June 20, 2007

Let's take a closer look at Bill's carrot and Hillary's onion ring.

Let's talk about the onion-ring shaped vortex I started yesterday. All I did was a little casual Freudian interpretation of a Hillary Clinton campaign video. It was a short film, premised on the much-interpreted final scene of "The Sopranos," with Bill and Hillary Clinton seated at a table in a diner, sitting in for Tony and Carmela Soprano. Acting!

Maybe you just sit there pleasantly and think: Isn't it clever for Hillary to use the "Sopranos" scene as a device for informing us about her new campaign song and to include some cute business where she alludes to her concern about health care by having a nice bowl of carrots instead of the onion rings they had on "The Sopranos"? If so, aren't you the good little voter, accepting the message Senator Clinton hoped to insert in your receptacle of a brain? The famously controlled former First Lady is pleased there are people like you.

Me, I'm not so obedient. Even though I voted for Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996 and may very well vote for Hillary, I don't accept these things at face value. What's more I love a ripe opportunity for interpretation, including comic interpretation with sexual, Freudian content. What are you going to say: "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar"? You simply cannot say that when Bill Clinton is in the picture. In the whole history of the world, if there is one person for whom a cigar was not just a cigar, it's Bill Clinton.

So here's the passage -- ooh, a passage! -- that got people so excited:
Bill says "No onion rings?" and Hillary responds "I'm looking out for ya." Now, the script says onion rings, because that's what the Sopranos were eating in that final scene, but I doubt if any blogger will disagree with my assertion that, coming from Bill Clinton, the "O" of an onion ring is a vagina symbol. Hillary says no to that, driving the symbolism home. She's "looking out" all right, vigilant over her husband, denying him the sustenance he craves. What does she have for him? Carrot sticks! The one closest to the camera has a rather disgusting greasy sheen to it. Here, Bill, in retaliation for all of your excessive "O" consumption, you may have a large bowl of phallic symbols! When we hear him say "No onion rings?," the camera is on her, and Bill is off-screen, but at the bottom of the screen we see the carrot/phallus he's holding toward her. Oh, yes, I know that Hillary supplying carrots is supposed to remind that Hillary will provide us with health care, that she's "looking out for" us, but come on, they're carrots! Everyone knows carrots are phallic symbols. But they're cut up into little carrot sticks, you say? Just listen to yourself! I'm not going to point out everything.
See that phrase "I doubt if any blogger will disagree with my assertion"? That's an awfully cheap trick, a way to prod bloggers to write about the post. But nobody with any decent readership is dumb enough to say Althouse is crazy to think everyone will agree with that. Right?

I'm saying outright: Come on, everybody, into the vortex. And in they hop. It's an anti-Althousiana fest. I love it!

According to Memeorandum, my onion-rings-are-vagina-symbols story ranks second only to Mayor Bloomberg's leaving the Republican Party. (I'll try to do a free-form Freudian riff on Bloomberg later, perhaps: The O in GOP traumatized him. Ever notice that GOP could be pronounced "go pee"? (I doubt if any blogger who reads that can continue to view me as a "wingnut."))

So let's survey the onion-ring subgenre of anti-Althousiana:

First, let's see what TRex has to say. Surely, a guy who named himself after the biggest, most ferocious dinosaur will have a useful perspective on sexual imagery in film. He begins with the least creative approach found in the anti-Althousianan literature: assertions that Professor Althouse is crazy. I think the poor man knows this is a cliché, because he desperately grasps for colorful ways to say it. He comes up with "a few balloon animals shy of a birthday party" and "on the short bus to Woof-Woof Land." This is mainly padding though. Let's get to the specifics. He quotes me, then says:
Uhhhhhh, hold up, wait a minute. This blogger strongly disagrees and I’m sure if you gave me a couple minutes, I could run out in the yard and round up a couple dozen more, at least.
Ah, ha ha ha ha ha! Good lord, is it really this easy? Now, I'm laughing, but starting to feel a little sad. I don't think TRex is the dumbest guy in the world, yet he wrote something that I had assumed no one was dumb enough to say.

His post is padded with comments from my blog, but his main substance is this:
Apparently in the Mind of Ann Althouse absolutely anything (even something as innocuous as a humble onion ring) gets larded down with layers of psycho-sexual significance when it’s submerged in the warm, sticky tide of sexual charisma that surrounds our former president like a fog.
No, when I saw the onion rings in the final scene of "The Sopranos," I, like many other people, thought they represented communion wafers. The context counts. Here the context was Bill Clinton and the wife he has notoriously cheated on for years. He's saying he wants onion rings, and she's imposing carrots on him. That cries out for psycho-sexual interpretation. It's not the intent of the film's auteur -- unless he's a traitor to Clinton -- but it's imagery that they should have noticed as they were writing the script. TRex seems to want to let them off the hook by acting like associating Bill Clinton with sex is a weird little problem of mine. I don't think so!

Hillary wants to take advantage of Bill in her campaign. Fine. I understand the motivation. But she's got to figure out how to overcome the negatives. Whenever we see them together, we think about their relationship and what he did to it. There is complexity there. She can't expect us to just put that aside. She may be able to compartmentalize as she pursues her goal, but why would we?

TRex brings up last year's biggest anti-Althousiana topic: my interpretion of a photograph of Bill Clinton with a group of bloggers who'd just had lunch with him. That lunch was, ostensibly, an effort to help the Hillary Clinton campaign by using Bill's clout to influence bloggers to think well of her. In the photograph, the woman posed in front of Bill had the effect -- I argued -- of reminding us of Monica Lewinsky. This illustrated the problem of Hillary attempting to use Bill in the campaign.

Here's what TRex says about that now:
Looks like we now have conclusive proof that the whole Unpleasantness from last fall was just a spasm of Althouse’s mania to compulsively eroticize anything and anyone (apparently up to and including innocent foodstuffs) that is unlucky enough to be photographed with Big Dog. I wonder if [the woman in the photograph] realizes now that she could have been wearing a blouse made of prepared vegetables and the reaction would have been exactly the same.
Of course, a "blouse made of prepared vegetables" (why "prepared"?) would have been outrageously suggestive. But what the hell? TRex is intent on denying that Bill Clinton's reputation has a big sexual dent in it. And, by the way, vegetables are not that innocent. Don't you know that they dream of responding to you? Why else are they covered with dew?

