Who's on first?

Here's a crude attempt of imitating the "who's on first" skit of the great Abbott and Costello:

A: Mmm mmm mm

Barack Hussein Obama.

Mmm mmm mm

Obama is taking order from Hu in Communist China.

Mmm mmm mm

Hu told Obama he should not see Dalai Lama.

Mmm mmm mm

So Obama says yessir and announce that he will not see Dalai Lama.

B: Hey, wait a minute. Obama is taking order from who in Communist China?

A: Yea, you got it right!

B: I got what right?

A: Obama is taking order from Hu in Communist China.

B: That’s what I’m asking you: Obama is taking order from who in Communist China?

A: The answer is Obama is taking order from Hu in Communist China.

B: Cool it, let's start over again, what's going on?

A: Like I said, Hu did not want Obama to see Dalai Lama in Washington, so Obama obey Hu's order not to see Dalai Lama this time.

B: Who did not want Obama to see Dalai Lama in Washingtom?

A: Hu.

B: Who?

A: Hu!

B: What’s the matter with you? That’s my question. Why do you asking me for?

. . .

Here's a good 2006 imitation:



Here's even a Shakespearian imitation:



And of course here's the original great:

Ig Nobel peace prize -- joker's joke

Quick, do you know who Le duc tho is?

Now an easier question, can you name a famous name that was nominated or a winner for Nobel peace prize?

Well, Bush, yes, he was nominated, Carter, yes, he was a winner, Gore, yes, he had won one too along with thousands of his fellow alarmists, . . .

Keep going, Gandhi?

Yes! He was nominated in 1938, "although the committee agreed that he didn't deserve recognition" according to this February 21, 2003 Guardian article.

Keep going. who else?

Hitler?

Yes, indeed, Adolf Hitler, was nominated for Nobel peace prize in 1938 also. That was "after the persecution of the Jews had been established under the Nuremberg laws" according to Guardian.

The above mentioned 2003 Guardian article, entitled "Ignoble peace prize" has this subtitle:

Given the fact that previous nominees include Adolf Hitler and Henry Kissinger, can anyone take the Nobel Peace Prize seriously, asks Paul Hamilos

No, no one would in their right mind, take the Nobel peace prize seriously at any rate, especially in 2009 today, no one can be surprised either. The joker's joke continues!

Now here's the tidbit Guardian alluded to which I doubt that's well known to everyone:

The prize was inspired by Alfred Nobel's secretary, Bertha von Suttner, who was nominated four times (nothing to do, of course, with Alfred being deeply in love with her) and was the first female winner in 1905.

Clearly it has never been really taken too seriously from day one. I think Alfrred and Bertha would turning in their graves much more stronger than before. Because the possibility of a nuclear war is much stronger now than a year ago and 300 million U.S. people have rendered much less safe and defenseless after their country's defense had been unconditionally disarmed by the 2009 Nobel Peace prize winner recently.


Poor American people, they made the worst mistake in their 233 years glorious history in 2008. Now their future, their safety, their dream, . . . are all in doubt. All because they elected some joker to lead their country who couldn't even show you where he was born -- and taking orders from the Commie regime occupying Chinese mainland not to see another Nobel Peace prize winner, Dalai Lama, among other things!

Please don't despair, American people are too strong and too smart not to take their country back and restore their former glory.

Let us pray!


P. S.

Oh yes, in case you are still not knowing who Le duc tho is, he was the one that presided at the first U.S. surrender by Henry Kissenger under Gerald Ford who sold out U.S. ally the Republic of Vietnam -- after the U.S. armed forces had won all the battles against the Viet Com on the battlefield. That's the part of the real history you may be too young or too indifferent to know.

Herta Müller, the dispossessed, 2009 Nobel Laureate in Literature

I don't know her, I have never heard of her, all because of my general ignorance. I have not think much about the Nobel literature prize because they often tainted by petty liberal politics.

But when I started looking into the news, I am mildly impressed this year because Miss Müller was awarded for her writings about her oppression and persecutions by the communist and "dispossessed" from her native land. Her profile in Wikipedia indicated that: "In 1976, Müller began working as a translator for an engineering company, but was dismissed in 1979 for her refusal to cooperate with the Securitate, the Communist regime's secret police." And the news article in Epoch Times describes her this way: "Her sensitive and insightful works reflect life under the rule of Ceausescu, who was overthrown and executed in 1989. She left Romania with her husband Richard Wagner in 1987 and now lives and works in Berlin."

My thumbs are up to Miss Müller and to the Nobel prize committee this year.

Just follow your nose!

Something refreshing for a Monday morning: this Reuters News from Stockholm by Nicholas Vinocur:

Three Americans won the Nobel prize for medicine on Monday for discovering and identifying telomerase, the enzyme that renews the little caps on the end of chromosomes whose natural fraying underlies aging and cancer.

That's not too earth shaking. But I was encouraged by the comments of Carol Greider, one of the three, who said the Nobel prize recognized the value of discoveries driven by pure curiosity. And

"We had no idea when we started this work that telomerase would be involved in cancer, but were simply curious about how chromosomes stayed intact," she said in an emailed statement.

"Our approach shows that while you can do research that tries to answer specific questions about a disease, you can also just follow your nose," she said.

Just follow your nose! What a refreshing and profound advice for doing scientific research. I am sure that more sagacious and enlightened comments will be developed later on, but I think this her immediate reaction will still be most most natural, candid, and ingenuous -- and not at all affected by the stinky political correctness. In the present state of our research system, alas, there is absolutely no room for "pure curiosity" researches to enable anyone to follow their nose. Don't the "answer specific question" kind of research reminds you of standing on a street corner? (No apology for those who might be offended by this question. Hey this is a personal blog written for my own enlightenment first of all, and thank God this is still the U.S. of A, where we are all endowed with certain unalienable Rights by our Creator. Please feel free to find other blogs to read to accommodate your own discernment. Of course, it's easy for me to say because I am retired. It was the overwhelming feeling of that last question that led me to finally decided to retire! )

The EGO has landed!

This is the latest news from the online CBS (emphasize added):

COPENHAGEN, Denmark (CBS) ―Despite four years, millions of dollars in planning and a last-ditch pitch from President Obama, the Chicago 2016 Olympic bid ultimately fell short.

The City of Chicago was eliminated in the first round of voting, before any host city was selected.

An expert called it the "biggest shock in IOC history."

The last sentence is clearly an over statement. Chicago was never even close to be considered by anyone in the first place when you look at the cities in the running.

I guess Drudge Report characterized it the best:

The Ego has landed:
World rejects Obama . . .

And this:

Obama + Michelle x Oprah = Zero.

There's sanity in this world after all!

Do you know what's going on, really?

How can you keep yourself duly informed?
How about watch this for a start:

A beautiful story

This is a sad, but also very, very beautiful love story. No other adjective can describe it:

. . . our love knows eternity, and because our love knows eternity, our love overcomes death.

God bless us all!

Hat tip: NCRegister.com.