“Wokeness” Is Not the Democrats’ Problem - Some in the Party chastise the left for driving away moderate voters, but they fail to consider why their own base isn’t turning out in larger numbers. - link
Can a Vastly Bigger National-Service Program Bring the Country Back Together? - The idea has a remarkably broad array of supporters, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Stanley McChrystal. - link
How Big a Threat Is Steve Bannon? - The case of Donald Trump’s former adviser marks a strange and perilous period in American democracy. - link
The Outsized Meaning of the Rittenhouse Verdict - A Wisconsin self-defense law made it difficult for the jury to convict—an outcome that was celebrated by the Republican Party’s violent fringe. - link
The John Smiths of America - One was an internationally known expert in molecular biology; another was a miner who loved to play checkers. - link
From Vox
Two confusing questions about Covid-19 boosters, answered -
President Joe Biden, eligible because he is older than 65, received a booster shot for Covid-19 in September. | Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
Should I get it? And, if I do, am I taking a dose from someone who needs it more?
The big Covid topic on everyone’s minds is boosters.
On Friday morning, the FDA authorized Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna booster shots for all adults ages 18 and up.And later in the day, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) followed suit.
The CDC said that every adult who is at least six months removed from their second shot of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine can get a third shot. And it recommended that people over the age of 50 or in long-term care settings make sure they do so.
The long-awaited decision comes after months in which the boundaries of who can get a booster have been widening. The Biden administration first announced its plans to make boosters widely available in August. Since then, we’ve seen the rollout of boosters to Pfizer and Moderna recipients over age 65, and those who are 18 or older who are immunocompromised or at high risk of infection. All adult Johnson & Johnson one-dose recipients have also been approved for booster shots, two months after their first.
The fact is, the federal government has been lagging on this front. Several states have already gotten ahead of the federal government by approving boosters for adults: Colorado, California, New Mexico, and Arkansas, among others, have all moved in the last few weeks to declare nearly all adults eligible. And based on anecdotal accounts, even adults not eligible yet have been able to get a booster shot.
That has left people anticipating official federal guidance that anyone who wants a booster can get one — and it has also fostered confusion over what exactly the US’s public health game plan is, and whether getting the booster is the right personal choice for any given person.
Those questions will only loom larger now, with the expanded booster eligibility. Here’s how to help you think through the situation.
I’m healthy and not at higher risk for serious disease. Should I get a booster?
Personally, this describes my situation — and I’m getting one.
If you got two shots of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines, as I did, you’re already fairly well-protected from severe Covid-19 outcomes. The main thing a booster does is make you less likely to get infected and (mildly)sick — but that’s still good to have.
We have a lot more data on these vaccines than we did when they were first approved. We know that they generally remain very effective against severe illness and death even a year after someone gets two shots. But they do wane in effectiveness against infection. Six months after your second dose, the vaccine is less protective against catching Covid-19 and, perhaps, virus spread.
That’s because antibody levels in the blood decline over time. Experts disagree on how much peopleshould worry about that. Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, told me that a healthy, functioning immune system gradually prunes blood antibodies for infections the body hasn’t encountered, and it doesn’t mean you won’t fight off Covid-19 just fine (likelysuffering only mild, maybe even unnoticeable illness, if you do catch it).
There’s a fair debate to be had about whether preventing infection, if illness is likely to be mild, is all that important as a public health priority. But even though I won’t get all that sick if I get Covid-19 because I’m fully vaccinated, I prefer not to get it at all. The booster does reduce my risk of becoming infected with Covid-19 — period. For me, that’s sufficient to take a booster, especially given that I didn’t have bothersome sideeffects from the first two shots.
This lukewarm recommendation becomes a much stronger one for older adults and others at elevated risk from Covid-19 due to their health or setting. If your immune system functions less well, then at least one additional shot might be needed just to get your immune system to the level of readiness that other people were at after two shots. That’s well worth it.
And if you got Johnson & Johnson, you should definitely get a booster (which the CDC had already approved) to combat some waning in vaccine efficacy for the one-dose shot.
If I’m healthy and get a booster, am I taking a dose away from someone who needs it more?
