mycalicocat

"Would anyone like anything to read" is family code for "the crisis is over and it's time for the jokes." That's Dylan Thomas, in a Child's Christmas in Wales.

The last one I'm sure is the Grinch.

I have a hunch about the middle one, but I'd have to use google to know, so I'll let someone else share instead.
 

Also of course, the source of the ultimate statement on snow: "But that was not the same snow," I say. "Our snow was not only shaken from white wash buckets down the sky, it came shawling out of the ground and swam and drifted out of the arms and hands and bodies of the trees; snow grew overnight on the roofs of the houses like a pure and grandfather moss, minutely -ivied the walls and settled on the postman, opening the gate, like a dumb, numb thunder-storm of white, torn Christmas cards."
 

I recognized 2, 3 and 5. Had to cheat and look up 1 and 4. Since I cheated, I won't give the answers and spoil it for everyone else.
 

Googling is fine -- and assumed. I've done some multiple ones that I don't think anybody could answer without using a web search. But it's still interesting which ones people know. Tina got 3,4 and 5 right off the bat, but didn't know 1 and 2.
 

i keep the grinch and max the dog in my office year round. the grinch is the epitome of rehabilitation and max could have been charged with party to the crime under georgia law. i'm saving my whole quiz for a work day lunch since i have extra time due to no red hat's vacation.:)
 

Okay, we've got two lawyers in this group. How would you defend Max?
 

i would maintain that the actions of max are not sufficient to convict max, even under party to the crime. mere presence is a defense in georgia. my quite vocal opposition would call a press conference and declare that there would be no more plea bargains in cases of dogs stealing presents.:)
 

That reminded me of this:

Famous Cat Bill Veto STATE OF ILLINOIS EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT SPRINGFIELD, April 23, 1949.

To the Honorable, the Members of the Senate of the Sixth-sixth General Assembly:

I herewith return, without my approval, Senate Bill No. 93, entitled, "An Act to Provide Protection to Insectivorous Birds by Restraining Cats." This is the so-called "Cat Bill." I veto and withhold my approval from this Bill for the following reasons:

It would impose fines on owners or keepers who permitted their cats to run at large off their premises. It would permit any person to capture or call upon the police to pick up and imprison, cats at large. It would permit the use of traps. The bill would have statewide application— on farms, in villages, and in metropolitan centers.

This legislation has been introduced in the past several sessions of the Legislature, and it has, over the years, been the source of much comment— not all of which has been in a serious vein. It may be that the General Assembly has now seen fit to refer it to one who can view it with a fresh outlook. Whatever the reasons for passage at this session, I cannot believe there is a widespread public demand for this law or that it could, as a practical matter, be enforced.

Furthermore, I cannot agree that it should be the declared public policy of Illinois that a cat visiting a neighbor's yard or crossing the highway is a public nuisance. It is in the nature of cats to do a certain amount of unescorted roaming. Many live with their owners in apartments or other restricted premises, and I doubt if we want to make their every brief foray an opportunity for a small game hunt by zealous citizens— with traps or otherwise. I am afraid this Bill could only create discord, recrimination and enmity. Also consider the owner's dilemma: To escort a cat abroad on a leash is against the nature of the cat, and to permit it to venture forth for exercise unattended into a night of new dangers is against the nature of the owner. Moreover, cats perform useful service, particularly in rural areas, in combating rodents— work they necessarily perform alone and without regard for property lines.

We are all interested in protecting certain varieties of birds. That cats destroy some birds, I well know, but I believe this legislation would further but little the worthy cause to with its proponents give such unselfish effort. The problem of cat versus bird is as old as time. If we attempt to resolve it by legislation why knows but what we may be called upon to take sides as well in the age old problems of dog versus cat, bird versus bird, or even bird versus worm. In my opinion, the State of Illinois and its local governing bodies already have enough to do without trying to control feline delinquency.

For these reasons, and not because I love birds the less or cats the more, I veto and withhold my approval from Senate Bill No. 93.

Respectfully, ADLAI E. STEVENSON, Governor

Veto Messages of Adlai E. Stevenson, Governor of Illinois, on Senate and House Bills Passed by the 66th General Assembly of Illinois. Springfield: State of Illinois, 1949.
 

too bad our georgia delegation never saw a law they didn't like.