Not so fast!

The good news is, the tortoise is alive and well. I just want to be upfront about that. The bad news is, there's a new low. 

Above: Jonathan the tortoise who, as of this writing, is alive.

"For the last time, I never said anything
against trans people, Diane, not once."

-Jesus, kinda over it

New low? Maybe I should rephrase. We do, after all, live in a world where being a sex crime enthusiast isn't a bar to high office, and where we can't ban conversion therapy because that would impinge on some therapist's right to tell trans kids that Jesus is mad at them. Which he's not. He told me himself. What, don't believe me? Prove it. Boom. And yes, I'm going to be salty about that for a while. Anyway, my point is that there are some real shitheels out there, and I think they need to be called out even if their crime is trying to scam people with a dead tortoise and not say, bombing Iran. And once again, to be clear, the tortoise isn't actually dead.

Yeah, the "Trail of Tears" guy. Hey, Jonathan
has lived through the two worst presidents... 

What tortoise? Great question, glad you asked. Jonathan is a one hundred and ninety-four year old Seychelles giant tortoise living on Saint Helena island. Yes, one hundred and ninety four years of age old, can you believe it? He's a contemporary of both Brahms and Chappell Roen. He was hatched during the Jackson administration. He's the oldest living land animal according to my exhaustive research of his wikipedia page, so you can imagine the reaction around the world when his veterinarian, Joe Hollins, announced his death on X, and then asked for crypto donations--which, yeah, see where this is going? 

Above: Jonathan with today's headlines,
which I guess means he's ok? I'm not sure
how to tell an alive tortoise from a dead one.

According to the Guardian, upon learning of the alleged death of the island's oldest living inhabitant, the Governor of St. Helena--yeah, the actual governor--went outside to check. Evidently Jonathan lives at the Governor's house, or maybe the island is really small, either way, he found the animal alive, and even took a proof of life photo this morning just to quell any remaining rumors. But what about the vet's twitter post? Welp, turns out that wasn't him. That was just some rando posing as the vet to ring sympathy money out of tortoise lovers and that's why there's an extra warm spot in hell just for them.

Seriously, explain to me why it
exists except for doing crimes. 

And look, if this wasn't such a shitty, manipulative, cynical scam, you'd almost have to admire the dirtbag. Like, who would have thought to fake the death of an ancient tortoise in order to make a quick, uh, crypto buck? The hutzpah! It sounds like it should have been a perfect crime. Who could have foreseen the island's governor being in strolling distance of Jonathan? I don't know if they netting any crypto, although if they did, I suppose there's nothing to be done. It is, after all, crime money. 

I mean, could you imagine how much better the world would be if we took all the money, resources, and manpower we're wasting on a pointless war, racist immigration enforcement, and that preposterous ballroom/secret military base, and spent in on going after scammers?

"What am I doing? Why, I'm buying something called bit coin to send to
the Tulsa Police Department to bail out a grandson I wasn't aware I had."

-Someone's grandparent, right now

somewhere. Like this moment

Heartless? Hey, we all agree on something!

"Oh, was I not suppose to say that?"

-the deranged clown 35%

of the country still worships

I guess what we're all saying is that no one, literally no one was waiting for the Senate Republicans to chime in on International Transgender Day of Visibility. We know very well what they think about--wait, that's not fair. Sorry, I'm being unfair. Here I am, suggesting that Republicans don't care about trans people and that's misleading and simply not the case. They do care about trans people. At least insofar as they can keep beating the drum of "woke Democrats want to trans your kids" in order to con rubes into voting for seven dollar per gallon gas and secret military bunkers under the East Wing.

Case in point, yesterday, when the Democratic Party's X account posted--yeah, I don't know why they have an X account either--anyway, when they posted in support of trans rights, the National Republican Senatorial Committee replied:

"Wow, sick burn, brah."

-literally no one

Apologies to strawberry vape fans, but
comedy loves specificity. Also, maybe quit?

Yeah, whatever manosphere-addled, young Republican intern they put in charge of their social media account set down their strawberry vape long enough tap out "No" followed by a heart. I would read this as "no heart," an astonishingly frank, and self-aware thing for a conservative to say. So obviously that's not it. Instead, what they meant is "we disagree with everything you just said." Everything the Democrats said being "we acknowledge that you, trans people that is, exist, and are facing a daily struggle just to exist in the world." 

