-present aggravation
of frivolous medical lawsuits. The government must legislate
a “three strikes” rule for attorneys. Any and all attorneys
who lose a cumulative total of three medical malpractice
cases in court are automatically barred from ever again
participating in medical malpractice lawsuits. They also
forfeit legal fees for every case they lose. If we’re going
to clean up health care, there’s no reason we can’t start
cleaning up the legal profession as well.
If you've read to this point and believe the warnings don't
apply to you, just give it a few years. You'll be over 65
sooner or later, provided the new health care system hasn't
already facilitated your early euthanasia. Once you reach 65
(55 if Congress gets its way) you'll be balancing on the
edge of the sinkhole just like the rest of us.
TOP
Movies Are Supposed To Be Fun
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen Fits the Bill
June 30, 2009
I haven’t gone to a movie theater since . . . I can’t even
remember. I think the last movie I watched in a real theater
was Revenge of the Sith, in 2005.
I don’t
have an issue with the quality of movies today, it’s all
about personal budgets. Movies in theaters are expensive.
Consider the cost of gas; wear-and-tear on the car;
outrageous ticket prices combined with outrageous popcorn
and drink prices; medical costs after catching swine flu
from someone in the theater; the screaming little shit in
row 3; the cell-phone text addict in row 14; and the
nose-dead female in row 24 who believes she should introduce
the whole world to the odor of cheap perfume.
But
there I was anyway, standing in line at the theater waiting
to watch Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. What
was I doing in a movie theater? Circumstances beyond my
control . . . the tickets were a birthday present from
Sondra.
Not that I wasn’t looking forward to the
second Transformers movie. After all, how many
chances does anyone get to watch Megan Fox overflowing her
clothes in slow motion on the big screen? Who cares if she
can act? Optimus Prime is a better actor than Megan Fox, but
let’s avoid the old “apples to oranges” comparison. Oh,
sorry. I know the average critic will find my reference to
“apples and oranges,” and Megan Fox in the same paragraph as
being vulgar - typical for a critic.
Many nationally
known movie critics came out openly against this movie. They
said it was too loud, too vulgar, too fast, too long, too
suggestive, too socially un-redeeming and basically
pointless.
Critics. Do we really need these idiots?
Here is a movie that grossed something like 387 million
dollars worldwide in 5 days, breaking the all-time record
for a movie opening and proving that most critics don’t know
their ass from a matrix? We should ignore these
self-proclaimed movie critics.
This movie was great.
Great on a level that eludes most movie critics who fail to
understand the fundamental reason people watch movies in the
first place - to have fun. This movie was all about fun.
Kids had fun watching the transformers. Military enthusiasts
had fun watching the soldiers with advanced weaponry. Male
viewers had fun watching Megan Fox oozing what looked like
Vaseline from her lips. Nerds had fun watching the special
effects including a female robot they’ll all be fantasizing
about for the next six months. Female viewers had fun
watching Shia LaBeouf. NASCAR enthusiasts had fun watching
the transformer cars. I could go on and on.
The only
people who didn’t think the movie was fun are the critics
and old, right-wing conservative Republicans who believe we
should banish Transformers from Earth; Megan Fox should be
banned from all public media for being too provocative;
mothers shouldn’t talk or behave like the one in the movie;
God will defeat the Decepticons without any human help; and
our children should be reading bibles, not Transformer
comics. I think we need fewer critics, fewer right-wing
conservative Republicans, and more movies like this one.
Even though movies-for-two at the theater can easily run
$40 for a one-time shot compared to unlimited viewing of a
DVD in the comfort of your living room for $16.95, I can’t
wait for the third Transformers movie to be
released. With any luck I’ll get to see that one in a
theater too. Screw the critics. It’s one thing to be
nominated for an Academy Award (the critics are really into
that); but quite another to garner sincere appreciation from
theater-goers. At the end of Transformers: Revenge of
the Fallen, the crowd in the theater erupted with
cheers and applause. I haven’t heard applause like that in a
movie theater since aliens blew up the White House in
Independence Day.
TOP
Michael Jackson Moonwalks Out
June 26, 2009
On June 25, 2009, Michael Jackson took his final roller
coaster ride into Neverland. He leaves behind a truly
awesome musical legacy and scores of mysteries about his
life. Did he or didn’t he? The world seems obsessed with
knowing.
Did Michael really pop little boys? Did
Michael even pop Lisa Marie? He was after all, the purported
King of Pop. Did he suffer from skin ailments and
breathing problems, or did he just want to be white? Who or
what were “Hee-Hee” and “Who-Who,” and why did he wear the
glove? What kind of pain constantly caused him to begin
screaming in the middle of a song? Why did he always grab
his genitals on stage? Is that where the pain was? Who was
the mother of his third child? Did he really convert to
Islam?