A lot of Covid-19 questions are complicated, but here’s one thing we can be fairly sure of: Your booster shot, if you choose to get one, is very likely not directly coming at the expense of other people, experts told me.
The concern stems from the fact that many people in the US will be getting their third shot when about half of the world hasn’t had even one shot. That’s not just an injustice and a humanitarian wrong, it’s also strategically foolish: Virus variants can develop more easily when Covid-19 cases are high, and vaccines are the most effective way to lower them.
If skipping a booster would get that shot to someone in a poor country instead, I’d prefer to do that.
But that’s not really how vaccine allocation works. Many months ago, the US placed orders with Moderna and Pfizer for millions of doses of their vaccines. Other countries and international organizations did the same.
Those orders, experts told me, are being fulfilled in the order they were placed — so if Moderna is committed to delivering 20 million doses to the US first, then 10 million to France next, that’s the order they will send them. And if the US orders additional doses now in response to increased demand from booster-getters like us, that request will be at the back of the queue.
Not getting your booster won’t get that shot to people in other countries who need them more. What might help, Amanda Glassman, senior fellow at the Center for Global Development, told me, is queue-swapping: the US formally ceding its place in line to other countries that need it more or to Covax, the international alliance to vaccinate the world.
If you’re frustrated, like I am, that millions of vaccines are going unused in the US while they’re badly needed elsewhere, you should absolutely push for the US to give up its place in line. But skipping a booster shot won’t change how many doses Moderna or Pfizer will deliver to the US before they move on to the next country on their list.
And within the US, we have plenty of supply of mRNA vaccines at this point — so getting a booster isn’t taking one from your neighbors either.
Why there has been so much confusion over boosters
The confusion surrounding boosters is in some ways an outgrowth of messy communications from the public health establishment. It likely explains the markedly different response to boosters than to the initial wave of vaccines.
Conversations about boosters have been tinged with ambivalence and uncertainty. In the early days when the vaccines first started rolling out to the larger population, my family and friends drove for hours to land our Covid-19 vaccines. I hate long car rides, but I spent the whole time actively excited. There’s a bit less of that feeling this time (but don’t tell that to our 5-year-old, who was so inspired she declared she’ll invent an immortality shot when she grows up).
“We’ve miscommunicated this,” Offit told me. He argues that the adults dying of Covid-19 are almost all people who are unvaccinated or those at much-elevated risk, and the back-and-forth on boosters for healthy people has ended up leaving people confused. Many people who are already very safe from serious infection or death have ended up with the impression they’re at risk, while people who actually are at risk — largely those who are unvaccinated — have ended up with the impression the vaccines don’t really help.
The FDA and CDC announcements on expanding booster eligibility should hopefully clarify some of the confusion out there. And the science on booster shots will continue to evolve — as we learn more, it should inform our public policies and individual decision-making.
In the meantime, it’s okay to go ahead and grab a booster to increase your protection. The earlier doses of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are still protective against severe disease and hospitalization, but an added coat of armor — especially since there is little vaccine scarcity in the US — can only help.
Update, November 19, 6:15 pm: This story was updated to reflect news of the CDC approving expanded booster shot eligibility, after FDA approval earlier in the day.
The smart political argument behind the satire Such a Fun Age -
Such a Fun Age by Kiley Reid | Courtesy of Putnam
Kiley Reid’s debut novel reveals the lie behind the claims that the Obama age was post-racial.
The Vox Book Club is linking to Bookshop.org to support local and independent booksellers.
Kiley Reid’s Such a Fun Age, the Vox Book Club’s pick for November, takes place in a very specific age indeed. It’s 2015, the lead-up to the 2016 election. President Barack Obama is in office, Hillary Clinton is expected to be the next president, and pundits are given to smugly declaring America to be post-racist and post-sexist.
As Such a Fun Age shows, that was never truly the case. This novel is a satire of polite liberal prejudices, and how they flourish beneath a veneer of colorblind civility.
Such a Fun Age concerns 25-year-old Emira. She’s Black, a recent college grad, and struggling to figure out what she wants to do with the rest of her life. Her 26th birthday is approaching, which means she’s about to get kicked off her parents’ health insurance, so she’s got a ticking clock on this problem.