Second, let's look at Glenn Kenny, who's the Premiere film critic I got into a bit of a dispute with last week. He makes a show of refraining from attacking me and noting that he gets the song reference, then taking up the idea that it was elitist to use "The Sopranos," shows us what film references the Clintons might make if they were really elitist. Let's move on.

Third, we have Scott Lemieux, whose is probably the biggest hack in the anti-Althousiana genre. He writes about me frequently, even though he can't think of much beyond the usual clichés about how I'm crazy, stupid, drunk, and so forth. It's sad. This is his new effort:
I really hope that she wasn't kidding with the "no blogger will disagree" bit.
Why does he hope I wasn't kidding? I assume that's a mistake. He seems to be somewhat less dim than TRex, even though his writing is duller. But TRex only seems un-dull because he reaches for those phrases like "short bus to Woof-Woof Land" that are typical of second-rate comic writing. Back to Scott:
A consuming obsession with Bill Clinton's sex life is merely banal among American conservatives, and with Althouse more than well-established in any case, but the assumption that it's universal is special.
Oh, lord, that man is boring! This may be the first time I've ever linked to him, even though he writes about me all the time. Someone in his comments says:
It would seem that you have your own obsession with Ann Althouse. I have visited her blog and don't see the reciprocity. I suspect that you have the perfect relationship; you follow every move she makes and she simply isn't aware or doesn't care.
Yeah, well, poor little Scott -- who's actually a political science professor -- will have to satisfy himself alone again for a good long while, because I really don't care. He's too boring! Or should I say merely banal among anti-Althousian scribblers.

Fourth, Instaputz displays a picture of me and then says sexual things about me. If I were a Yale law student, I'd sue him, and I could even leverage my way into federal court with a copyright claim. (I have a Creative Commons license on my photographs in Flickr, but he omits the required attribution and, in any event, it's obvious that I didn't take this picture so the license isn't mine to give.) By the way a "putz" is a little penis, so he might want to order the fried calamari instead of the onion rings.

Fifth, Roy at Alicublog is in the vortex, even though, as usual, he's got nothing interesting to say. My post made him "think of Matt Taibbi, a progressive who is famously embarrassed by the 'silly' American Left." He goes on:
I say that for all the "guys on stilts wearing mime makeup and Cat-in-the-Hat striped top-hats" Taibbi notices on the left, I see an equal number, at least, of Althousean clowns on the right, as this blog documents.
Yeesh. He's got that Greenwaldian verbosity. Translation: My post is silly. Too bad that with all those words, he can't come up with a single substantive point. Another inconsequential contribution to anti-Althousiana. How embarrassing for little Roy.

Okay, I'll stop. For now.

ADDED: Okay, there's more now: here. Don't miss the added part at the bottom. Well, let me excerpt it:
I just want to emphasize that I stand by my original sexual interpretation. You've got a married couple talking about two foods, one of which is obviously a hole, and the other of which is so clearly phallic that this Google search gets over 70,000 hits.

The man wants the hole-shaped item, and the woman forbids it. She insists that he confine himself to the phallic item, which has been sliced down to puny, thin stick form. The man looks at it sadly, and the woman tells him it's for his own good. If you don't see sexual imagery there, you exist on a very narrow band of human imagination....

When Clinton sadly bites into the carrot stick of his own castration, it makes a crunch noise -- ouch! -- and it's that noise that causes the ominous looking man at the bar ("Johnny Sack") to turn and look at him. He then walks by and gives him a glare. What does that glare mean in the Clinton video? I think it means: "What kind of man are you?"

230 comments:

1 – 200 of 230   Newer›   Newest»
Positroll said...

He's saying he wants onion rings, and she's imposing carrots on him.
Even worse, she is imposing a chopped carrot on him ...

Josh said...

Me thinks she doth protest too much.

ricpic said...

Whatever this post is about, what I saw in the Hillary commercial is a confirmation of just how hopelessly wooden she is, especially relative to her husband. If the purpose was to make her more appealing, regular folks and all that, it failed.

JD Rhoades said...

This just gets better and better. Few things are funnier than watching an Internet loon try to defend their lunacy.

MadisonMan said...

What ricpic says. There are two problems with Hillary using Bill in her campaign: One, the whole sex thing. Two, he's a definite natural politician -- whether that's good or bad, I won't say -- and she's just so mechanical in comparison.

He oozes charm. She oozes anti-freeze. A politician is going to have to charm you into voting for them, and she's not up to the task. Seeing him just reinforces that.

AllenS said...

Maybe Hillary is trying to send a subliminal message, that is voting for her, is actually a vote for Bill, and not to worry, he'll be running things.

mcg said...

Well, as funny as this exchange is---and therefore, as glad as I am that you started it!---I have to admit that the Freudian interpretation fell flat with me. It just seemed like too much of a stretch, even with randy ol' Bill involved.

Mindsteps said...

Dosen't the vortex swirl in the opposite direction in the Southern Hemisphere?

One Gestaltist technique to dream and fantasy interpretation suggests that everything in the dream or fantasy represents aspects of the dreamer.

At any rate, Ms. Althouse wrote, among other things:

Hillary wants to take advantage of Bill in her campaign. Fine. I understand the motivation. But she's got to figure out how to overcome the negatives. Whenever we see them together, we think about their relationship and what he did to it. There is complexity there. She can't expect us to just put that aside. She may be able to compartmentalize as she pursues her goal, but why would we?

I think this is a perceptive observation.

Bill disintegrated so many boundaries, as did the media, the special prosecutor, and other branches of government in the process of grappling with it. The boundaries between Bill, Hillary, Monica, Linda, etc. and the public also began to blur. Personally, I suck at compartmentalizing, even on my best days. Mix up all of the powerful impulses and forces at play with Bill and the gang, and for me, it becomes next to impossible. I have to think that the ubiquity of the 24-7 media coverage heightens the intensity of any breach of boundaries (there is some research that tends to support this, at least with respect to violence).

The whole question of respect for boundaries, privacy, and behavioral rules etc. in reference to our leaders is really an outstanding question, that, no doubt will become politicized.

TMink said...

President Clinton's behavior begs the psychosexual interpretation to everything he does in the same way that Nixon's behavior led us to wonder if he was lying.

Not rocket science, just uncommon sense. 18 minutes of erased tape, stained blue dress. Not difficult if you are honest with yourself.

Trey

Richard said...

