It's time to have a somber national discussion about the [insert shooting tragedy here] tragedy.
Before we get started, let's go over a few basic ground rules.
1. In the wake of the __________ tragedy it's time for us all to
come together as a nation and not assign blame. This is
not the time, for example, to talk about how it's easier to purchase a gun in America than it is to vote (or buy French cheese).
2. And we won't tolerate any second guessing of the Second Amendment
right to carry assault weapons, or questions about how the Framers could
have possibly envisaged an assault rifle over 200 years ago, or why a
"hunter" needs six thousand rounds of ammunition, or kevlar, or smoke
grenades to kill a pheasant.
3. While the shooter may have been inspired by political fliers showing
the victim in cross hairs, or may have come unhinged by inflammatory
rhetoric about how said victim was coming for the shooter's guns,
discussing such motivation at this sensitive moment would be completely
inappropriate. Not to mention, disrespectful to the __________ victims.
4. If the tragedy involved someone flying an aircraft into a government
building, or for that matter blowing up a government building, now is
not the time to discuss people like Lush Dimbulb or Sean Handjob, or repugicans generally,
incessantly trying to convince their audience that the occupant of the
White House, or any government official, agency, or entire branch of
government is evil and/or "un-American" and/or out to get them or our
country or our freedom.
5. And definitely don't mention the repugican party's frequent claim
and/or insinuation, including suggestions from the repugican candidate
himself, Mitt Romney, that the sitting Democratic President is a
socialist, which in American parlance actually means "communist," which
actually means "Soviet," which was America's deadliest enemy out for our
utter destruction. Sure, it would be entirely understandable why
someone would take up arms against a Soviet takeover of the United
States, but a Democrat said something mean once about a repugican's
dog, or something, so aren't both parties really to blame, thus making
the charge moot?
6. Never, ever mention the NRA. Sure, they've proven themselves, time
and again, incapable of passing laws that effectively keep guns out of
the hands of crazy mass murderers, but that's no reason to blame them
for the _______ tragedy because it's just too early to cast blame on
anyone other than the shooter, who was obviously crazy, and thus this
month's anomaly.
Now, let's discuss for a moment the race of the shooter and the victims.
7. If the ______________ tragedy involved angry white men opening fire on brown people of faith, this is
definitely
not the time to replay clips of bombastic commentators and politicians
getting white men in places like Kansas whipped into a frenzy over
Manhattan's zoning criteria for non-christian houses of worship.
8. But feel free to discuss if all brown people, and thus the shooter,
or his victims, were muslims - sorry, I meant to say "radical islamists." And even if neither was a muslim, make sure you discuss
that point incessantly - muslims, muslims, muslims, muslims - so as to
eventually sow suspicion in the public's mind as to whether there really
is a muslim angle to this story.
9. Speaking of which, this is not the time to discuss the more general
fear mongering around words like "muslim," including the ongoing,
successful, attempt by repugicans to convince their base that our
dark-skinned President
is one.
Okay, I think we're ready now to discuss the ______________ tragedy.
First off, it is entirely acceptable for a repugican to opine that the
tragedy could have been averted had the victims all been armed (please
disregard previous tragedies where armed police officers themselves were
injured by the shooter).
Second, poignant, but ultimately meaningless, gestures such as lighting
tragedy candles at nighttime vigils, and posting anti-gun petitions on
Change.org, are to be encouraged.
Finally, clutch your pearls, and all together now, ask the purely rhetorical question: "How could this happen?"
Forty-eight hours later return to talking about the Olympics and the
latest Kardashian wedding until the next shooting occurs, then refer to
point 1 above.
PS If the victims of the ___________tragedy were black, ignore the above
restrictions and take up a collection for the shooter's defense fund.
In
the 17th century, all Europe was mad to have the little brown nut from
Indonesia- nutmeg. Especially the Dutch, who monopolized its cultivation
and, in doing so, built their tiny nation into one of the wealthiest
trading powers on the planet. 
In 1602 Dutch merchants founded the VOC -the Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie,
better known as the Dutch East India Company. Other trading nations had
formed cooperative associations like it but none were more successful
than the Dutch. By 1617 the VOC was the richest commercial operation in
the world. The company had 50,000 employees worldwide, with a private
army of 30,000 men and a fleet of 200 ships. Yet even with that huge
overhead, the VOC gave its shareholders an eye-popping annual dividend
of 40% of their investments. How'd they do it? With sheer
ruthlessness... and nutmeg.
Strike 1:
In 1770 a Frenchman named Pierre Poivre ("Peter Pepper") successfully
smuggled nutmeg plants to safety in Mauritius, an island off the coast
of Africa, where they were subsequently exported to the Caribbean. The
plants thrived on the islands, especially Grenada.