But all Emira really likes doing is hanging out with Briar, her 3-year-old white babysitting charge. Emira has tried to imagine getting a permanent nannying position with another family so she can get her own health care, but it’s not children in the abstract she likes: it’s Briar specifically, who is smart and deadpan funny and never stops asking questions.
What Emira likes less is Briar’s mother, Alix. And it’s with Alix that Reid’s satire gets most pointed.
Alix exists as an all-too realistic parody of Lean In white feminism. She’s a sort of proto-influencer who built her brand in the ’00s by writing handwritten letters to companies asking for free products, receiving them, and then blogging about the result. Now, she’s an Instagrammer who runs a coaching business teaching women how to ask for what they want — so long as they are nice, upper-middle-class women who ask politely, respectfully, and on expensive stationery. Her signature hashtag is #LetHerSpeak.
The tell that Alix’s interest in letting women speak is phony comes early on, when we enter her point of view and learn what she thinks of Briar. Alix is viscerally annoyed by Briar’s voice, which is “loud and hoarse” and “consumed everything in its path.” Briar seems more unruly to Alix than other children her age, less respectable in her curiosity and desires. So though Alix is happy to use Briar as a prop — breastfeeding her from the stage during an event in order to leverage a viral moment, positioning herself as the icon of the modern mom who has it all — she prefers not to pay too much attention to Briar on a day-to-day basis. That’s why she hires Emira.
And Alix finds herself fascinated by Emira, much more than she is fascinated by Briar. She wants Emira to use her youth and Blackness and beauty to validate Alix, to affirm that since Alix has a close Black friend and her favorite shoes are from Payless, she’s still cool. She wants, also, to “save” Emira from herself, to teach her how to polish her self-presentation and redo her résumé and start writing handwritten cover letters on beautiful creamy stationery.
Emira isn’t particularly interested in any of that, though. She mostly just wants health care, and she wants to be thought of as a human rather than as a prop in white people’s performances of progressivism. That’s why her closest relationship is with Briar, who loves her with a deep and specific gravity. It’s also why she doesn’t care for Alix, who treats her as a trophy — and why she’s more than a little wary of her own white boyfriend, Kelley.
While Alix is an obvious villain, a cringey tryhard who might as well be the living embodiment of A White Woman’s Instagram, Kelley is a more ambiguous character. We never get inside his head, as we do with Alix, but we can see from the outside that he’s self-confident and genuinely pretty cool, someone easy to like.
But Kelley also, Emira notes with some surprise, seems to only date Black women and have Black friends. He drops the n-word in casual conversation, hard r and all. When Emira talks about racism, he seems very eager to prove that he “gets it,” but she isn’t at all sure that he does. He seems to savor his outrage over her situation in a way she keeps thinking is maybe a little off-putting.
Kelley and Alix, we eventually learn, have a history. It’s left them resentful of each other — and also eager to use Emira as a pawn in the contest Alix mentally labels Which One of Us Is Actually More Racist?
And so Such a Fine Age winds up with Emira, now extricated from both Alix and Kelley, thinking not of them but of Briar. Briar was the only person Emira could be sure genuinely loved her in her whole time as a babysitter — but Emira fears that stuck alone with her neglectful mother and all the privileges of whiteness, Briar, too, will come to outsource her emotional labor to someone she can hire. In the world of liberal racism, the problem isn’t hate so much as it is unthinking and callous fetishism.
Let’s talk about that Thanksgiving scene! Alix and Kelley first recognize each other when Alix invites Emira and her boyfriend over for her Thanksgiving party, for which she has decorated with ironic tacky pumpkins and turkeys. Did Thanksgiving strike you as a good time for all these secrets to come out? What about the class politics of Kelley taking Alix’s ironic decor seriously?
Emira winds up as the administrative assistant to a regional director of the US Census Bureau, and from there gets an unspecified promotion. What do you think of Emira winding up in an office dedicated to observing and chronicling demographic shifts in this novel dedicated to satirizing different social demographics? Does it square to you with the ideas Emira is interested in through the rest of Such a Fun Age?