Whoa, whoa, that's a serious allegation.
You'd better have evidence to--oh, right.

No to all that, is what the NRSC is saying here. No. No to trans and non-binary people existing. Which, great. Super. The GOP looked at the unrelenting shitstorm of torment and vitriol visited upon a small and extremely vulnerable minority in America, and said, "how can we make their lives juuuuuust a little bit worse, while at the same time distract from the child sex trafficking our party's leader is allegedly guilty of?" Any ideas? The answer? A shitty comment on the burnt out husk of what used to be Twitter.  

The only silver lining here is that, despite the NRSC's dumb social media post, America's 2.8 million trans and 1.2 million or so non-binary people do indeed continue to exist. Something which, if there's any justice in the world, we may someday not be able to say of the GOP.

This November, just remember which party brought back internment camps, started a war,
sent armed goons into American cities, deported citizens, threatened our allies, and shielded (and in
many cases are themselves) sex offenders. Assuming that is, we actually get to vote ever again.

Today in justifiable gatekeeping:

I don't want to gatekeep or anything, but Stephen Miller is not a Star Trek fan. Ok, fine, I guess I do want to gatekeep. But hear me out: complaining about how woke the latest entry in the long running series of series about a moneyless, secular humanist utopia of space hippies is is evidence that he's not really a fan of Star Trek and possibly has never seen it before. It's been woke since the 1960's when painting Frank Gorshin half black and half white was considered subtle social commentary.

Star Trek in 1969: Racism is dumb and wrong.
The entire GOP platform in 2026: Racism is great, keep it up!

I mean, this has to be
unconstitutional too, right?

Miller, for those unfamiliar, is the White House Deputy Chief of Staff. He's probably most famous for both his policy of ejecting brown people from the United States without a hearing and for that time he went on TV sporting an artificial hairline he'd inexpertly sharpied onto his head. He recently took time off from Grima Wormtongue-ing into the remarkably un-scarred ear of the current President, to voice his opinion of the new Star Trek Starfleet Academy show, or at least a clip of it posted on a Twitter account called End Wokeness. Miller pronounced it "Tragic" and helpfully suggested that Paramount reconcile with William Shatner, so that he can salvage this disaster. I mean, ladies? In space?

Above: a scene from Starfleet Academy,
seen here passing the Bechdel test. 

At least, I assume that's what his beef is. Or maybe it's that one of the actors is British? Doesn't matter, he's the figurative (and possibly literal) devil. For William Shatner's part, the ninety-four year old star of Priceline.com ads trolled him right back suggesting that Miller's issue was that Holly Hunter wore glasses in the scene, because what else could it be? Anyway, he added that he's standing by to assume total control. Like it's an island in the North Atlantic.

Which, Uh-oh, does Miller know that Shatner is Canadian? Yikes, better not tell him.

Oh, right, he's white. Guess he's safe from Stephen Miller then, amiright?

Pictured: Jean-Luc Picard, noted captain
seen here not wearing fake spray-on
hair, and thinking woke thoughts. 

In any case, I felt the need to come out of my semi-retirement both to rag on Stephen Miller for having an opinion about how to fix Star Trek, and to say that I quite enjoyed the first couple of episodes of the new series. Did I ever think I'd be interested in a show that's at least fifty percent teen drama? Absolutely not, but I'm super into it and can't wait for the next episode. And do you know what? Make it more woke. Just, pour it on. Nothing gives me greater joy than to see right-wing shitheels whining about how they don't feel seen. Particularly when it's about media that stands in direct challenge to their worldview.

Zoox: it's not a word.

Look, I'm not anti-robot, I'm just anti-pointless robot. Or more precisely anti-robot where the point is to eliminate a human's job so that the shareholders or whoever can buy another yacht or a bit coin or whatever else it is bajillioniares are into.

"Human suffering. We're mostly into human suffering."

-bajillionaires

As long as nothing ever collides
with it ever, you should be fine.

