It’s Not My Fault

The other day I tried to call my sister and got a very strange recorded message:  “due to
circumstances beyond our control, your call could not be completed”.  Um…. okay.   This struck me as funny as many  things do and it made me wonder why my cell phone provider felt it necessary to blame something/someone else on the lost call.   Why change the message from “your call cannot be completed” which is what I remember from past lost calls to “…due to circumstances beyond our control?”  It’s not like I’m going to call up Verizon and demand to know just exactly WHO or WHAT was at fault.    Maybe it would actually be worth a phone call after all.  Maybe I could get to the bottom of that lost call.  Maybe it was that Republican staffer who outfitted Sarah Palin?

 

After the urge to phone Verizon passed (I mean, another call could be lost and that would be a cryin’ shame), I thought about how “It’s not my fault” has sort of become our national slogan much like “I’m sorry” is the national slogan of Canada.”    If I had my druthers, I would choose “I’m sorry” over “It’s not my fault” but it appears there’s only one slogan per country and ours has already stuck.  Just take a look at pharmaceutical commercials.  They have to let us know that if we take their drug and we’re cursed with chronic constipation or we wake up in the middle of a drug induced sleep and drive our car into a Wal-Mart light pole, it’s not their fault because they’ve already warned us this might happen.  I can accept that, I suppose.

 

But here’s something to ponder:  I fail to see the logic in a disclaimer about an erection lasting more than four hours.  Is this a bad thing?  I wonder.

 

 

(Word of the day: hubrisHYOO-bruhs, noun:
Overbearing pride or presumption.)

With dizzying hubris, soon-to-be ex-president George W. Bush announced that the current financial crisis was not his fault but rather due to circumstances beyond his control.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
3 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tina
Tina
October 31, 2008 4:46 pm

A four hour erection is not necessarily a bad thing, but too much of a good thing. There is a line that is crossed, after the appropriate period of time, into the overkill zone. Like cake: cake is good, but I don’t want to eat it for four hours. Disneyland’s Space Mountain is fun, but four hours crosses the line into barf-ville. George W., well he wasn’t any good to start with.

I just want the four free hours.

I am enjoying your blog. Cheers, Tina

Sharon Matthams
Sharon Matthams
October 31, 2008 11:44 pm

Julie,
Your blog is always such a diverting quiddity, it never fails to take my mind away from the trifling woes of everyday living.
I was at a Vince Gill concert last night, (don’t ask) he sang a song about ‘Levitra’
Jones, cleverly titled “Cowboy Up”. Even he decried the four hour erection.
Does anyone really enjoy four straight hours of the…..well, hard stuff?

Julie
November 1, 2008 5:07 pm

Well, there is such a thing as “intermission”. You stand up, stretch the gams, have some M & Ms, a pbj, some saltine crackers (not in bed, though)and viola! That lovin’ feelin’ hits you and it’s off the races once again. Seems like it may be quite efficient. Just a notion.. no actual experience, as far as you know. wink