Alix is probably the richest character in this novel — awful and cringey, sure, but also compelling in her sheer desperate striving. I often found myself enjoying her despite myself, on the principle that the most interesting character is usually the one who wants things with the most energy, and Alix wants with all her shallow heart. How did you feel about her?
While Alix gets to be entertainingly awful, Emira’s job in this book is to put up with a lot, until she doesn’t. How does that change the way you engage with both of them? With Emira playing defense for so much of the book, what are the qualities that make you latch onto her as a protagonist — or not?
Kelley’s a deeply ambiguous character, and we never fully find out what his deal is, in part to make the final misdirect land. How did you end up thinking about him by the end of the novel?
The whole book is built around a video of Emira facing down a racist security guard at a grocery store who has accused her of kidnapping Briar. Emira considers the video humiliating and badly wants to keep it from getting out, but Alix and Kelley both think she should leak it. How do you think about that conflict? Why does Emira want to keep anyone from ever seeing the video, and why are Alix and Kelley so eager to make a fuss over it? Does this story change the way you think about our national pastime of dissecting videos of everyday racism all over social media?
Senate rules could undercut Democrats’ prescription drug plan -
Democrats have a multi- pronged strategy for addressing drug prices in the Build Back Better Act — but one of those prongs may not be allowed under the Senate’s rules. | Getty Images
Democrats want to lower drug costs for commercial health plans — if the Byrd Rule will let them.
A critical part of Democrats’ plan to control prescription drug prices would apply not only to the government’s Medicare program but also to the commercial market that covers most working Americans — unless the Senate’s rules stop it.
Democrats have a multi-pronged strategy for addressing drug prices in the Build Back Better Act. First, they would allow Medicare to negotiate with pharmaceutical manufacturers on the prices of a certain number of prescription drugs, something they have been promising to do for years. But Democrats also want to limit drug companies’ ability to hike the prices of their medications for everyone — regardless of what kind of health insurance they have — in the future.
To do that, Congress has proposed requiring drugmakers to pay rebates for any price increases, in either the Medicare health program or the commercial health plans that cover 180 million Americans.
But, as Politico reported this week, the plan to apply the inflation-indexed rebates to the commercial market could be in trouble.
Senate Republicans — at the urging of the drug industry — plan to challenge whether the rebates for commercial health plans are permissible in a bill passed through the budget reconciliation process. If they succeed, it could have significant consequences for US patients and the prices they pay for medicines.
The Byrd Rule could alter Democrats’ drug pricing proposal
This precarious situation is a direct consequence of the process Democrats are using to pass the Build Back Better Act: budget reconciliation, which allows them to pass a bill with a slim majority but must meet a certain condition known as the Byrd Rule.
In brief, the Byrd Rule requires that all the provisions in a budget reconciliation bill directly change federal spending or revenue.
Republicans will argue that the purpose of the provision is to control drug prices for the private plans, full stop, and that does not have anything to do with federal spending or revenue — at least not directly.
The Democratic counterargument would be that applying these rebates to commercial plans would have a serious, more than incidental, effect on the federal budget. The federal government subsidizes almost all private insurance plans in one way or another, and so lower or higher costs for those plans could have major implications and lower costs for private health plans could also mean higher wages for workers, who would then pay more in taxes.
Who wins is likely ultimately a decision for the Senate parliamentarian.
But what would happen if the parliamentarian determines rebates covering commercial plans cannot be allowed under the Byrd Rule?
The big fear, voiced by advocates of the Democrats’ plan, is that drug companies would extract higher prices from the commercial market in order to make up for the revenue they would lose from Medicare once that program’s new price controls take effect.
According to several experts, that appears unlikely. Loren Adler, associate director of the USC-Brookings Schaeffer Initiative for Health Policy, covered why in a lengthy analysis published in September.
“Fundamentally, for this to occur, it would have to be the case that drug companies are benevolently choosing not to profit-maximize at present,” Adler told me this week, “which I find rather difficult to believe.”
In other words, drug companies are already charging the highest possible prices they can get in their negotiations with private insurers. They are not suddenly going to be able to secure higher prices in this new reality; private insurers will have the same incentives and leverage to keep costs down that they did before.