Which brings us to Zoox. What's a zoox, you might reasonably ask? Well, first of all, it's Zoox, with a capital "Z." It's a nonsense word invented solely so they'd have a name they could trademark. Secondly, "it's not a car," according to the website. "It's a robo-taxi designed around you." But it is a car. It's 100% a car. Or at least a golf cart. Again, this is about the marketing, and not about providing a useful description. So, to be clear, of it's definitely, albeit one that looks like a box on wheels. A fragile, mostly plastic box on wheels, with no driver.

"Well, I got bathroom breaks."

-Jeff "Dick Rocket" Bezos

No human driver, that is. Instead it's an autonomous vehicle. You know, those things that are mowing down pedestrians, and clogging up city streets? Unlike Waymos, these things don't resemble cars (although they're totally cars). Instead they remind me more of twenty-first century horse drawn-carriage, but without the horse, or charm. A horseless carriage if you will (again: car). Oh, and it's owned by an online retailer called Amazon. You might remember them as the company that made its employees poop in bags rather than give them bathroom breaks. 

Even charmless manosphere
homunculi can drive electric vehicles.

Admittedly this was some years ago, and I should probably let it go, but I mean: poop. In bags. Anyway, more recently the company has been in the news for trying to replace their employees with robots, so I suppose this tracks. So I guess my question is, what's the justification here? In what way are autonomous taxis better than those driven by humans? Now before you say they're electric, I will remind you that humans can drive electric vehicles too. We don't have to trade cabbies for electric cars. What I'm asking is who benefits from robots-taxis?

In what way is an autonomous taxi superior to one driven by a person?

Hang on, I'm getting there.

Besides, Zoox's transverse seating creates
the social awkwardness that comes with having
to stare at your fellow passengers the whole ride.

Sure, passengers don't have to make awkward conversation with a Zoox. But I'm not sure we should be willing to trade the livelihoods of cabbies and ride-shar-ies (that's the term, right?), just to sooth out social anxiety. And to be clear, I don't love Uber and Lyft, like, as things, but at least it's still a job. A person does a thing--drives an Uber--and receives compensation for it. Job. Zoox is a product that replaces someone's job. The company's slogan suggests that it's "built around you," but it's not. Of course it's not. It's designed around and for the sole purpose of, generating revenue. 

And ok, I know, boooo, capitalism. Get me, I'm edgy, but I really do think it bears repeating that every time we hail a Zoox instead of a cab, or buy a thing off of Amazon instead of a small business, or use generative AI instead of an actual human artist we're just making the world a little bit shittier. Which, I mean, you wouldn't think that would be a needle we could even move at this point, but here we are.

This just in: unfettered capitalism might not be in the best interests of everyone. 

Maybe don't give up the day job?

Oh...uh, apologies to some of
the hillbillies out there. 

So what about anything--poll numbers, the economy, the world in general--would lead J.D. Vance to think that anyone, anyone, wanted to hear his tight five about turkey? I'm sorry, I'm being unfair. It was not five, and it was far from tight. But for the Vice President, who famously called Trump Hitler, before hitching his fake hillbilly wagon to--wait, are hillbilly's associated with wagons? And is hillbilly kind of, you know, offensive? It feels like it might be insulting. Apologies to the hillbillies out there.

Anyway, I'm getting off topic. Sorry, it's been a few months. So Vance, whose only job qualification is sycophancy, and whose only job is to have a pulse, was at Fort Campbell, Tennessee serving food to the troops when he decided to shit all over turkey for some reason. Obviously I mean that figuratively, but if anyone wants to make it a pervasive rumor that people have look up on Snopes or whatever, I'm not going to stop you. 

"You know, there's extra gravy in it for you if you agree to follow
whatever orders the President gives, regardless of legality."

-Vice President Vance, 

trying his best

Pictured: The Vice President, seen
here with some of the troops he accused
of being "full of shit" for liking turkey.

Now, I know what you're thinking: doesn't the military have kitchen staff? Well, yes. Of course they do. I mean, unless they were trans, or gay, or grew a beard, but the point wasn't to serve the soldiers. The point was to exploit them for a photo op. And, since the cameras were rolling anyway, Vance decided to try out his: "does anyone actually like turkey?" bit. Many answered in the affirmative, but since "yes" wasn't the answer he needed for his joke, he accused the troops of being liars. Well, first he said they were full of shit, then he called them liars. 

