Wednesday, February 29, 2012

We interrupt this hiatus to bring you some exciting news:

Congressman Roscoe G. Bartlett (R), representative from the Sixth District of Maryland to the 112th Congress, has introduced a bill that will bring some much-needed relief to a heretofore neglected a small but politically powerful a well-deserving segment of our population.

He has introduced the Stache Act.

According to the website of the American Mustache Institute (a major and perhaps the only supporter of the new legislation), “the Stache Act (Stimulus to Allow for Critical Hair Expenses) aims to earn a well-deserved $250 annual tax deduction for every Mustached American for expenditures on mustache grooming supplies.”

“Wait a minute,” I can hear some of you saying. “Hold on there, cowboy. A $250 annual tax deduction for mustache grooming supplies expenditures?”

But others of you, including perhaps my new friend Jim Baker, whose mustache is a real beauty, may be saying, “It’s about dadblamed tootin’ time them cantankerous coyotes up in Washington paid some attention to us little guys that are payin’ their salaries.” [Editor's note. Truth in blogging compels me to say that I’m just having a little fun; the speech patterns of Jim Baker do not resemble those of Gabby Hayes in any way.--RWP]

But let me, as I am wont to do, explain. I was pretty sure this was some kind of joke, especially after learning that the American Mustache Institute is planning a march on Washington on April 1st.

That’s right, folks, April 1st. April Fool’s Day.

But the office of the congressman has indeed informed the institute that the congressman has begun the process of ensuring the Stache Act becomes law by passing the proposal to the House Ways and Means Committee for study -- an essential first step for tax legislation.

Blogger Daniel Halper of The Weekly Standard called the office of Congressman Bartlett to see if something so silly could possibly be real. Sure enough, it is -— but there’s a wrinkle:

Congressman Bartlett was never aware that the bill had been referred to the committee in his name.

At 86 and the second-oldest member of the 112th Congress, Congressman Bartlett may be unaware of many things -- I mean, I’m only 70 and I’m lucid about half the time these days -- but it is clear that only two responses by the Congressman are now possible.

He can fire the staffers responsible and find new ones, or he can join in the fun and have a great laugh with everyone while our country continues to go down the drain day by day. It’s his choice. Only time, as they say, will tell. [Editor's note. It’s also clear, as we cowboys say, that certain congressional staffers may have gotten a little too big for their britches, but I’ll leave that post for another day. --RWP]

As for me, I’m really looking forward to getting that additional $250 annual tax deduction.

Here is a picture of Congressman Bartlett, who was born in 1926:

Here is an earlier picture of Congressman Bartlett:

And for those of you have stuck with me through this post all the way to this point, here is a special treat: A blurry picture of Mrs. RWP and moi from around 1980, when I was being regularly mistaken for both Engelbert Humperdinck and the bass singer in the Statler Brothers, Harold Reid:

You can see from one detail in that blurry photo why I am so pleased with the new legislation. I mean, it may come a tad late for me and my crowd, but the younger fellows coming along behind us can sure use the extra money.

And let’s give credit where credit is due.

Thank you, 112th Congress. It’s good to know that big government is still at work.


  1. Razor blades are exceedingly expensive. The tax deduction should go to clean shaven gentlemen and not to beatnik hobo guys who are too lazy to shave their faces!
    (In my opinion and without prejudice)

  2. I'm with Mr Pudding and Helsie on this one. Razor blades and shaving gel are expensive, and let's not forget the alcohol tax on aftershave and the cost of celebrity endorsements.

    Also, my grandmother told me never to trust a man with a beard, although she was equivocal on women with the same condition.

  3. Are you sure it is you next to Mrs. RWP? In either photo? Because I would have never thought that the male person in the one photo is the same one as the person in the other. I can see it is the same Mrs. RWP in both photos.

    Oh... and I'm with Yorkshire Pudding, Helsie and Shooting Parrots on this one :-)

  4. So let's see, that makes it Disagreeing Readers 4, RWP 0. Nonetheless, I remain undaunted in my support on behalf of the mustached or mustachioed crowd.

    Carolina, Mrs. RWP said to tell you that she can vouch for the fact that that is most definitely me in both photographs, and I'm sure you would never doubt Mrs. RWP!

  5. True, I would never doubt Mrs. RWP