And God Created ... Pets
A newly discovered chapter in the Book of Genesis has
provided the answer to, "Where do pets come from?"

Adam said, "Lord, when I was in the garden, you walked with
me everyday. Now I don't see you anymore. I'm lonesome here
and it's difficult for me to remember how much you love me."

And God said, "No problem! I will create a companion for you
that will be with you forever and who will be a reflection of
my love for you, so that you will love me even when you
cannot see me. Regardless of how selfish or childish or
unlovable you may be, this new companion will accept you as
you are and will love you as I do, in spite of yourself."

And God created a new animal to be a companion for Adam. And
it was a good animal. And God was pleased. And the new animal
was pleased to be with Adam and he wagged his tail. And Adam
said, "Lord, I have already named all the animals in the
Kingdom and I cannot think of a name for this new animal."

And God said, "No problem, because I have created this new
animal to be a reflection of my love for you. His name will
be a reflection of my own name, and you will call him
'Dog.'"

And Dog lived with Adam and was a companion to him and loved
him.

And Adam was comforted.

And God was pleased.

And Dog was content and wagged his tail.

After a while, it came to pass that Adam's guardian angel
came to the Lord and said, "Lord, Adam has become filled with
pride. He struts and preens like a peacock and he believes he
is worthy of adoration. Dog has indeed taught him that he is
loved, but perhaps too well."

And the Lord said, "No problem! I will create for him a
companion who will be with him forever and who will see him
as he is. The companion will remind him of his limitations,
so he will know that he is not always worthy of adoration."

And God created CAT to be a companion to Adam. And Cat would
not obey Adam.

And when Adam gazed into Cat's eyes, he was reminded that he
was not the Supreme Being. And Adam learned humility.

And God was pleased.

And Adam was pleased.

And the Dog was pleased.

And the Cat didn't care one way or the other.

Arguing effectively
How to Argue Effectively

I argue very well. Ask any of my remaining friends. I can win an argument on any topic, against any opponent. People know this and steer clear of me at parties. Often, as a sign of their great respect, they don't even invite me. You too can win arguments. Simply follow these rules:

-=- Make things up.

Suppose, in the Peruvian economy argument, you are trying to prove that Peruvians are underpaid, a position you base solely on the fact that YOU are underpaid, and you are not going to let a bunch of Peruvians be better off. DON'T say: "I think Peruvians are underpaid." Say instead: "The average Peruvian's salary in 2004 dollars adjusted for the revised tax base is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before the mean gross poverty level."

NOTE: Always make up exact figures.

If an opponent asks you where you got your information, make THAT up too. Say: "This information comes from Dr. Hovel T. Moon's study for the Buford Commission published on May 9, 2005. Didn't you read it?" Say this in the same tone of voice you would use to say, "You left your soiled underwear in my bathroom."

-=- Use meaningless but weighty-sounding words and phrases.

Memorize this list:

Let me put it this way

In terms of

Vis-a-vis

Per se

As it were

Qua

So to speak

You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as "Q.E.D.", "e.g.", and "i.e." These are all short for "I speak Latin, and you don't."

Here's how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say, "Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don't have enough money."

You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you say, "Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers

vis-a-vis Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were. Q.E.D."

Only a fool would challenge that statement.

-=- Use snappy and irrelevant comebacks.

You need an arsenal of all-purpose irrelevant phrases to fire back at your opponents when they make valid points. The best are:

You're begging the question.

You're being defensive.

Don't compare apples to oranges.

What are your parameters?

This last one is especially valuable. Nobody (other than engineers and policy wonks) has the vaguest idea what "parameters" means.

Don't forget the classic: YOU'RE SO LINEAR.

Here's how to use your comebacks:

You say: As Abraham Lincoln said in 1873...

Your opponent says: Lincoln died in 1865.

You say: You're begging the question.

You say: Liberians, like most Asians...

Your opponent says: Liberia is in Africa.

You say: You're being defensive.

-=- Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler.

This is your heavy artillery, for when your opponent is obviously right and you are spectacularly wrong. Bring Hitler up subtly.

Say, "That sounds suspiciously like something Adolf Hitler might say," or "You certainly do remind me of Adolf Hitler."