Mumbai: The Indian cricket board on Thursday denied the reports that they had restricted the WAGs (wives and girlfriends) of Indian cricketer during the away tours, according to reports.
The Board of Control for Cricket in India were contemplating to ban the players’ partners during the foreign tours. The rationale was that the Indian cricketers’ performance was getting affected by the presence of WAGs.
While the BCCI had allowed the wives of Ashwin, Vijay, Pujara, Binny and Gambhir to travel with them, the Indian cricket board had approved Virat Kohli’s request to allow Anushka Sharma to travel with him, reports.
Youngsters, including my grandson, label me old-fashioned when I sneer at them using their smartphones. I welcome technology. Way back in 1983, I was the first person to teach computer science with my Apple IIe in Tirunelveli and Tuticorin Districts in Tamilnadu, India. Since then technology has traveled a long way and improved a million times, but not all is that good.
Technology is radically changing the way we interact with each other. While connecting us in many ways, smartphones are also disconnecting every one of us, even family members. From the time my college-going grandson enters the house, he never talks to me, but jabber with people using his smartphone or indulges in texting. He always dines alone while jabbering or texting using his phone.
Smartphones have brought on the phenomenon of causing “death of conversation”. The smartphone technology is affecting social cohesion in the younger generation. They do not know when to switch off their instruments and start conversing directly with those seated just next to them. Due to the rapid rise of the smartphone, our younger generation does not know what social etiquette or interpersonal relationship is.
Young filmmaker Matthew Abeler perfectly depicts the overuse of technology in his short film titled: “Pass The Salt“. While the father and mother are having dinner with their two sons, one son’s phone beeps. Then, both sons start texting. Father says, “pass the salt” and one of the texting sons passes him the pepper. The hilarious ending with the sons dumbfounded should make everyone think twice before they pull out their phone the next time in the middle of dinner.
By the way, it is good etiquette to always pass salt and pepper together. If a person asks for just one, pass both anyway.
Jeanne Robertson (born September 21, 1943) is a nationally recognized humorist and professional speaker with a thick southern American drawl. Even at 70, she continues to charm appreciative audiences with her humorous observations about life around her. Over the years, the demand for her family friendly brand of comedy has grown exponentially. She infects everyone with her charming personality, and her deep sense of humor.
By age 13, Jeanne reached 6’2” tall signalling that she would soon soar to great heights. In 1963, named Miss North Carolina at age 19, she credits her reign as the catalyst for her career. She toured the state for a year speaking to civic organizations and garden clubs. After graduating from Auburn University, she was a gym teacher for nine years. She became one of the funniest, busiest, most popular, and successful professional corporate speakers. Now she is considered one of the funniest, busiest, most popular, and successful stand-up comedians.
You can hear Jeanne’s anecdotes daily on XM Radio’s Channel 98, Laugh USA and Sirius Radio’s Blue Collar Comedy channel 103 (XM 97) and Laugh Break channel 105.
From where does she get her inspiration?
She bases her humor on real-life situations. Jeanne once said:
“When we look for humor around us, we can find it. I want to weave a story that makes people laugh their head off, but I also want it to be a point to the story. I want people to say, ‘the same thing happened to me’ when they leave the show.”
On April 29, 2008, she spoke at the White House for National Volunteer Week to honor the 1,300 volunteers who donate time to work at the White House.
Jeanne Robertson is an award winning corporate speaker. Among many honors, she was a Speaker Hall Of Fame inductee; the first woman to win the National Speakers Association’s prestigious Cavett Award; the only woman to receive Toastmasters’ International Golden Gavel Award;, and the NCAA SEC and Auburn University’s 2000 Woman Entrepreneur of the Year Award.
She has seven nationally released DVDs, three humorous books: “The Magic of Genie,” “Mayberry Humor across the USA,” and “Don’t Let the Funny Stuff Get Away.” She has hundreds of hours on Sirius-XM Satellite Radio’s Family Comedy, and Blue Collar Comedy channels. Jeanne has more than 20 million views on YouTube. Some of her most popular anecdotes are: “Don’t Go to Vegas Without A Baptist,” “Don’t Bungee Jump Naked,” “Left Brain vs. Intruder,” and “Don’t Send a Man to the Grocery Store.”
When Jeanne was in need of some ingredients to make a cake, her husband volunteered to go to the grocery shop. What did he come home with?
Jeanne Robertson is hilarious! Her clean old fashioned humorous depiction of everyday situations never fails to have audiences of all ages rolling with laughter. You will agree with me after viewing this video titled “Don’t Send a Man to the Grocery Store!“
Carmina Burana means “Songs from Beuern” in Latin. It is the name given to a manuscript of 254 poems and dramatic texts from 11th to 13th century. “Beuern” is short for Benediktbeuern. The collection found in 1803 in the Benedictine monastery of Benediktbeuern, is now housed in the Bavarian State Library in Munich.