Questions, questions and more questions. Was
Michael that messed up in the head or was it all for
publicity? Personally, I don’t care. Let future generations
debate whether or not the U.S. postal service should use the
“old” or the “young” picture of Michael Jackson on a postage
stamp. Here is how I remember Michael.
I remember
being pretty full of myself when I learned how to imitate
Michael’s moonwalk. I remember incredible music videos like
Billie Jean, Beat It, Thriller
and Smooth Criminal. Those weren’t the only good
ones, just the ones that come to mind first. I remember
watching We Are The World over and over just to see
the short Michael Jackson segment. I remember The Wiz,
and I remember all the times I convinced new friends to
watch it. I remember Michael giving me the song You Are
Not Alone, to call my all-time favorite.
I
remember wishing I could dance like Michael. I remember
being near death in a hospital on August 31, 1987, my only
thoughts being how much I would miss my wife and children .
. . and my disappointment that I might not be around to
watch the national television premier of Bad.
I remember Michael proving he was not really Janet in
disguise when they both appeared on stage after the rumors
circulated. I remember sensing his child-like innocence
always there just below the surface, even after he grew up.
I remember crazy costumes; controversial family members; and
his brilliantly captivating, live on-stage performance at
the 25th Motown Anniversary show. Damn, he was good.
I remember being one of the first in line whenever a new
Michael Jackson music video came out. Most of all though, I
remember how energized I felt every single time I listened
to Michael sing or watched him in one of his music videos.
Michael could get people pumped up and happy for hours, just
from watching him or listening to one of his songs. Michael
was naturally and beautifully talented and all controversial
circumstances and events aside, Michael really was “The King
of Pop” for most of my life.
A new contender will
certainly attempt to claim the title of “King” in the music
world, but the newcomer will never be the King of “Pop.”
That honor is locked up forever by Michael Jackson. He
earned it.
We are the world . . . and the world will
miss Michael Jackson . . . I know I will.
Thanks
Michael, for all the good times (and teaching me how to
moonwalk).
TOP
McDonalds Trashes Traditional Motherhood
June 10, 2009
You can’t depend on mommy any more. Don’t panic though;
McDonalds is picking up the slack. Just look at their new
subliminal advertising campaign. On
the front of the McDonalds hot apple pie box it says, “Mom didn’t have time today
so we made you this baked apple pie.”
Mom didn’t have
time? For her own kids? Is McDonalds outing your mom? This all seems somehow wrong, but
I’m impressed nonetheless by the McDonalds approach.
McDonalds has decided to stand in for all the mommies who
don’t have time for their kids any more. Better yet, McDonalds has
decided to expose kids to the realities of life.
This
could turn into a refreshing trend. After McDonalds
convinces everyone they can’t depend on their mother any
more, the next step is to kill the Santa Claus, Easter Bunny
and Tooth Fairy myths. Then McDonalds can continue
their lets be honest campaign by killing more
nonsensical fantasies like you can accomplish anything
if you put your mind to it. From a practical viewpoint,
McDonalds can ask kids questions like, “If everyone is
equal, why do they all get different grades in school?”
McDonalds should
take this reality campaign one step further and
turn it into a game. On the back of McDonalds apple pie
boxes they should print a list with little check boxes
showing the ways mommy prefers to spend her time. Kids could
check off the statements that best describe their own moms. There
could be 20 different lists. Kids would have to purchase
tons of McDonalds apple pies to collect all the different
lists. They could take the boxes to school for show-and-tell
and compare their own lazy mother to their friends’ lazy
mothers.
McDonalds could even publish a special page
at their Internet site where kids would suggest new additions
to the lists. Weekly winners would be awarded (you guessed it)
a coupon good for one free McDonalds hot apple pie if
ordered with a happy meal.
Let me be the first to
suggest a few entries for the list. Here goes. Mommy doesn’t
have time for you because:
- You are not as important as American Idol,
Dancing with the Stars or mommy’s favorite soap
opera.
- Mommy doesn’t function properly since her cell phone
attached itself permanently to her ear.
- Mommy is too busy painting her nails and face so she
can go shopping for shoes.
- Mommy never learned how to cook, and never wanted to
because she’s lazy.
- Your uncle Bob monopolizes all of mommy’s time (don’t
tell your dad).
- Mommy is too busy cruising bars looking for a dad, or
at least a free drink.
- Mommy’s microwave oven is broken, so it’s either
McDonalds or cold hot dogs.
- Mommy never wanted you in the first place. She just
forgot to take her pill.
This is fun. I could go on and on but the kids can take it
from here. Once they understand mommy doesn’t have time for
them, they will be better prepared to accept the fact that
mommy won’t pay their college tuition; they’re out on their
ass at age 18; and you can’t depend on a woman. The paradigm
shift alone will generate years of debate by psychologists
and countless new varieties of therapy.
