FURTHERMORE AND THE QUEST FOR JUSTICE
My wife has been camping this week with some teacher-type girlfriends on a beach in California. This, of course, has the potential to be the source of some remarkable stories upon her return. Her idea of roughing it is a hotel without room service. But already I digress.
Anyway, my wife is out of town for a few days so I’ve been spending more time than usual with Furthermore. We had finished reading the morning newspaper, such as it is, and FM had launched into one of his usual diatribes about the quality of local news writing, the weird things that people do, etc. For a bird, he’s really very well informed.
Having completed our discussion of local politicians and their antics, we selected a couple of good cigars, which the nine-headed hydra was kind enough to light with a blast from head number three, and we moved on to other topics.
Of special interest was the article about the couple from Yeman who were suing NASA.. Seems that they claim their ancestors left the planet Mars to them for their exclusive use and now NASA is trespassing with all its electronic and remote equipment. Furthermore and I were stunned, frankly, with the complete and total brilliance of this suit. We were also angry that we had not thought of it first.
Furthermore, of course, thinks they will lose. He figures this because he doesn’t believe NASA is really on Mars. The photos “from Mars” look entirely too much like the terrain between Yuma and Gila Bend, he says and I believe him because he is my friend and brother. Besides, they do look like the terrain between Yuma and Gila Bend. He also thinks they would have had a better suit if they had sued the people naming the features of the Martian landscape. Really. How would you like a mountain or a rock named Yogi or Scubby Doo in your backyard?
Still, the example is worth emulating. If you can sue the space agency for trespassing on Mars, what other creative opportunities are out there just waiting to be discovered?
Furthermore, of course, is making a list, checking it twice, and looking for a sleazy lawyer (never hard to find).
He wants to begin with television. We plan to sue Channel 12 for the stupidity of its newscasts and newcasters, Channel 3 for their perky morning show hosts (we hate perky in the morning!), Channel 15 for Buffy the Vampire Slayer (the series); and Channel 10 just for the hell of it.
Then we’re going after the department of transportation. The construction of the interchange at I-17 and the 101 beltway is clearly criminal.
Then there’s Microsoft. We’re going to sue them just because it can be done.
And then we thought we’d sue every network anchorperson who leads their newscast again with tales of small children from Cuba, hard drives from Los Alamos, how you can drown in your home pool, and politics in New York state.
The only problem I can see here is the one you’ve probably already spotted. Stupidity may be stupid but it is not necessarily criminal. Of course, juries have convicted on far less. I’ll let you know how we do. If you promise not to sue.