These pieces are in most cases bawdy, irreverent, and satirical. Written by students and clergy, in Medieval Latin, a few are in Middle High German, and some with traces of Old French or Provençal.
Twenty-four poems in Carmina Burana were set to music by Carl Orff in 1936 and his composition quickly became popular and a staple piece of the classical music repertoire. Scores of film soundtracks including Lord of the Rings have used the opening and closing movement, “O Fortuna”.
The Sydney Symphony Orchestra launched its “Say it with Carmina” contest inviting Australians to come up with new lyrics.
Matthew Hodge is a father of three living in Sydney, Australia. He sent his entry an “An Ode to Sleep Deprived Parents and Terrorizing Toddlers” to the contest. Among the many entries submitted, including odes to the Pope, it was Hodge’s entry with its hilarious phrases such as, “Oh you terror, get down from there. Mummy’s getting cranky,” that received the most votes. He won the first prize.
The 200 members of the Sydney Symphony Orchestra somberly chanted phrases like “Where are your pants? What have you done with my purse?” with a straight face making Hodge’s words funnier.
Even if this musical offering from the Sydney Symphony Orchestra won’t make your chores and stress go away, it is sure to bring a smile on your face.
THE ODE TO SLEEP DEPRIVED PARENTS AND TERRORISING TODDLERS
O’ you terror! Get down from there! Mummy’s getting cranky…
Put my phone down. Where are your pants? What have you done with my purse? Don’t throw those blocks. What is that smell? Why do you look so happy? What’s in your mouth? Who ripped that book? Why won’t you just stop moving?
He’s on the chair! Just standing there! Wobbling like a drunk man. Where is my mug? What was that crash? Who let you in the kitchen? You’ve got a knife! Put it down now! Don’t wave it near your sister!
Put my phone down. Where are my apps? Who dialled triple zero?
Why won’t you sleep? Is it your teeth? I need another coffee! My head’s so sore! Look at the floor! Cleaning will take forever.
What’s wrong with you? What did I do? Why do you do this to me? I hope when you… Have some kids too… They drive you crazy!
Last year I read a post titled “Opportunist” by Rob in his blog Mental Gymnastics. In it, he mentions news about a work syndicate that won three million pounds between them.
This news intrigued me. Statistically, the chances of winning a million on a one-pound bet are slim. However, by pocketing out an extra dollar, you can better the odds.
I have outlined below an easy scam to dupe your lazy, gullible friends and profit from it.
1. Organize a lottery syndicate with at least 10 members. Volunteer to handle collection and buy tickets.
2. On Saturday mornings, buy eleven lucky dips with the collected ten dollars plus an extra dollar from your pocket.
3. On Mondays scan the results for lottery. If there is a sizeable win, substitute the spare ticket with the winning ticket and pocket the loot. No-one is any the wiser.
4. Email the results to your syndicate members. The number of tickets bought matching the number of members. Everything tallies.
5. Don’t be too greedy. To keep the members interested declare the small winnings.
Soon, the number of members in your syndicate will increase. If you collect 100 dollars then buy 102 tickets and your chances of winning will be better than the chances of winning a million on a dollar.
“Why not try this scam?”
When you hit the jackpot, will you retire and leave these fools to their drudge? I don’t think you will.
By the way, don’t forget to send me 1% of your winnings as royalty for this simple but great idea.
A convenience store called Cigars and Smoke was transformed into a liquor bar in March this year.
The bar sits just 200 feet away from the church of St. Augustine. This infuriated the congregation of St. Augustine, and local officials scratched their heads because a loophole in the County’s law allows a bar to be opened next to a church.
Every day, while the members of St. Augustine’s church were getting ready for their evening service, bartenders of Cigars and Smoke next door were also getting ready for their evening service. “Our community is a quiet one. Now every church-goer is complaining about the noise since it opened in March” said a senior member of the congregation.
For almost a month Father Patrick, the parish priest rained down brimstone and fire from the pulpit against the bar. “We are seeking the presence of the Lord and it is not congruent and it is not acceptable to us to have that damn thing next door to us,” he said. His congregation joined him in prayer invoking God to have the business closed.
A month later, Cigars and Smoke was struck by lightning and was burned to ashes.
The bar owner sued the parish priest and the entire church members for restitution for the loss of his bar. He claimed the lightning that struck his bar was the direct result of their prayer to God.
The parish priest and the members of the congregation countered this allegation and denied all responsibility.
The learned judge after listening to the arguments of both the parties commented:
“It is difficult to decide the case because we have here on one side a bar owner who believes in the power of prayer, and on the other side a priest and an entire congregation that does not believe in it!“
Poor little apostrophe. He knows his place, and more importantly, he knows when he’s not in it. Some, or all, will say that it isn’t really too important, and that as long as you get the gist of what is meant, then the grammatical semantics of the written word can probably fall by the wayside. However, if the boat of proper grammar truly is sinking, then I would rather let the weight of a million neglected semi-colons and brackets pull me down to the dreary depths of the abyss, than abandon ship and take refuge upon the misplaced and miserable apostrophe that hangs lifeless between the O and the S in the word: photo’s, or cling to safety upon the second f in the word of.