“Drug companies maximize their profits and get as much as they can out of their negotiations,” Darius Lakdawalla, a USC health economist, told me. “They are not leaving money on the table that they would then choose to scoop up if they lose Medicare profits.”
Private health plans may actually still see some savings, according to the Congressional Budget Office, because inflation penalties in Medicare could discourage drug companies from raising list prices altogether.
But the savings would not be as big as they would be if the inflation rebates covered the commercial market as well — and there may be some cases where drug companies charge ahead and hike their list prices higher than inflation anyway.
Under the current plan, drugmakers would pay a rebate based on their sales volume in both the Medicare and commercial markets. In that scenario, there would be little reason to raise list prices faster than inflation, because you are paying the penalty based on the entire market.
But if those rebates can’t include the commercial market, the penalty will be based on the Medicare market only — making it a smaller price to pay if a company does decide to hike the list price of a drug at a rate higher than inflation.
“If the penalty is only based on Medicare sales, it still may be worth it financially for drug companies to increase their list price faster than inflation, just as they would have before, even though it won’t mean any higher revenue from Medicare,” Adler said.
Most people don’t pay the list prices of medications, and health insurers negotiate the prices they pay to drug companies. They will still have the same incentives to drive down that price as much as they can, which should limit the likelihood that drug costs would rise for commercial plans in the aggregate.
But rising list prices can still drive up costs to patients, if they must meet their deductible before their insurance kicks in or if they must pay any coinsurance that is based on a list price. Deductibles and coinsurance have been steadily rising as a share of out-of-pocket costs over the past few years, according to a 2020 report from the IQVIA Institute.
Those rising costs can have a deleterious effect on people’s health. About 1 in 12 prescriptions issued for people on commercial plans are abandoned, likely because of the out-of-pocket cost to the patient, a higher rate than is seen in Medicare, according to the same IQVIA report. For uninsured people who pay entirely in cash, and who would still be exposed to price increases going forward, 1 in 5 prescriptions end up being abandoned.
The bottom line is, if the commercial rebates are nixed under the Byrd Rule, the people on private plans would end up saving less money than they would have if the Democratic plan were enacted in full — and any future price increases that are allowed under a more limited version of the plan could end up hitting certain patients particularly hard.
The price controls for only Medicare would still be a big step. But they would end up being a half-measure compared to what Democrats currently propose.
“The real problem for [large-employer insurance plans] would be the loss of a rare opportunity to gain relief from high drug prices, which are becoming a bigger problem over time,” Paul Ginsburg, a senior health economist at the Brookings Institution, told me.
The filibuster is the problem
Why do prescription drug savings for half of Americans ultimately turn on how one person interprets the Senate’s rules? Because budget reconciliation is dictating the legislative process, leading to half- measures and incoherent policies that do not work as originally intended in the real world.
So long as the filibuster still exists, budget reconciliation is the only way for the Democrats to move a bill, unless 10 Republicans were willing to break ranks with their party and break a filibuster. That is exceedingly unlikely in a highly polarized Congress.
But the budget reconciliation rules place such tight restrictions on which provisions can be included and which ones can’t — all subject to the interpretation of the parliamentarian — that it can be difficult to craft policies that are internally consistent. A prescription drug plan that lowers costs for some people and increases them for others would be entirely the result of this misshapen process.
Budget reconciliation wasn’t meant to pass complex legislation. It was created in the 1970s to make sure no amount of partisan gridlock could prevent Congress from dealing with its most basic duty — determining how much the federal government spends and how much revenue it raises. The Byrd Rule exists in the first place, to limit the process’s use to those core functions.
But over time, as bipartisan comity faltered and filibusters against any and every kind of legislation became the norm, budget reconciliation has devolved into the only tool by which a slim Senate majority can advance its legislative agenda. Yet both parties keep bumping up against its limitations.
In 2017, Republican majorities struggled to roll back the Affordable Care Act’s insurance reforms in part because a straightforward repeal or even a more modest alteration was not allowed under the Byrd Rule. It didn’t directly affect federal spending or revenue enough to satisfy the parliamentarian, and they were forced to come up with awkward workarounds to clear the Byrd Rule. (Ultimately, they failed to craft a plan that could win 50 votes.)