McDonalds
will become known as everyone’s mommy and the world will
turn into a happier place (with McDonalds serving up all the
happy meals). Lazy mothers everywhere will finally shed the
unreasonable responsibility for cooking at home and
McDonalds stock holders will smile all the way to the bank.
Everyone wins except of course, the kids. But who cares
about the kids anyway, besides McDonalds (as long as
somebody keeps paying for all those hot baked apple pies)?
There is one potential problem McDonalds overlooked.
McDonalds faces a deluge of discrimination lawsuits for
picking on mommy, but not daddy. I recommend strongly they
print a companion box that suggests daddy doesn’t have
time for you. Because in all reality, daddy doesn’t
have time for the kids either. Kids should be entitled to a
choice. A derogatory mommy apple pie box, or a
derogatory daddy apple pie box. In some cases
we might even need a derogatory granny apple
pie box.
There is no shortage of reasons for the back
of the daddy apple pie box either. Daddy doesn’t have
time for you because:
- Daddy prefers to spend his spare time looking at
pornography on the Internet.
- Daddy doesn’t function properly since his cell phone
attached itself permanently to his ear.
- Daddy would rather spend quality time with his adult
buddies than with you.
- Daddy never learned how to cook because real
men don’t cook.
- Daddy has more fun playing video games by himself than playing
anything with you.
- Your uncle Bob monopolizes all of daddy’s time (don’t
tell anybody).
- Daddy is too busy cruising bars looking for hot tender
chicks (sometimes called chicken tenders).
- Daddy’s microwave oven is broken, so it’s either
McDonalds or leftover hot wings from the local bar.
- Daddy never wanted you in the first place. You
happened along because mommy forgot to take her pill.
Looking at the current state of affairs in American society
and the breakdown of the traditional American family, this
whole McDonalds theme gives new depth of meaning to the old
phrase, As American as apple pie.
Burger
King should pay close attention to the mommy doesn’t
love you any more messages from McDonalds. If Burger
King management is clever, they will counter this insidious
McDonalds attack on American motherhood with a campaign of
their own. The Burger King hot apple pie box can say, “Mommy
asked us to give you this apple pie because she loves you.”
That’s right. Free apple pies to children under 12 who are
loved by their mommies. Do you think anyone would show up? I
do. And Burger King needs the business. Compared to
McDonalds, Burger King hasn’t been doing so good lately.
As a matter of fact, when Burger King starts giving free hot
apple pies to children under 12 who are loved by their
mommies, I will buy a few shares of Burger King common stock to go with
my Mcdonalds common stock. How could I possibly resist stock
in a company that gives away free love at the drive-through?
TOP
ATTENTION Walmart Executives
June 7, 2009
For years I wondered why I succumb to impulse buying at
Harris Teeter. Even when I go there with a very short
shopping list of gourmet items I can’t find anywhere else, I
end up coming out with 20 or 30 items that weren’t on my
list. I can’t afford to shop at Harris Teeter like that.
Their prices are so incredibly high I never understood how
they stay in business at all. But they do.
I do my
best to stay away from Harris Teeter, knowing in advance
what will happen. Where else though, can I possibly find
decent rhubarb, fresh-caught Alaska salmon or shallots?
Common sense (and my wallet) tells me I should buy most of
my groceries at Walmart where they cost a lot less.
Why Walmart? Well, Walmart is (or was) sort of my . . .
Mecca. They got it right with the “everything in one place”
concept. Why shop at three or four different stores when
almost everything I need is at Walmart for less money? Hi.
My name is Leon. I am a Walmartaholic. But for the last few
years the intoxication has been wearing thin.
Why?
Because every time I go into any Walmart, I walk out of the
store incredibly agitated. Ten minutes into a Walmart visit
I can’t wait to get out of there. It isn’t the long checkout
lines because I’m already fuming before I ever reach the
checkout counter. It isn’t the bad lighting because lighting
is terrible almost everywhere but I’m never cranky anywhere
else; just in Walmart.
Imagine becoming intensely
angry and not knowing why. It happens to women all the time
but I can explain that. When a woman can’t figure out why
she’s angry or unhappy it’s either 28 days since the last
time that happened; she’s discovered her husband is spending
money for pornography on the Internet; or she’s just not
getting enough hugs.
It is different for a man. A man
gets out of sorts from insufficient sex, high gas prices or
a woman who nags him incessantly. But at least a man knows
the cause of his agitation. A man who can’t figure out why
he’s angry is mired in a dangerous mental predicament.
Because a man is supposed to know. A man is supposed to be
in control.