Y'know, my reaction to the whold onion ring thing was that it was clever but overdrawn, OBVIOUSLY an extended joke. The virulence of the reactions may say more about the commenters than about AA. Reminds me of my own reactions to Bill C, back in the day....

Seven Machos said...

It really is hilarious to me that people have gotten riled up about this. The trope about all bloggers agreeing was great, and should have clued people in.

But, no.

Pogo said...

Re: "She oozes anti-freeze."

Exactly; hilarious.

You'll eat those carrots and like them!" Her portrayal of "concerned uber-mom for the entire USA" is an accurate reflection of her underlying Plan for micromanaging our lives, down to the prescribed dose of carrots, whether phallic or not, because dammit, she's in charge and she's ordering for the whole damned table so sit down and enjoy them right now or I'll give you something to cry about.

Really really awful.

Meade said...

Positroll said...
He's saying he wants onion rings, and she's imposing carrots on him.
Even worse, she is imposing a chopped carrot on him ...


Technically, the carrots aren't chopped and does she really impose the carrot stick on him? She orders "for the table" and he chooses, glumly and dutifully, to chomp down on one.

So now it's Bill's mouth, not an onion ring, that symbolizes a vagina (vagina dentata?) - the same mouth that smoked the blue dress-wearing intern's post-masturbation cigar in the Oval Office - the same office Hillary desires to officially occupy.

Hil[l]arious.

B said...

My only wish is that all intellectual (and pseudo-intellectual) discussions were as tongue-in-cheek.

But no! Try having a little fun with someone of the "Inconvenient Truth" crowd - for example - and . . . wow! No light-heartedness there.

I am always amazed at how easily Ann can make someone's back hair rise. Don't any of the "aggrieved" have even the tiniest senses of humor and self-confidence?

David53 said...

Blithering Misogynist Idiot.

Don't you think it's too early for a box of wine?


I just wanted to get that in before trademark troll dave woke up, you know, save him some key strokes.

What was the record for the last super vortex, something in the 300 to 400 commments range? This is going to be fun, I expect it to come close to the record.

vet66 said...

Bill Clinton is a serial (cereal) womanizer. Hillary is a serial enabler married to a lech. The left-wing loons refuse to admit that Bill Clinton did anything wrong up to, an including, Lewinsky. So much for their morality!

I immediately saw the sexual innuendo of the carrots and onion ring metaphor. Hillary is sending a subliminal message that she has Bill (Depends on what the definition of 'IS' is) on a short leash. If elected she will not turn the Lincoln bedroom into a bordello for Cigar Bill and a bunch of horny interns looking to share power and a blue dress.

Any attempt to ignore the obvious inference to be drawn from this presentation is either denial, ignorance, or both. The Clinton's don't do anything without thoroughly planning it's effects on the targeted audience.

Like Bill obsessively pursuing women, Hillary obsessively pursues power. Unfortunately for her, Bill is infinitely more successful at handling young women than Hillary is at handling power.

jane said...

In a way, that awful Bill comes off as a sympathetic character in Hill's vid. She's on time and waiting. (His coming in after her is mildly suggestive that he's been off on his own...) She selects "for the table" without hesitation or apology. She didn't need the menu, since her mind's made up. She's over-controlling and shows no zest for life. That little carrot stick he holds up unhappily is what his "thing" now looks like.

Doyle said...

The reason so many people wouldn't get your little joke is because so much of what you write (in all seriousness) really is that bonkers.

Just yesterday, in fact, your bit on the toothless guy could have been tongue in cheek, but of course wasn't.

So yeah, way to keep everyone on their toes!

Hoosier Daddy said...

In a way, that awful Bill comes off as a sympathetic character in Hill's vid.

I can't stand the man myself but even I have sympathy for him when I think of him being married to Hillary. I mean she had to be fun at some point for him to get hitched to her.

I still say that if she wins, they'll have to rename the plane to Broomstick One.

Seven Machos said...

Or maybe, Doyle, it's that people like you can't see hyperbole because you are dumb.

halojones-fan said...

Ann: You should have gone out with Scott back when he asked, instead of spurning his advances. Now he's obsessed with you! He's totally fixated on you (and your vortex.)

...or maybe I'm just projecting.

MadisonMan said...

I still say that if she wins,

If?

The Republicans offer little in the way of palatable candidates for me. Giuliani? Please -- the man was too busy talking and making money to help with the Iraq Study Group to help find a way out of the mess. Are we meant to take him seriously now? McCain is done. Romney? He is a Republican Kerry (except he's much better looking). All bloggers will agree with me when I say that the only reason Fred Thompson gets any looks -- other than his bodacious wife -- is because the rest of the field offers only yesterday's rehashed leftovers.

jane said...

"the field offers only yesterday's rehashed leftovers"

Hillary, anyone?

Bob said...

Quote: (Vet66)

Hillary is sending a subliminal message that she has Bill (Depends on what the definition of 'IS' is) on a short leash. If elected she will not turn the Lincoln bedroom into a bordello for Cigar Bill and a bunch of horny interns looking to share power and a blue dress.

Only way that Hillary will be able to control Bill in the White House again is to have the Secret Service hound him 24/7, and she won't do that. I think that she'd much rather let him start playing his games again, and then throw him out of the White House in the ultimate display of vagina power, filing for divorce in the bargain.

I've liked the last 8 years of the Bushes in the White House for this very reason; no matter how you feel about them, the Bushes make the Presidency about the issues, not some low-rent white trash soap opera that embarasses the country.

Eli Blake said...

So what comes next? On his birthday she buys him a new gift-- a cigar cutter?

One thing I do have trouble with though-- people who insist on blaming Hillary for Bill's dalliance with Monica, and then seek to justify their blaming her by suggesting that if she had any sense of moral outrage she'd have divorced him.

In fact, both of those reactions are insulting at a very deep level. How is the wife of a cheating husband responsible for his wandering? That sort of logic has been used for a long time (something about 'if she'd just taken care of him better...') and it is absolutely and flagrantly false, sexist and a disgusting attempt to re-victimize the only legitimate victim of Bill's philandering.

The second part, that she should have divorced him over it is also insulting. Many people whose spouses are unfaithful do divorce them. But also many people whose spouses are unfaithful don't. Marriages are not all the same and frankly it is not up to those whose only objective is to defeat Hillary and/or Bill politically to advise her about how to handle her marriage, or condemn her when she doesn't do what they want her to.