Now, Democrats are trying to pass an omnibus social spending bill — which covers everything from prescription drugs to child care to green energy — within the strictures set down by Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) many years ago.
If there were no filibuster, they could have simply put up one bill for child care, another bill for green energy, another bill for prescription drugs. Each one could pass on its own merits if it had 50 votes. The provisions wouldn’t be subject to the arbitrary restrictions of budget reconciliation. The plan to apply these drug pricing rebates to the commercial market could be approved as intended. The dissonance would be gone.
Instead, Democrats may end up being forced to pass a compromised version of their drug pricing proposal — with significant consequences for millions of patients.
From The Hindu: Sports
Queen O’ War and Successor catch the eye - Queen O’ War and Successor caught the eye when the horses were exercised here on Saturday (Nov. 20) morning.Sand track:800m: Magical Rays (rb) 52, 600
Cricket Australia chairman admits it was a mistake to not strip Paine of captaincy three years ago - Paine stepped down as Australia’s Test skipper on Friday after it emerged that he had sent unsolicited explicit image of himself along with a string of lewd messages to a female co-worker in 2017
Sindhu exits Indonesia Masters with defeat in semifinal - She lost to Japanese top seed Akane Yamaguchi 13-21 9-21 in a one-sided duel that lasted just 32 minutes
India vs New Zealand 3rd T20 | Ready for clean sweep, Rohit’s India may try new combinations - Bilateral T20I series in various parts of the globe is fast losing its context due to too many private leagues but for Indian team, after their World Cup disaster, a series win might help in partially healing the wounds
Barcelona, Man City drop club crypto sponsors amid concerns - Premier League champion City suspended a deal with 3Key Technologies after concerns were highlighted about the limited digital footprint of the company and its executives
From The Hindu: National News
Navjot Singh Sidhu bats for trade, ‘new friendship chapter’ between India & Pakistan as he visits Kartarpur - Mr. Sidhu said he wants mutual love between India and Pakistan and stressed on opening of trade between the two countries
What’s black in farm laws except for its ink, asks V.K. Singh - “In farmers’ organisations, there is a fight for supremacy among themselves. These people cannot think about the benefits to small farmers,” says Union Minister General (Retired) V.K. Singh
Narendra Giri death: CBI charges Anand Giri, 2 others with criminal conspiracy, abetment to suicide - Acharya Narendra Giri, who was the president of the largest organisation of sadhus in India, was found hanging at the Baghambari Mutt in Allahabad
GFP working president Kiran Kandolkar quits party ahead of Goa polls, joins TMC - Kandolkar said only the Mamata Banerjee-led party is capable of defeating the BJP in the next year’s polls
Service providers can now check vaccination status of an individual on CoWIN portal with consent - Employers can use this service to verify vaccination status of employees and resume the functions in offices, workplaces, etc.
From BBC: Europe
Covid: WHO says it is very worried about Europe surge - The health organisation’s regional director warns of half a million deaths by March without action.
Rotterdam police clash with rioters as Covid protest turns violent - Seven people are injured in Rotterdam as protests against new coronavirus curbs turn violent.
Belarus’s Lukashenko tells BBC: We may have helped migrants into EU - In an exclusive interview, Alexander Lukashenko says it was “absolutely possible” migrants had help.
Belarus migrant crisis: British army engineers to help at Polish border - About 150 army engineers are to help reinforce the EU border after migrants tried to enter from Belarus.
Serious EU intent to fix Northern Ireland border row, says Irish PM - But Micheál Martin says he is “frustrated” post-Brexit talks are hindering UK-EU relationships.
From Ars Technica
Locked out of “God mode,” runners are hacking their treadmills - NordicTrack customers were watching Netflix—until the company blocked their access. - link
DuckDuckGo wants to stop apps tracking you on Android - The latest update promises to block invasive data collection across your whole phone. - link
Review: Ghostbusters: Afterlife sinks under treacly, over-the-top fan service - Talented cast and a few fun callbacks can’t make up for tired retread of a plot. - link
Adults nationwide eligible for boosters this weekend as CDC gives sign-off - CDC advisers voted unanimously to expand booster eligibility. - link
Apple has a new work-from-home policy, but it’s still not what employees want - Employees will have to work from the office most days by spring. - link
From Jokes Subreddit
A man was hunting when a gust of wind blew, the gun fell over & discharged, shooting him in the genitals. -
Several hours later, lying in a hospital bed, he was approached by his doctor.