Now in writing this, I just want to assure anyone reading that I am not trying to seem patronising, nor am I pretending to be an expert; I can assure you that I’m not! I do, on occasion, get quite baffled with so many of the finer and seemingly more insignificant points of english grammar: a possessive of a plural, apostrophes on names that already end in ‘s‘, and so on, but what I’m trying to speak in favour of is the feeling that you needn’t be wrong, it doesn’t take that much effort to look it up and, let’s be honest, abbreviating and misspelling words in text messages really doesn’t save that much time!
Also, since I mentioned saving time, I may as well have a quick rant about how utterly, utterly stupid it is to replace a few letters with a number, or a word with a letter. I will of course concede that great is indeed two characters longer than gr8, and that if someone wrote b4 in a certain context, I would be able to deduce that they meant before; and I dare say that if ever I read “U R L8!”, I would probably be able to extract the meaning of that as well, albeit amidst a flurry of rage; but are we really in such a hurry all the time that we just can’t spare the fraction of a second lost by writing you’re instead of ure? It’s trying to look cool, because people think proper English isn’t. It’s the grammatical equivalent of wearing sunglasses at night.
There are a lot of aspects of our fine language that can baffle some, for instance the eternal battle between then and than (simple answer: then is chronological; than is comparitive. E.g. I grabbed the chicken nugget that was bigger than all the rest, and then I ate it.), and I understand that it is an effort to remember it all, but it simply pains me to see people who lack the linguistic skills to convey their points; and it makes me sad, because I know that joy that it brings me to properly convey my own.
Always remember, a well placed apostrophe is a happy apostrophe; and you’re never too busy to write a legible text message.
G.K Chesterton a Catholic and a Distributist, and George Bernard Shaw, an atheist and a socialist debated often. However, both could joke and to stay on as friends. Their ability to joke produced heated debates. Even some who disagreed with Chesterton well-known for his reasoned apologetics recognized the universal appeal in such works as Orthodoxy and The Everlasting Man.
As a political thinker, he denigrated both progressivism and conservatism. In 1924 in the Illustrated London News of April 19th, he wrote: “The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected.”
Once Bernard Shaw, Chesterton’s “friendly enemy,” said of him, “He was a man of colossal genius”.
Chesterton often associated with his close friend, the poet and essayist Hilaire Belloc. Chesterton’s friendly enemy, George Bernard Shaw, coined the name “Chesterbelloc” for their partnership.
Chesterton loved to debate. He often engaged in friendly public disputes with such men as George Bernard Shaw, H. G. Wells, Bertrand Russell and Clarence Darrow. Whenever Chesterton and Shaw debated it looked like they played cowboys in a never released silent movie.
During a debate between Chesterton and Bernard Shaw chaired by Hillaire Belloc, Shaw defending his wish to abolish private property, said:
If I own a large part of Scotland I can turn the people off the land practically into the sea, or across the sea. I can take women in childbearing and throw them into the snow and leave them there. That has been done. I can do it for no better reason than I think it is better to shoot deer on the land than allow people to live on it. They might frighten the deer.
But now compare that with the ownership of my umbrella. As a matter of fact the umbrella I have tonight belongs to my wife; but I think she will permit me to call it mine for the purpose of the debate. Now I have a very limited legal right to the use of that umbrella. I cannot do as I like with it. For instance, certain passages in Mr. Chesterton’s speech tempted me to get up and smite him over the head with my umbrella. I may presently feel inclined to smite Mr. Belloc. But should I abuse my right to do what I like with my property–with my umbrella–in this way I should soon be made aware– possibly by Mr. Belloc’s fist–that I cannot treat my umbrella as my own property in the way in which a landlord can treat his land. I want to destroy ownership in order that possession and enjoyment may be raised to the highest point in every section of the community. That, I think, is perfectly simple…
To this G.K. Chesterton responded:
Among the bewildering welter of fallacies which Mr. Shaw has just given us, I prefer to deal first with the simplest. When Mr. Shaw refrains from hitting me over the head with his umbrella, the real reason–apart from his real kindness of heart, which makes him tolerant of the humblest of the creatures of God–is not because he does not own his umbrella, but because he does not own my head. As I am still in possession of that imperfect organ, I will proceed to use it to the confutation of some of his other fallacies…
I fully agree with Mr. Shaw, and speak as strongly as he would speak, of the abomination and detestable foulness and sin of landlords who drove poor people from their land in Scotland and elsewhere. It is quite true that men in possession of land have committed these crimes; but I do not see why wicked officials under a socialistic state could not commit these crimes. But that has nothing to do with the principle of ownership of land. In fact these very Highland crofters, these very people thus abominably outraged and oppressed, if you asked them what they want would probably say, “I want to own my own croft; I want to own my own land.”