Oh, and whatever the Clinton's problems are, they pale in comparison to the first couple of the French Socialist party-- Segolese Royal, who recently lost a close election for President of France, is separating from her partner (they were never married-- in France that is no big deal) who is the father of her four children but recently had had quite a few affairs, and will now run for the leadership of the Socialist party-- against HIM!

Mike said...

Isn't it clever for Hillary to use the "Sopranos" scene as a device for informing us about her new campaign song and to include some cute business where she alludes to her concern about health care by having a nice bowl of carrots instead of the onion rings they had on "The Sopranos"? If so, aren't you the good little voter, accepting the message Senator Clinton hoped to insert in your receptacle of a brain?

God, I think it sucks that the struggle for the most powerful position on the planet is waged with ads and campaign songs. We really are a stupid people, deserving of the selfish, no-talent hacks who lead us.

JD Rhoades said...

Sigh.

She "ordered for the table" because that was the line from the famous Sopranos final scene!

I mean, talk about not getting the joke! All this bizarre examination of every detail of the video could be done away with if you actually look at what they're attempting to parody.

But you're still so obsessed with Clinton's Willy that you can't get a reference if it slaps you in the face.

Meade said...

MadisonMan said...
"...rehashed leftovers."

"If you vote for my husband, you get me; it's a two-for-one, blue plate special."
Source: April 1992, CBS This Morning

Sloppy seconds?

Zeb Quinn said...

You'd have more traction to your theory if Jungian analysis had the onion ring archetyped in classical mythology as symbolic for the vagina. Alas, it isn't.

But on another Jungian level I'll concede that a bit of synchronicity may be going on with respect to Hillary's expressed health concerns in the video's about greasy deep-fried onion rings ("I'm looking out for you") and how if you were to substitute big-haired bimbos for onion rings it'd work just the same. Something operating on a subconscious level there?

But, then, don't forget that other operation, Bill's heart surgery. "I'm looking out for you" takes on a personal heart-felt feeling when you keep that in mind.

So, like somebody else already said, sometimes an onion ring is just an onion ring.

But this is what's really scary:

"Even though I voted for Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996 and may very well vote for Hillary, I don't accept these things at face value."

You are full well willing to plumb the depths of these people's joint depravities, their psychopathologies, and everything all that implies, their sham marriage, analyze it all, and then hold it up to the light and twist it like a kaleidoscope to see what else you can shake of it of it, and after all of which you still "may well vote for Hillary." Jung would say much about that too. One thing you may have lain out for examination is the prototypical Bill Clinton - Hillary Clinton voter and supporter. And I'm also thinking that somewhere in that dynamic is where the seeds to all that anti-Althousia are planted.

SteveR said...

Its just funny how people are so willing to jump into the vortex and shed their intellect (or any appearance of one). So easily drawn in, its no wonder that 9/11 and Bushilterhalliburton conspiracies get so much attention.

Josh: Me thinks she doth protest too much. Protest? Not hardly.

Simon said...

"we have Scott Lemieux, who is probably the biggest hack in the anti-Althousiana genre."

I prefer my appellation for Lemieux - the "Grand Inquisitor of anti-Althousiana." At least, that's the polite term.

AJ Lynch said...

The ad was warm at times and off-kilter at times.

Hillary showed some warmth but Bill's line were out of sync- I doubt he even knows what Smashmouth music sounds like and he hastily sqgued into "everyone wants to know what won". I bet majority of people were not aware of theme song contest and then they choose a Canadian singer!! Thatwas dumb.

And the nanny-state thing came across loud and clear.

Last- they chose the Sopranos tie-in to try and be cool and with it. I don't think they achieved that goal.

jane said...

Sigh.

She "ordered for the table" because that was the line from the famous Sopranos final scene!

I mean, talk about not getting the joke!

Hey, JD-

Ever hear of lit, artistic and ad devices having more than one meaning? You know, connotations on different levels or with different associations? Even if you never studied English, art or marketing, this is a rather obvious fact about symbol and meaning. Talk about not getting the point!

Joshua said...

the best way to show how little you care about lemieux would be to write another crazed rant about his penis

jane said...

"and then they choose a Canadian singer!! That was dumb."

Or was it, AJ? Hillary is a transnationalist and the centerpiece of her administration to come will be a Canadian-style single payer health care system.

steve simels said...

That screed was beyond parody.

A masterpiece of cluelessness and toxic self-absorption.

I'm stunned...

Victor said...

This screed was tough to finish.

More importantly, how's HC doing in the polls?

From media reports, her campaign effectively uses the internet.

JD Rhoades said...

Hey, JD-

Ever hear of lit, artistic and ad devices having more than one meaning?


Ever hear about "projecting your neuroses"?

Jimmy said...

>No, when I saw the onion rings in the final scene of "The Sopranos," I, like many other people, thought they represented communion wafers.

Sometimes an onion ring is just an onion ring, to paraphrase a deep thinker.

Meade said...

"Let's take a closer look at Bill's carrot and Hillary's onion ring."

Or were they Hillary's carrots and Bill's onion rings?

Don't ask; don't tell.

JD Rhoades said...

Gotta love this:

I'm saying outright: Come on, everybody, into the vortex. And in they hop. It's an anti-Althousiana fest. I love it!

Translation: I'm not a nutcase, I'm an attention whore! I say stupid stuff so you'll bash me and I can play the martyr! And you've all fallen for it! HAHAHAHAHAAAAA!

The lady sure does know how to bring the crazy.

salvage said...

Ann I knew you'd top yourself, whenever you say something stupid and it penetrates your thickness you always come back with something even stupider.

Never change sweetie.

Luckyoldson said...

Boy, where could you possibly get a more unbiased view of Bill and especially Hillary, than the nutcases here.

Ann's insane theory that the onion rings represent vaginas, with the carrots as phallic symbols is so ridiculous it's hard to believe it originates with a law professor??
(Try to imagine her students reading this drivel.)

The entire post also illustrates what I've said on many occasions: Ann does her best to represent herself as some kind of highly intellectual independent thinker, when in reality, she's really no different than that other monumental example of intellect and objectivity...Jonah Goldberg.

*I'd put Ann in the class of a Rush Limbaugh, but he at least appears to finally understand that he's much more a comedian than a political guru.

vet66 said...

Eli;

Serial philanderers don't belong in the White House as leaders of the free world. Serial enablers display a lack of character for enabling and condoning the behavior in question.