Above: a couch.

Which is wild coming from a member of the current administration, but wilder still coming from the guy who freely admitted to just making things up to get media attention. And then to do on and-huh? Oh, specifically making up racist lies about Haitians. Maybe the eating dogs thing? It doesn't matter, the point is he's full of shit. We know he's full of shit. He knows that we know that he's full of shit, and he's one hundred percent comfortable with that. Truth doesn't matter, and that's one of the many reasons he's the literal worst. Ok, Vice Literal Worse. 

The math doesn't check out, which
tracks, because they don't believe in math.

So, clearly the troops like turkey, I like turkey, millions of Americans like turkey. Even J.D. Vance, in the midst of his idiotic "turkey's bad, amiright?" routine, spoke about his plans to have turkey tomorrow. I guess my question is why did no one on his staff wave him off the "trash an American tradition" jokes? Maybe I'm giving them too much credit, but comedy is logical, and the basic logic of this line of--and I'm being generous here--humor, is flawed. Turkey is simply not the new fruit cake.

Look, nobody cares. Merry Christmas.

This whole thing is particularly bizarre given the right's obsession with positioning themselves as the defenders of all things traditional. The right's bread and butter voters are people who build their entire personality around being persecuted for saying "Merry Christmas," and "God Bless America," (two things no one in the history of forever has ever been persecuted for saying) but here's this goon is calling the troops liars for not yes and'ing his fumbling and cringy sub-Seinfeldian observational humor about our most traditional holiday meal? I know their too Fox-News and Twitter-addled to know when they're being played, but shouldn't they be outraged by the V.P.'s hardline anti-turkey stance?

You know, I'd say he shouldn't give up the day job, but maybe he should. Quit I mean. Quit and never speak in public again?

On the other hand, if Vance gave up Vice President-ing for a career in
comedy, we'd be only one Epstein list away from a Mike Johnson
Presidency, so I suppose it's for the best he stays where he is for now.

Today in ill-conceived marketing pitches:

What do professionals have that I don't?
Pie charts and a man-bun, evidently.

So I'm not dead or anything. I usually do a bunch of these every month, and only like one so far in July. I guess I'm calling it a sabbatical from blogging. You know, like the rest of the world did in 2010 or whenever it was people stopped doing these. Although, can I even take a sabbatical? Professional people with serious jobs take sabbaticals, for the rest of us, it's just not showing up at work. Which this isn't. Nobody's paying me to do this. And that's fine, I wouldn't pay me for this either.

Now I'm reading my mail at you.
That's how out of ideas I am.

Anyway, the point is I thought you should know that I'm not dead. That's not however stopping a local funeral parlor from advertising at me. And at some point, I  can't help but feel that this constitutes a threat, albeit one that comes with a meal at a Mexican restaurant. Oh, didn't I mention? Here, let me back up. The mailing was addressed to my family or "Current Resident," which I found somewhat impersonal. It's almost as if they don't care about me, only the possibility that I or a loved one might die. Hey, you don't suppose...

Pictured: why more Americans are
pre-planning for their imminent deaths.

Ok, so one side of the enclosed flyer extols the virtues of pre-planing for one's demise, which is, I'm sure this is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, but it's not something one necessarily wants to think about, so in many ways, the good people at Benita & Azzaro have their work cut out for them. They approach it as any good rhetorician would: with a list. In their case, a list of reasons "...more Americans are pre-planning." They don't provide any evidence that we're doing more preplanning than previously, but I'm not really prepared to do research here.

Be sure to check the "bloated corpse
loaded into a catapult and flung over
the enemy's wall" box on the form.

The reasons given include #1: not being a financial burden on those left behind. Because worrying about money should haunt you to your grave. #2: Making sure the wishes of the deceased are carried out. Because dead people defiantly care about such things. And #3 "Creating contingency plans." Which isn't a reason, and completely breaks the rhythm established by the first two items, but since lists need a minimum of three things for some reason, there it is. Is it weird that that's what bothers me the most about this funeral home's marking push? It is, isn't it?  

