Drive, Just Drive &%$*# You!

The U.S. state of Connecticut recently passed a law stating that, while driving, you could be fined $100 for not only talking on your cell phone, but also eating, putting on makeup, and other things that normal human beings do out of necessity in their harried lives, harried mainly because of all the other stupid regulations and unnecessary laws that simpletons appointed to state legislatures pass in order to look as though they're doing something besides chatting up people for campaign donations and eating free, expensive lunches paid for by lobbyists.

Thus I've developed a new tourist slogan for Connecticut: "Connecticut - Not for humans."

Meanwhile, the Reader's Digest responded to this new law by stating in their magazine "fine by us."

The happy-go-lucky, condensed-book publishing, expurgated idiots.

Now, let's get a couple of things straight. First, I normally like the Reader's Digest. Despite their penchant for publishing jokes that have been recycled for at least three human generations, and the odd stupid column (Yes, I was thinking of "Ask Laskas" when I wrote that), they generally publish interesting and occasionally uplifting stories, and manage to do so without make you feel like you've been dipped in treacle whist reading them. Normally, this is a fine publication.

Also, I completely recognize that there are some human beings who should not be allowed to use a cell phone whilst driving. These are the people who you come upon on a busy motorway, swerving like drunks on an ice rink. You think to yourself, "It's 7:30 a.m., they can't be drunk for at least another 2 hours yet," only to pass them and see the smiling stupor upon their face as they absentmindedly chatter away on a hand-held cellphone, completely oblivious that they've just run a petrol truck off the road. This smiling stupor is only broken by the occasional cackle, when the person on the other end of the connection makes a flatulence-related joke.

So, I understand where some of the frustration is coming from. What the people in the Connecticut legislature fail to realize is that these people would be like this if the cell phone had never been invented. They'd simply smile blankly at their rear-view mirror and tell jokes with the word "pooter" in them, to themselves.

There are simply times when people need to eat a bite of food or drink a bottle of water or put a spot of makeup on in the car on the way to work or elsewhere. Surely, they won't begrudge the peckish, thirsty, female, or transvestite these fundmental rights?

So of course I had to write them:

**********

Dear Reader's Digestives,

I noticed your RD Index for the month of December 2005, where you praised the state of Connecticut for passing a law punishing motorists who used a cell phone, ate, put makeup on, or did other things whilst driving a car that normal human beings do.

I myself am currently typing this on a laptop computer (with a wireless mouse) from behind the wheel of my giant Humvee, while doing 85 miles an hour on a busy freeway, and also carefully devouring my super-sized Double Quarter-Pounder with Cheese with the large Coke and fries and a delicious fried apple pie. You people probably thought that couldn't be done! Ha! Ha-Hah!! Ha-ha-hah!!! So there!!!

Rather than engage in busybody micromanging, Connecticut lawmakers should focus on issues important to their state, such as rural poverty, crime, and how to stop people from confusing them with New Hampshire.

Yours Erratically,

Earl Fando
Co-Editor and Contributor
The Dictionary of Unfortunate Ideas
http://unfortunateideas.blogspot.com

P.S. Please accept my submission for December's Finish This Joke contest: "Tinky Winky in formal attire"