Moral lapses/weaknesses such as that preclude them from positions of authority and role models. Their character is impeachable and suspect. If Hillary gains the nomination, expect the full range of disclosures on her illegal activities at Rose, various investments, and her handling of the ill-fated health plan, among others. Her own people from the bubba years have already gone on record against her and her ability to serve.

Pogo said...

JD Rhoades said: " I'm an attention whore!"
This from the man whose ID picture is of his own book?
Heh.

Re: " mean, talk about not getting the joke!"
Shouldn't novelists be able to riff on the metanarrative, on hidden subtexts, and all that crit lit stuff? Or do you tend to eschew such obfuscation?

Luckyoldson said...

JD Rhoades said..."This just gets better and better. Few things are funnier than watching an Internet loon try to defend their lunacy."

You got that right.

Luckyoldson said...

vet says: "Serial philanderers don't belong in the White House as leaders of the free world. Serial enablers display a lack of character for enabling and condoning the behavior in question."

Are FDR, Kennedy and Thomas Jefferson in that grouping?

And I suppose Guli and Newt are toast, too?

Seven Machos said...

J.D. -- How is that book selling?

Luckyoldson said...

Pogo said..."JD Rhoades said: " I'm an attention whore!"
This from the man whose ID picture is of his own book?
Heh."

*Well, at least you have the good sense to represent yourself with a cartoon character.

P.S. Have you and Fen-Fen made up yet?

dave™© said...

Pathetic.

Get help.

Seriously.

Seven Machos said...

What the fuck, Dave? Nothing about wine? No cussing.

I'm concerned about you.

Luckyoldson said...

Seven Machos said..."J.D. -- How is that book selling?"

This from someone who's probably never even read a book, much less written one?

*Those who can...do...those who can't...whine.

Doyle said...

I'm not a nutcase, I'm an attention whore!

Can't she be both?

JD Rhoades said...

This from the man whose ID picture is of his own book?

Why yes. As opposed to, say a picture of myself, which would be attention whoring.

As would posting a long involved explication of why onion rings=vaginas and then acting like a martyr when people laugh at it. I mean, really, a whole category for "Anti-Althousiana"? WTF?

Seven: Selling well enough the publisher keeps buying the next one, so I can't complain.

Seven Machos said...

J.D. -- You have devoted entirely too many words to blunt, unsubtle, poorly unorganized criticism here to seriously claim that it is Althouse who seeks attention. Also, if you don't want her to have attention, don't provide it.

I don't use the word hack very often...

Hoosier Daddy said...

Madison Man said:

If?

Yeah if. Nothing’s over till the fat lady sings and considering we’re 18 months out, I’m pretty comfortable saying if Hillary wins. She can easily pull a Howard Dean between now and then. I have a six pack that she does. Kerry was supposed to be a shoe in till he stuck it in his mouth.

The Republicans offer little in the way of palatable candidates for me.

Well if you’re willing to settle for Hillary then I’d figure that no GOP candidate would be palatable to you.

All bloggers will agree with me when I say that the only reason Fred Thompson gets any looks -- other than his bodacious wife -- is because the rest of the field offers only yesterday's rehashed leftovers.

C’mon MM as opposed to the Dems? What’s new and exciting there except the Barrack who is indistinguishable from Hillary on policy? The rest of the Dem field is pretty much a re-run of 2004.

steve simels said...

Bottom line:

If we've learned anything from Ann in the last two days, it's that a neatly slivered section of her medulla would unquestionably fetch top dollar from any major medical research laboratory in the country.

Seven Machos said...

The capacity on the left to be unable to get a fractionally sophisticated joke and at the same time be able to laugh at blunt non-humor that is meant to be funny just isn't funny (and isn't made more funny by the use of exclamation points!!!) is apparently boundless.

Luckyoldson said...

seven,
the guy has written and SOLD three novels (that get good reviews) and you say he uses "too many words?"

could you run a list of anything YOU'VE published?

PWS said...

It's a lot of mental masturbation and Althouse is laughing at anyone who takes her too seriously.

In my mind this brings up Ann's outburst on bloggingheads TV. If you go back and look, Ann did not react right away when Garance said "the Valenti breast controversy." Ann purses her lips, smiles sardonically, waits about 20 seconds and THEN goes off. It appears somewhat calculated.

Many are being dragged (unknowingly) into the vortex because you don't "get" what Ann is doing here.

Luckyoldson said...

seven,
could you explain what you consider to be a "fractionally sophisticated joke?"

Luckyoldson said...

pws,
nobody takes ann more seriously than...ann.

are you new here?

JD Rhoades said...

shorter Seven Machos: "She's not seeking attention! YOU'RE seeking attention because you comment! So there!"

Guess you showed me.

Seven Machos said...

No.

Roost on the Moon said...

The capacity on the left to be unable to get a fractionally sophisticated joke and at the same time be able to laugh at blunt non-humor that is meant to be funny just isn't funny (and isn't made more funny by the use of exclamation points!!!) is apparently boundless.

I call Greenwaldianism!

Ann Althouse said...

My favorite part of all this is that whenever you guys order onion rings, you'll have to think of me. I now own onion rings.

jane said...

Dr. Pogo,

Have you come across any treatments for leftists arrested in their schoolyard bully ways? Or perhaps they're suffering the debilitating effects of second childhood, and the first wasn't so good. Or, given the outbursts, language and tics, Tourette's? Suppose they're other conditions characterized by spittle-flecked spasms and paroxysmal attacks. An untreatable case of no manners?

Luckyoldson said...

hey, everybody!!!

i passed a milestone today.

200 of you nutcases have reviewed my "highly intellectual" profile. (and no, i haven't finished the bush dummy yet.)

JD Rhoades said...

200 of you nutcases have reviewed my "highly intellectual" profile. (and no, i haven't finished the bush dummy yet.)

Cute dog.

Seven Machos said...

J.D.: Yeah, that's exactly it. Althouse has popular blog wherein she posts her opinions. That's the point of the blog and people pay attention to her opinions. Calling her an "attention whore" means calling anyone who proffers their opinions an "attention whore" and, under your theory, the more widely-read a person is, the more of an "attention whore" the person is.

You, on the other hand, are an attention whore. Nobody cares about your opinions. Nobody reads your books. You are insignificant. Yet you wail into the void that people who are far, far more significant than you are -- that these people are "attention whores" because people pay attention to them..