But, and I'm sure you were wondering the same thing I was: what does Benjamin Franklin have to say on the matter of planing one's own funeral:

"Ow...it burns when I pee."

-Franklin, in one of his 

lesser known aphorisms

"By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail."

-Benjamin Franklin, according 

to Benita & Azzaro's flyer

Great advice. And who better to advise us than Benjamin Franklin? He is, after all, dead. Of course, he was famously riddled with STIs, so maybe he wasn't the best at thinking ahead?

Which brings us to the dinner for two at El Jardín Restaurant. Or does it? No. But the pre-deceased and a guest are cordially invited to an exclusive complimentary meal and seminar...yes, and seminar. Uh-huh, there's the catch. I'm out, but if you and a guest are free on Wednesday, August 6th in the middle of the day--like, noon on a weekday--and would like to sit through a sales pitch about how to plan for your inevitable non-existence, hit me up for a QR code. I am, of course, only joking. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. 

Ironically, the release death brings would be preferable to the luncheon seminar.

Not a Scoop!

I know journalism has long since died, but it's long frustrated me that Prime Day is somehow worthy of news. But this:

Pictured: the kind of heard-hitting journalism we've come to expect in the 2020's.

Look, I'm not business guy, but why'd he
bother buying the Washington Post when
news sites will cover his sales for free? 

So the "article"--and I hesitate to use the word--covers which sales the writer feels are worth taking advantage of and which are not, and which ones are worth jumping on before the official start of Prime Day on July 8th. None of which is news. And sure, I get that there has long been a tradition of things like Consumer Reports which cover things of importance to people trying to save money, but this feels not like that. And I don't mean to criticize the writer of the NBC piece linked above as a person, just the existence of their job. 

But first, I feel obligated to voice my traditional concerns about how dumb Prime Day, as a thing, is. Not because Amazon is the economic equivalent of a malignant polyp, nor because the "sale" follows subtle price increases in the lead up, but because Prime Day is multiple days. Four days this year. And it's confusing because Prime means first, "day" is singular, and this "sale" lasts ninety-six hours. 

"I rented Venice, do you think I can't redefine time itself?"

-Jeff Bezos,* evidently

Click here for great deals on transatlantic
cruises, life jackets, and deckchairs!

While the article does make a passing reference to some of the items on sale are not worth buying, the writer doesn't say which ones. Instead, what follows is just a list of items whose Prime Day sale prices are highlighted, along with direct links to the online retailer, as well as bullet points about the Prime Day sales. None of which seems like something honest journalism, even journalism that purports to be helping consumers make purchasing decisions, should ever, ever do. The writer even includes personal testimonials for some of them. 

Pictured: literally anyone explaining
how this isn't seriously compromised.

That's not news. And I know it's carried under the label "NBC Select," but what even is that? I asked AI--well, I didn't ask AI, I searched the question and Google made an assumption, but, I mean, look at this: "NBC Select is a section of NBC News and CNBC that focuses on providing high-quality, editorially independent content, including deals, tips, and product reviews, to help readers make informed decisions about various aspects of their lives..."

That's just an example, I'm sure that
Ninja Air Fryers are great at making
dried out food that last like plastic.

What? I mean, what? It's high quality, editorially independent content about deals? That's oxymoronic. The explanation wraps back in on itself and explodes in a cloud of its own rhetorical impossibility. The actual NBC Select site includes an advertiser disclosure that claims that while they receive a commission, said commission doesn't influence what they say about the products. Which, ok, but if they say, for example, that they feel a new Ninja Air Fryer is garbage, they have to know that Ninja Air Fryer commissions will dry up. So, how is it possible for them to be independent and accept commissions?

Again, not blaming the writer here, they're just doing their job. I'm not even blaming NBC. I think all the news sites have something similar to this. They are not responsible for the hyper-capitalist, dystopian nightmare we find ourselves in. But they're not, you know, helping, and sooner or later the wheels are coming off.

"Here's to endless growth with no consequences!"

-Rich people

*I'm aware that he's no longer in charge of the day to day operations, but he still like, is the largest shareholder so...