"Well, sir, I have some good news & some bad news.
The good news is that you are going to be OK.
The damage was local to your groin, there was very little internal damage, & we were able to remove all of the buckshot."
“What’s the bad news?” asked the hunter.
“The bad news is that there was some pretty extensive buckshot damage done to your willy which left quite a few holes in it. I’m going to have to refer you to my sister.”
“Well, I guess that isn’t too bad,” the hunter replied.
“Is your sister a plastic surgeon?”
" Not exactly answered the doctor………
"She’s a flute player in the Boston Symphony Orchestra. She’s going to teach you where to put your fingers so you don’t piss in your eye.
A gas station owner in Arkansas was trying to increase his sales, so he put up a sign that read: * “FREE SEX w/fill-up … just guess the right number between 1 & 10.” ***** -
Soon a local redneck pulled in, filled his tank, and asked for his FREE SEX. The owner told him to pick a number from 1 to 10. If he guessed correctly, he would get his FREE SEX. The redneck guessed ‘8’. The proprietor said, “You were close. The number was ‘7’. Sorry, but no FREE SEX this time.” A week later, the same redneck, along w/his brother, Bubba, pulled in for another fill-up. Again he asked for his FREE SEX. The proprietor again gave him the same story, and asked him to guess the correct number. The redneck guessed ‘2’ this time. The proprietor said, “Sorry, it was ‘3’. You were close, but no FREE SEX this time.” As they were driving away, the redneck said to his brother, “I think that game is rigged, and he doesn’t really give away FREE SEX.” Bubba replied, “No. it ain’t, Billy Ray. My wife won twice last week.”
A woman was out golfing and hit the ball deep into the woods. -
When she went to look for it she found a frog in a trap.
The frog said to her, “If you release me from this trap, I will grant you three wishes.”
The woman freed the frog, and the frog said, "Thank you, but I failed to mention that there was a condition to your wishes.
Whatever you wish for, your husband will get times ten!"
The woman said, “That’s okay.”
For her first wish, she wanted to be the most beautiful woman in the world.
The frog warned her, “You do realize that this wish will also make your husband the most handsome man in the world, an Adonis whom women will flock to.”
The woman replied, “That’s okay, because I will be the most beautiful woman and he will have eyes only for me.”
So, KAZAM-she’s the most beautiful woman in the world!
For her second wish, she wanted to be the richest woman in the world.
The frog said, “That will make your husband the richest man in the world. And he will be ten times richer than you.”
The woman said, “That’s okay, because what’s mine is his and what’s his is mine.”
So, KAZAM-she’s the richest woman in the world!
The frog then inquired about her third wish, and she answered, “I’d like a mild heart attack.”
Moral of the story: Women are clever. Don’t mess with them.
Attention female readers: This is the end of the joke for you. Stop here and continue to feel good.
Male readers: Please scroll down.
The man had a heart attack ten times milder than his wife.
Moral of the story: Women think they’re really smart.
Let them continue to think that way and just enjoy the show.
Note: If you are a woman and are still reading this; it only goes to show that women never listen.
An old couple are celebrating 75 years of marriage -
At the party one of the grandkids asks the Grandma what is the secret to such a long happy marriage as they never seed to argue or disagree about anything. The grandma tells them a story of when they first got married.
“It was our wedding day and we were very poor so we were heading to our honeymoon on our donkey and cart. We were about an hour into the journey when the donkey just lay down and wouldn’t budge. My new husband said to the donkey”That’s one“. After a few minutes the donkey got up and started going again. After another little while the donkey again sat down and wouldn’t move and my husband said”that’s two“. Again eventually the donkey got up and we were on our way. Then eventually the donkey stopped and wouldn’t go any further and without a word my husband got down and shot the donkey in the head and said”that’s three. “. I was so shocked, I started screaming at my husband”what did you do that for, are you crazy that’s terrible“. My husband turned to me and he said”that’s one".
