GM Unveils Sarcasm-Powered Automobile

A Solipsist Exclusive

DETROIT, MI--General Motors today introduced the Chevy Snark, the first mass-produced automobile to be powered entirely by sarcasm.

"We just got so sick and tired of listening to all these self-righteous Prius drivers going on and on and on and on about how they were saving the planet," sneered GM Chief Satirst Paul von Hoeven. "We figured if we could just somehow channel our feelings through a drive-train, we could save the planet and take all those models of civic virtue down a few pegs."

Von Hoeven accompanied the Solipsist on a test drive. In order to work, the Snark's engine must interface with the central nervous system of the driver and/or the passengers.

"Wow," we remarked, "this is amazing technology. Like something out of 'Star Trek.'"

"Yeah," remarked Von Hoeven, "it's just like 'Star Trek'! What an astute observation. Like nobody's ever made that comment before."

And we were off.

The Snark is not the first emotion-driven automobile. In the 1960's, the French developed a car that ran on existential despair. Unfortunately, no one could muster the will to activate it. When asked if General Motors was concerned about a similar fate for the Snark, a spokesman remarked, "Oh, yeah, 'cause Americans are just gonna stop being sarcastic any second now, Einstein."

The spokesman did admit, though, that pre-orders from Canada were unprecedentedly low.

Snarkiness for No Good Reason (Another Quickie)

The frame around the license plate read, on top, "TOO CLOSE FOR MISSILES," and, on the bottom, "SWITCHING TO GUNS." Except that it didn't say that. It said, "To close for missiles." Now, we don't want to make sweeping generalizations about the mental acuity of gun enthusiasts--especially since they may be armed. We prefer to let license plate frames make the generalizations for us.

More Rules for a Better Life

Here's the thing: You know how you sometimes drive up to an intersection--presumably one with a stop sign as opposed to a traffic signal--and, just as you reach the crosswalk, a pedestrian reaches the corner? Now, technically, you have the right of way, as you reached the intersection first and were ready to proceed at the time the pedestrian showed up. Still, you're in a generous, at-peace-with-the-universe kind of mood, so you give the pedestrian the half-wave, "go 'head" signal. We humbly submit, then, that it becomes incumbent on said pedestrian to walk across the street as briskly as possible.

Of course, allowances must be made for the pedestrian's age and state of relative decrepitude. One would not expect an elderly quadriplegic in one of those breath-operated wheelchairs to coast across the thoroughfare with the same alacrity as a twenty-something, spandex-clad triathlete. At the same time, one would not expect the spandex-clad triathlete to mosey along at the speed of said wheelchair-bound geezer. And should the triathlete move at such speed he or she deserves every venomous glare and impatient horn-blast he or she gets.

We're just sayin'.

(Image from Thecityfix.com)

OK, It Ain't "Schindler's List," But Still. . . .

As we may have mentioned, WOS loves horror movies. As some people have music in the background for their mundane activities, WOS will relax or do household chores to a soundtrack of blood-curdling screams and gory demises. The movies don't even need to be good--indeed, more often than not, they're dreadful. Every once in awhile, though, we experience a pleasant surprise.

The other day, WOS scrolled through our Netflix instant-watch queue and came across "Monster in the Closet," a Troma Entertainment production. The distributor behind such classics as "Surf Nazis Must Die!" (1987) and "The Toxic Avenger" (1984), Troma is known for low-budget, tongue-in-cheek horror movies. A z-movie satire of b-movie monster flicks, "Monster in the Closet" opens with a typically perky sorority girl screaming in terror as she is dragged into a closet by an unseen monster that sounds like nothing so much as the Tasmanian Devil ("Oooo-RAH! Blah! Uh-BLAH! BLAH! BLAH!"). When she disappears into the closet the screams continue, and all manner of clothes and detritus come flying out of the closet. The scene is repeated with victims including a blind man (played by John Carradine) and an angelic little girl, who meets her end, according to the subtitles, on "April the 16th or 17th at 2:15-ish." At this point, we realized we were not in the realm of "The Exorcist."

