Once upon a time in America, circa 1780 or thereabouts, somewhere on the western frontier, which was probably just south of Pittsburgh, considering the era…
George: “I’m so happy that we’re starting our new life together. Someday, we’ll make this country great again.”
Heather: “Of course we will. We’re both white.”
George: “Wait, what? I didn’t take you to be a racist.”
Heather: “You took me because I’m easy. One gin and tonic and the pearly gates are thrown wide open.”
George: “I must say that I’ve never seen this side of you.”
Heather: “Well, that’s very understandable. If you didn’t always insist that we do it animal style, you might see my face more often.”
George: “Uh huh. Okay, well, I’ve got to run take care of something. I’ll be right back with your trousseau.”
Heather: “What on earth do you mean? I just finished unpacking all that mess after our wedding two days ago. Are we moving?”
George: “You are. I should have spoken up when the Preacher Man asked if anybody had any objections. I just didn’t realize at the time that your pearly gates had racist hinges.”
Heather: “Oh, please. You didn’t have any problem breaching my barracks before we were married. Do you really want to get all moralistic about this?”
George: “Fair enough. We both made rash decisions and neither one of us bothered to Google each other’s names. Still, it’s now abundantly clear that we shouldn’t be near.”
Heather: “Don’t think you can get rid of me so easily. My daddy has lots of money and he can crush you.”
George: “That sounds like a really healthy relationship for us to have. And who is your daddy? Donald Trump?”
Heather: “I don’t know who that is, because women aren’t allowed to read in 1780, but I suspect that I would like him, if he has money and the ability to destroy people who don’t do what he wants.”
George: “Wow. Okay, let’s get things back on track. I don’t want to be married to you.”
Heather: “It’s too late to compromise. I’m signed, sealed, delivered, and yours.”
George: “I still have three business days to negate our contract.”
Heather: “That notion hasn’t become law yet. Are you missing the plot point that this is 1780, despite the two references above? The only laws on the books so far are ‘don’t empty your bedpans into the streets’ and ‘George the III of England screwed with the wrong people’. After that, you’re on your own.”
George: “Fine. I guess we’ll just have to work something out. We can stay together even though we don’t like each other. And we’re going to sleep in different bedrooms and do our own thing.”
And thus was born the still-enduring two-party system of politics in America…
Note 1: This is Exhibit #28 in Bonnywood’s March Madness. Details found here.
Note 2: I messed with this one, as well. I suppose I should just give up on the original concept of March Madness at this point, but there are only two entries left, so let’s just pretend that I’m doing the right thing, even thought I’m not. Which is also just like the American Congress…
Categories: Past Imperfect
Bonnywood Manor 
You really can’t help it, can you? Messing with is probably your middle and second-middle name. It’s one of your endearing qualities.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Truly, I cannot help it. In my schooling years, I was “that boy” who, upon receiving a less-than-stellar grade on an essay, would beg the teacher to let me resubmit. This generally did not happen, because said teachers were done with the assignment and ready to move on, but a few of them would allow me to do it as an exercise, not a grade adjustment. That was good enough for me.
Following your suggested protocol, my name could possibly be “Brian Messing Lageose” or “Brian Gregory Messing Lageose”. That second option has a certain appeal. I’ll see what I can do… 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
😂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m guessing that George is George W, but Heather? Heather Locklear? She’s about the right age as well as possessing the required degree of chastity and propriety. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Okay, you killed me with the suggestion that Heather Locklear is roughly a hundred years old. (This satisfies me in some way, though I do feel her pain.) Truth be told: “George” is George O’Brien and “Heather” is Heather Angel, both of whom had some degree of popularity in their day, George more so. The movie (“Daniel Boone”) was released in 1936 but set in 1775, which is why I dated this story in 1780. I adjusted the year for inflation as well as the need to move things up to the point that America was already a country and not still a colony, or the first line wouldn’t work. Not that you needed all this detail, but I’m feeling perky tonight… 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Seems like if you two kids can’t find some common ground together, someone might just have to take over the decision making for you. Like Big Vladdy Putsch-in, like Leader For You Better Bet Your Life On It Xi, like Glorious Exalted Omnipotent Magnanimous Beloved Infallible Heavenly Guided Master And Supreme Commander of the Demagogic Repugnancy of Force Korea, Him Wrong-Un. Oh, and Don Wannabe Big Dog. Hey, one-vote-fits-all works for them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interestingly enough, you just encapsulated modern society much better than I did with my rambling scenario. Good on ya!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hmm. I googled George and Heather of 1780 but nothing comes up. I wonder who they are. And always like black and white photos.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“They” are George O’Brien and Heather Angel, who were actors in the 1936 movie “Daniel Boone” and not actually historical figures. Here at Bonnywood, I often mess with actuality, as reality can often be very boring and annoying… 😉
LikeLike
At first I thought he should be wearing a raccoon hat, but that’s Davey Crockett.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Right, different historical figure. Still, SOMEBODY is clearly wearing a symbolic hat in this one, albeit not a good one…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I wonder how many people back then got married without really knowing each other well, and ended up just hating each other, but couldn’t get out of it. Most of them, I would imagine. Thank god for divorce (not that I ever needed it–Ken agrees with me on everything–or else! LOL!)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, I’m sure most marriages in that day were not based on love in any way, more so on strategy. But even today, not so much in America but in many countries, matrimony is a chess game decided by people who are not the pawns in the game…
LikeLiked by 1 person
True!
LikeLiked by 1 person