The subtext of everything you say -- and it's not a very deep subtext -- is: pay attention to me, not the person I am criticizing.

Who is the attention whore?

Luckyoldson said...

janey says, as only she can: "Suppose they're other conditions characterized by spittle-flecked spasms and paroxysmal attacks."

that's a keeper.

JD Rhoades said...

Who is the attention whore?

Althouse. Read better.

MadisonMan said...

whenever you guys order onion rings, you'll have to think of me.

I usually think of Thomas Beresford, as he is allergic to onions.

Luckyoldson said...

jd,
sammy.

six and a half now.

and i think i'll give your books a read.

have you read any bruen?

rhhardin said...

Look for dried turnips in the next film, symbolizing the woman not getting her job done.

Mr. X said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
JD Rhoades said...

Lucky: I've read every Bruen I can get my hands on. He's amazing. Hell of a nice guy, too.

Luckyoldson said...

seven,
we're still waiting for that list of what you've had published.

*and what makes you say nobody reads jd's books? (other than pure jealousy?)

he has three on amazon, all with good reviews...so SOMEBODY'S reading them.

Pogo said...

1. "200 of you nutcases have reviewed my "highly intellectual" profile"
Congrats, lucky. Quite an achievement. Although that reflexive query occurs mostly when people are trying to answer the question, Is he older than 15?

2. could you run a list of anything YOU'VE published?
Yes, I could. But Mr. Rhoades' success is impressive regardless. His writing here begs the question though, who's ghostwriting his novels?

3. Jane, I suspect an underdeveloped frontal lobe (lack of sense of humor), Parkinsonian Socialist Ideology Syndrome (stuck in the 1930s) and Hypercredulous Intussusception Sinistrous (swallows anything from the left).

Incurable, unfortunately, except after being mugged of course.

4. JD, really, attention whoring ain't so bad. Failing to admit it is a bit unscrupulous, but if it keeps you writing, paid, and off the streets, so be it.

Seven Machos said...

I have written or co-written eight Random House books, Luck. I rest assured they have sold more than J.D.'s. If I wanted to use my name blogging, I would.

We're still waiting to hear about the military academy you graduated from.

Roost on the Moon said...

As long as you're insulting someone else's writing, Pogo, this is a good opportunity point out a commonly misused term in your own.

"Begs the question" is not just a fancy way to say "raises the question." Question-begging is a specific logical fallacy. It's when you assume the conclusion to your argument in formulating your premises.

"That begs the question" is a charge that the argument is flawed in this way, not that it brings up an additional point.

Luckyoldson said...

seven,
what are the titles of YOUR books?

and, as for my lack of military experience, i've explained everything in great detail, and have no regrets.

but what does that have to do with vaginal onion rings, carrot dicks or your obvious jealosy regarding jd?

JD Rhoades said...

If I had any way to actually back up my claim of being published, I would.

There, Seven, I fixed it for you.

Luckyoldson said...

pogo a published author?

get real.

Gahrie said...

I am starting to believe that Althouse is a sado-Masochist.

She seems to enjoy stirring up all the Lefteing wackos, and inflicting them on her and us......

Luckyoldson said...

Ann Althouse said..."My favorite part of all this is that whenever you guys order onion rings, you'll have to think of me. I now own onion rings."

ann, based on the consistent drool flowing from the many sycophants on this blog, i don't think it's an onion ring that will take center stage.

AlphaLiberal said...

And you call Gleen Greenwald verbose? Holy cow!

Gahrie said...

By the way...in the commercial did Hillary drip any Ranch sauce off a carrot stick onto her dress?

Seven Machos said...

The accusation "what books have you written?" comes up when people are angry about something else. It's an ad hominem attack.

The books I have written are for a specific imprint related to a publicly-traded company. They do move well because they are annual books, but at the end of the day they are tradebooks.

Anyone who thinks about the description combined with information in some other posts can figure out basically what I have written. Unlike J.D., who apparently writes about guys named DeGroot in books no one reads, and who can therefore afford to spout inanities, my opinions are my opinions and have nothing to do with the books I write professionally.

Anyway, Luck, West Point or VMI?

Robert said...

So, you're basically saying that you were trolling?

The Black Cat said...

So...you post something that indicates you're certifiably insane, everyone responds by saying, "Hey lady, you're certifiably insane!" and you respond, "Ha ha! Fooled you!!"

I don't think so.

Justin said...

Ann Althouse said...

I now own onion rings.

And carrots.

steve simels said...

Ann Althouse said...
My favorite part of all this is that whenever you guys order onion rings, you'll have to think of me. I now own onion rings.

Like I said, the bloated self-regard is approaching toxic levels.

Sorry, toots, the only things you own are crazy, stupid and narcissistic.

You're a figure of fun.

TMink said...

I think using Jungian symbolism is esoteric outside of Boulder, Colorado, the epicenter for that particular world view. So I support Ann's analysis (heh heh, that one slipped in) in this case.

Onion rings are Freudian, and they work. You could even squeeze them into early object relations theory. But Jungian stuff is not mainstream, even if it can be very powerful and helpful for the right person.

Trey

Seven Machos said...

No question that a little Jungian theory couldn't hurt steve simels and DaveTM and the other trolls who come here and make non-points.

JD Rhoades said...

The accusation "what books have you written?" comes up when people are angry about something else. It's an ad hominem attack.

So is "hack." So is, "no one reads your books, you're insignificant." Don't you, of all people, be accusing people now of making ad hominem attacks.

I am starting to believe that Althouse is a sado-Masochist.

She seems to enjoy stirring up all the Lefteing wackos, and inflicting them on her and us......


IIRC, the term is "bratty sub."

Thorley Winston said...

My favorite part of all this is that whenever you guys order onion rings, you'll have to think of me. I now own onion rings.

Um no, but I do promise to think of you every time I see ants crawling over a dead bird.

Mike said...

Has anyone else noticed how often Lucky drops the hint that he can read?

Seven Machos said...

I make no claims that I don't make ad hom attacks. They are often warranted.

who? me? said...

Wow - never been here before, and likely won't be back (unless there's something as bug shit crazy as this post to laugh at again). Entertaining to see the author try to justify the original ludicrous post. But what is wrong with you? I've eaten a lot of onion rings, and i've never made the vagina association before. Same goes for the other way around. Does the author's vagina make her think of onion rings? Might want to see a specialist about that.