Then came the day, about six months ago I
stormed out of a Walmart feeling like I should run over
somebody in the parking lot; or at least one of their
shopping carts. I had abandoned my empty shopping cart in
the middle of the produce section. If the old fart at the
entrance had said “have a nice day” to me on the way out I
would probably have cussed him out. Even then, I couldn’t
figure out what set me off.
Driving home from Walmart
and thinking, “screw Walmart; I’m going to Harris Teeter,”
the lights suddenly and finally came on. The reason someone
will sooner or later go postal in a Walmart and take out a
number of innocent customers, a checkout clerk, the old fart
at the entrance or possibly all of them at once is your
god-damned, squeaky; bumpy; drag to the right; drag to the
left; rattling and vibrating; lock up and stop dead in the
middle of the aisle; hard to push, wobbly, piece of crap
shopping carts.
These unwieldy, crippled carts make
shopping at Walmart a wholly frustrating experience. It
isn’t just the occasional cart. Every Walmart shopping cart
I’ve used for two or three years suffered some type of
malady or handicap that made it difficult or in some cases
impossible to push around. It had been staring me in the
face for years and I hadn’t noticed.
Nobody is taking
care of the carts at Walmart. That causes a significant
drain on Walmart’s bottom line. Because I don’t go to
Walmart to work out. I go to Walmart to shop (and check out
the chicks). But the cart that should contribute to a
pleasant shopping experience forces me to work out. I refuse
to work out in a Walmart. I’ll just buy my roasted chicken
for supper and finish my shopping at Harris Teeter. Can you
believe it? Forced to go bankrupt at Harris Teeter by a
Walmart handicapped shopping cart.
20 minutes later
at Harris Teeter I paid special attention to the cart that
greeted me at the entrance. I was vindicated. This sleek and
sexy, dark-colored shopping cart rolled so smoothly into the
store I barely had to push it. I couldn’t believe it. I went
back and tested another cart at random. It was just as good
as the first cart. Mind you, these are not new shopping
carts but somebody is obviously treating them with tender
loving care. A shopper doesn’t become exhausted pushing them
around or contract carpal-tunnel syndrome from constantly
forcing them to roll in a straight line.
Unlike a
Walmart cart, you can fill a Harris Teeter cart all the way
to the top (or even more) and it just glides along as
smoothly as it did when empty. Now I know why I always see
so many half-full abandoned shopping carts littering the
aisles at Walmart. It's because the weight caused them to
lock up in place and the shoppers pushing them just got mad
and left. Imagine how someone feels when their car breaks
down in the middle of an intersection. No difference.
I was reminded of every single time I’ve tried three or
four carts at Walmart only to “settle” on one that at least
rolled straight even if it took three or four horsepower to
push and sounded like a car with a flat tire driving on a
rim. My daughter admits to being embarrassed in Walmart most
of the time because our shopping cart makes so much noise.
Walmart; if you don’t think a sleazy, obstinate shopping
cart can piss off a customer and curtail his or her impulse
buys, you’d better hire a good psychologist to explain it to
you. Management is supposed to know that “impulse” buying
probably adds more to your bottom line than the shopping
list buying. Right now, all my impulse buying is reserved
for Harris Teeter and Trader Joe’s where the shopping carts
care enough to make me happy while I shop.
I’m not
just theorizing here. For the past five months, my daughter
and I (avid people watchers) have observed people intently
wherever we shop. There is no doubt that the happiest, most
impulse-buying customers populate the stores with the best
shopping carts. If Harris Teeter had Walmart shopping carts,
Harris Teeter would have folded long ago.
Walmart
faces any number of potential disasters caused by cart rage.
Customers “settle” for things that aren’t as good or as much
as they want because in all reality they don’t have much
choice. But they don’t like it and eventually one or more of
them is bound to go over the edge. That someone might be a
person who can’t control his or her temper. Walmart has the
highest potential risk because Walmart causes more cart rage
than any other store I know of.
So wake up Walmart
executives. Spend some money on cart maintenance and quality
assurance. The money you invest in your carts will be
returned many times over to your bottom line by happy
customers who desire to shop instead of working out. If you
don’t address this problem soon, the first sign of impending
disaster will be the dead carts in your parking lot that
were run over by irate customers. When that happens, you had
better start stocking up on body armor for your employees.
TOP
6/1/09 – Tammy Bruce –
Bitch! Bitch! Bitch!
11/7/08 – The New
Republican Game – “Finger The Scapegoat” 10/28/08 – Doctor Leon
Endorses John McCain for President 9/12/08 – Democratic
Party Prepares for Obama Crucifixion 8/13/08 – Solutions for
America’s Challenges 8/11/08 – Owen Frager Takes a Stab at Blackmail 8/10/08 – Barack Hussein Obama vs. John McCain vs. Paris (Hot)
Hilton
3/11/08 – Democrat Game
Rules May Change
3/9/08 – Off the Record
TOP |
ARCHIVES
|
q |