The movie is actually one long joke about humanity's battle with the eponymous closet-monster. We don't want to say too much, but suffice to say that the punchline--which arrives after a relatively brisk 80 minutes or so--is genuinely funny. We make no claim for the film as great cinema, but if you ever find yourself on a rainy afternoon with a couple of hours to spare, you could certainly do worse than "Monster in the Closet."

Quickie

Just a brief post today 'cause we're hungry.

In case you haven't heard about this, check out this story. We would like formally to nominate this guy for the "He Sure Knows How to Make an Exit" Award. See you tomorrow.

Obama Relinquishes Office after Getting Insanely Catchy Song Stuck in Head

A Solipsist Exclusive

WASHINGTON--President Barack Obama today invoked the 25th amendment to the Constitution and stepped down from the presidency, citing an inability to focus on the nation's affairs since getting Beyonce's "Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It)" stuck in his head almost one week ago. Vice President Joe Biden immediately took the oath of office and was sworn in as the nation's 45th president.

"My fellow Americans," former President Obama said in a statement, "I expect that this situation will resolve itself fairly quickly, and I hope to return to office in the very near future. In the meantime, let me be perfectly clear: If you like it, then you should put a ring on it."

Mr. Obama was exposed to the song last week when, at the insistence of Sasha and Malia Obama, the former President watched season one of "Glee" on DVD. "One of the episodes featured Ms. Beyonce's song," he explained. "You know, the one where Finn gets the football team to work with Mr. Schuester, and the offensive line breaks into a big dance number right before they score a touchdown? Could anyone not be hooked by that?

"At first, I thought I could work through this," Mr. Obama continued. "I realized I could not when I began humming 'all the single ladies' throughout a negotiating session between Benjamin Netanyahu and the Syrian ambassador.

"I apologize to the American people for letting them down, but I think that invoking the 25th amendment and having Vice President Biden take over is the right thing to do. I saw Martin Sheen do the same thing the other night on 'The West Wing.' The country will be fine."

Martin Sheen was unavailable for comment.

Tolerance and Provocations

As you may have heard, a large Muslim organization has won approval of a project to build a massive mosque and cultural center about two blocks from Ground Zero in Manhattan. Many individuals and groups, including the normally tolerant Anti-Defamation League, have spoken out against the project, while others, including Mayor Mike Bloomberg (who, for what it's worth, is Jewish) have staunchly supported the mosque project, saying that it will be a testament to the fundamental American values of religious freedom and tolerance that the 9/11 terrorists sought to undermine: “To cave to popular sentiment [and reject the mosque] would be to hand a victory to the terrorists — and we should not stand for that.”

As an enlightened liberal, the Solipsist supports the idea of the mosque, especially as its supporters explain that one of its primary missions will be to promote interfaith dialogue. Considering that this mosque, once completed, will probably be the most rigorously scrutinized house of worship in the country, we imagine its imams and congregants will represent the most moderate, tolerant, and modern viewpoints of Islam imaginable, which can only serve to soften the edges of a religion viewed as all too prickly by many Americans.

Still, we can understand the emotional response.

For a parallel, we imagine how people might react if Japan wanted to set up a cultural center within walking distance of Pearl Harbor. Today, the reaction would probably be a generalized shrug. But what if such a proposal occured in, say, 1950? There might be similar uproar.

Still, even then, there would have been fundamental differences. In 1941, the United States was attacked by Japan, war was declared, and the enemy was eventually defeated. Japan was officially no longer an enemy once its leaders surrendered to the United States. Thus, if Japan had wished to build a cultural center--even in the virtual shadow of its most outrageous attack--the US could accept it as a gesture of reconciliation--of bridge building--as the Manhattan mosque supporters argue their project represents.

Today, however, the situation is complicated by the fact that the US is still at war. And while we are not at war with Islam, as some would have it, we are at war with people who happen to be Muslims. We know intellectually that the vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists, and we believe that those behind the mosque project have sincere ambitions to improve the image of Islam in New York and the United States. But until we have that mosque or some other such a symbol of tolerance, Americans will contine to feel uneasy. It doesn't help that, for many people, the most recognizable "spokesman" for Islam remains Osama bin Laden.

The Muslim world needs a new public face in America. With a pulpit as prominent as a mosque near Ground Zero, we expect that a kinder, gentler face of Islam will emerge.