Even if you didn't see the show (and I didn't), you have to be living in a cave not to know the actual show had onion rings in it.

meh.

Ann Althouse said...

If I was really attention whoring, I wouldn't have used the sledgehammer line "I doubt if any blogger will disagree with my assertion," which (I thought) was a wink saying I bet you can't resist slamming me for this. I think the smarter bloggers would have realized that's exactly why they should resist.

JD Rhoades said...

steve simels and DaveTM and the other trolls

From Wikipedia: In Internet terminology, a troll is someone who intentionally posts derogatory or otherwise inflammatory messages about sensitive topics in an established online community such as an online discussion forum to bait users into responding

Isn't this pretty much what Professor Althouse has admitted doing here?

An Edjamikated Redneck said...

I've gotten most of it figured out, but I am stuck on one point:

Is Lucky old son the sock puppet, or is it JD Rhoades?

Ah well, that mystery will need to be shevled until after lunch.

Hoosier Daddy said...

In fact most average people, people who often barely make minimum wage, go without basics like health insurance or a workable car rather than give up their cable tv.

Nonsense. No one would willingly forsake vital health insurance to be able to watch cable tv.

Ask Luckyoldson, he’ll back me up on this one.

Seven Machos said...

J.D. -- Shouldn't you be writing to The Onion and complaining that some of the quotes they use aren't real?

Althouse signaled to anyone with a milligram of common sense that she was having some fun with this, that she was going over the top to make her point. You couldn't see it. Apparently, you still don't. That makes you the idiot.

Lars said...

Steven Machos:

"..West Point or VMI?"

I'm putting my money on the Citadel.
LOS has the doctrinaire and strident tones "Lords of Discipline".

Luckyoldson said...

seven,
i've never met an "author" in my life who doesn't want people to read what they've written. part of it's ego, part is to see what others think of their work.

it sounds like you write tech manuals or trade publications.

as for me, i spent years writing spec scripts and did re-writes for features and t.v.

i optioned three of them, came very close to having a feature produced (lost out to "look who's talking"), and now periodically send along treatments or ideas that i think will garner interest from agents and producers i've dealt with.

*as for my lack of military experience, can i assume you're implying that if one is against the iraqi fiasco, they have to have served before rendering any opinion? (and if so, that pretty much leaves cheney/rummy/wolfie/rove and damn near everybody at the american enterprise institute out of the mix, too.)

JD Rhoades said...

Seven: she wasn't "going over the top to make her point." She was, she now claims, "going over the top" to get a rise out of people. I.E. trolling.

Assuming she's not just furiously backpedaling away from a statement she now realizes makes her look like a nutcase. Actually, this second theory makes more sense.

Luckyoldson said...

lars,
it's ironic you mention "Lords of Discipline."

i happened to see the rough cut preview of the film, along with the screenwriter (Lloyd Fonvielle) and his manager (Keith Addis).

it was actually a pretty good film...and the screenwriter is brilliant.

thanks for bringing it to mind.

Mindsteps said...

T-Mink Onion rings are Freudian, and they work. You could even squeeze them into early object relations theory. But Jungian stuff is not mainstream, even if it can be very powerful and helpful for the right person.

Ann Althouse said...
My favorite part of all this is that whenever you guys order onion rings, you'll have to think of me. I now own onion rings.

We've got a little classical conditioning (or is it operant) going on as well..... (excuse me one second I am at McDonald's drive thru as I type this). Let's see if the Golden Arches (another metaphor) thanks you for the bump (another metaphor) in sales.

davidc. said...

It is difficult for me to believe that a very intelligent man or woman would consider Hillary. I live in Louisiana and we have a first hand view of these two as Ark. is only a few miles away. They are both crooks, sex perverts and liers. She is definitely not good for the country.

In this regard, I would like to say that given the current problem that conservatives have with the Republican party, if the Dems. presented anyone who was half way decent, stopped talking about raising taxes and dropped the major social programs (health care), they could have the presidency, congress, everything for at least a decade.

stoqboy said...

Very funny stuff here. I just decided that I'm voting for Hillary in the hope that I can send her a cigar cutter as an inauguration gift. Then, as Bob said, I hope she will "throw him out of the White House in the ultimate display of vagina power, filing for divorce in the bargain." You could put Katie Couric up against Desperate Housewives with all that stuff going on.

Seven Machos said...

J.D.: I claimed Althouse was "going over the top." I didn't find the initial post that interesting; it was a unique and clever review of a campaign stunt. Interesting, but certainly not worth a lot of time. What I do find interesting is how kooks on the left are going viral over Althouse's review.

Luck: For a guy who is always complaining that others can't read, you don't process information that well. I am asking you whether you attended West Point or VMI because you complain stupidly incessantly about people who did not serve in the military leading the country into war. You also miss my other point, so let me spell it out for you: publicly-traded companies with their names attached to books don't want my opinions about wholly unrelated topics attached to the publicly-traded companies. Also, I'm not an attention-whore like J.D.

Meade said...

Gahrie ,

In the commercial, Hillary isn't wearing a dress.

Bill, however, is wearing a blouse.

A blue blouse. Though not exactly an archetypal* blue blouse.

It is, however, apparently unstained.

(*Ah but I was so much Junger then; I'm Freuder than that now.)

stoqboy said...

And of course, whenever I order onion rings I'm going to think of Ann. But not in that way, I'm a breast man.

jane said...

"A blue blouse. Though not exactly an archetypal* blue blouse.

It is, however, apparently unstained." (Meade)

And yet another reason for Bill not to have rings with messy ketch-up that could dribble, and be embarrassing and a pain to clean up :)

You're definitely on to something with the role reversal biz. Works for feminists, gays, and for people who wonder exactly who's going to be in charge in the next Clinton WH. Her no-nonsense B & W pants outfit was effective costuming for the show.

SteveR said...

JD: At the risk of being called a hypocrite, we don't care how Wikipedia defines a troll, we know what they are and we should try not to feed them.

lee david said...

