Comedians make good money (well, the good and the fortunate do) from satire. Public figures, particularly around election times, provide rich veins to mine.
We've often heard or watched a position or statement taken to its illogical extreme - and enjoyed the arrival at absurdity. Similarly, a comedian will - in the voice of the public figure being skewered and roasted - make a series of statements about other people/groups/factions laced with innuendo and...shaded..."truth" - and we laugh at the absurdity of it. For we know the whole exercise not to be true and we know the statements were not made...but could have been.
Or so I thought.
The governing board of our condo association is up for reelection - or some members are. I have learned over the years that emotions around such governing boards can be heightened. We've been in receipt of position papers, exhortations to vote one group out and another in, stern messages to "stay the course" (dance with the one that brung you?)
Today we received another of these - but this one stands out. The first third is a bulleted list of innuendo and conjecture, casting considerable doubt on the character and motives of the incumbents. The great Stephen Colbert could have done no better.
But when I reached the line that stated "I am not in possession of any personal knowledge of this situation that would constitute evidence...", I had to stop reading. I was laughing too much.
How does the old saying go? "Better to keep one's mouth shut for fear of being thought an idiot than to open it and remove all doubt."
That train's left the station.