I have seen only one episode of the Sopranos, so the visual cues relating to the show were lost on me. I did however have a deep and visceral reaction to the line "I ordered for the table". It screamed, I will arbitrarily and cpriciously restrict your choices. Then, when you see the thin gruel of a basket of carrot sticks, not even a veggi plater where you might have some choices, I get the shivering feeling that I am looking at an absolute authoritarian momma/nanny Clinton that won't let you even look at a menu. No, no, no she's going to select the cold, hardest to chew solution and that's it buba, thats all you get. No debate, no choice, no persuasion because "I'm lookin out fer ya" and mommie knows best. In the absence of the Soprano's references I would think that this would produce revulsion in a free, thinking, individual, adult, citizen looking for a leader, not a nanny. That Bill's grumbling acquiesence is all she will allow furthers the authoritarian image and infantilizes him and by extension, us. The mind music that goes with this in my head is the Rolling Stones "Under my Thumb". I hear Hillary screeching.

He's under my thumb.

That scurvey dog who once had his day.

It's down to me, the change has come.

He's under my thumb.

Is this what she has in mind for the rest of us? I give this scene a big raspberry but perhaps it should be lauded, for, in my estimation, exposing the true nature of the candidate.

The psychosexual stuff that Ann posted about never crossed my mind but it sure was effective in terms of increasing the velocity of the vortex. Ha, Ha, good one Ann. On the other hand, the only associative image that I've ever had for a grown man called Soprano was, a castrati. I've often wondered why they chose this name for the family and if it was intentionally ironic. I don't follow television.

Meade said...

Psst... stoqboy,

she owns those too.

Luckyoldson said...

n says: "For a guy who is always complaining that others can't read, you don't process information that well. I am asking you whether you attended West Point or VMI because you complain stupidly incessantly about people who did not serve in the military leading the country into war." ("stupidly incessantly"???...and you say you're a "writer?")

uh, seven...i "comment" on the iraqi situation. cheney and the other chickenhawks actually spearheaded the invasion.

if you can't understand the difference that's your problem.

Luckyoldson said...

lee david says: "I have seen only one episode of the Sopranos, so the visual cues relating to the show were lost on me. I did however have a deep and visceral reaction to the line "I ordered for the table". It screamed, I will arbitrarily and cpriciously restrict your choices."

get real.

Luckyoldson said...

stever,
let's be honest...for a change:

your idea of a "troll" is anyone who expresses a attitude or opinion, contrary to your own.

Luckyoldson said...

jane,
are you on some kind of experimental medication?

where do you come up with this insane drivel?

Pogo said...

Roost on the Moon corrects my use of "begs the question", for which I am eternally grateful.

Even Wikipedia, though mentions its common alternative use, so it would have been "wrong" only if I were in fact attempting to cite a logical fallacy, for which that technical term applies.

"More recently, "begs the question" has been used as a synonym for "invites the question" or "raises the question," or to indicate that "the question ought to be addressed." In this usage, "the question" is stated in the next phrase. For example: "This year's budget deficit is half a trillion dollars. This begs the question: how are we ever going to balance the budget?" This usage has met with substantial resistance among logicians, academic philosophers, and prescriptive linguists. Although it is clear that this usage is disfavored in some circles, argument over whether this usage should be considered "incorrect" is an example of the debate between linguistic prescription and description."

Nevertheless, point taken, and consider the web a safer place for having served your role as today's grammar marm.

Luckyoldson said...

davidc,
you live in louisiana and you're telling us who we should vote for??

now that's funny.

Luckyoldson said...

hi, mikey,
still trying to figure things out?

Luckyoldson said...

Ann Althouse said..."If I was really attention whoring, I wouldn't have used the sledgehammer line "I doubt if any blogger will disagree with my assertion," which (I thought) was a wink saying I bet you can't resist slamming me for this. I think the smarter bloggers would have realized that's exactly why they should resist."

it's too late, ann. everybody knows exactly what you were implying, so get off the "i really didn't mean it...wink, wink" crap.

Seven Machos said...

I just wanted to add a post here to break up the boring litany of trolling by the same person, who apparently has no job. This could be an interesting thread if certain individuals who say much but add nothing would leave.

Pogo said...

Re: "...furiously backpedaling away from a statement she now realizes..."

After reading a bit of your profile and writings, I can understand how Althouse's success in getting the attention you so richly deserve is absolutely killing you, JD.

Pretty much it's Althouse setting hook, bait, and reeling them in. HDhouse really ought to hire her.

Mike said...

Lee David says: "I did however have a deep and visceral reaction to the line "I ordered for the table". It screamed, I will arbitrarily and cpriciously restrict your choices."

Indeed it does.

Justin said...

JD Rhoades said...

Assuming she's not just furiously backpedaling away from a statement she now realizes makes her look like a nutcase.

Why would she care? People like you are going to call her a nutcase no matter what she says.

Mike said...

Seven, I'm surprised at Ann's patience. He really has degraded the environment around here.

SteveR said...

your idea of a "troll" is anyone who expresses a attitude or opinion, contrary to your own.

No LOS that's not it, and if you had been here awhile and been willing to participate in civil discourse without childish insults directed at everyone *you* disagree with, you might realize that. For instance, Elizabeth (aka Beth) from New Orleans has been around here for three or more years. I and others have frequently disagreed with her, but name calling and the kind of responses you use jane,
are you on some kind of experimental medication?
is not part of it.

So let's be honest, you're not here to discuss, you here to argue, insult and try to piss people off. Call yourself what you want.

davidc. said...

To Luchyoldson,

Yes, I live in Louisiana and am telling you who to vote for. You see, we have lost the ability to chose our leaders in this state. The reason is that liberal interest came in and developed give away social programs. These were tied to soak the rich funds schemes. The result is that a politican can now buy votes with little difficulty. But in the post Katriana era, we have some hope. As all our problems were sent to your states and these purchased votes might not be available anytime soon.

Clyde said...

I like onion rings...

But I think Ann missed the real punch line: It's all about the outsourcing of her campaign song to Canadian singer Celine Dion.

I guess it must have been another one of those jobs that Americans just won't do.

jane said...

Thanks, Stever :)

Pogo, next to no one nobody uses that phrase as we're told it should be. Just say you "could care less," another one to be corrected! You're a terrific writer.

These threads on Hillary's vid should be a case history in Id unleashed, with the fun Freudian perspective and the puerile, nasty, vile attacks it has engendered.

Ann Althouse said...

Lee David: "On the other hand, the only associative image that I've ever had for a grown man called Soprano was, a castrati. I've often wondered why they chose this name for the family and if it was intentionally ironic."

Maybe it's a hint to watch the female family members, particularly Carmela and even more Livia. Unfortunately, we will never see the show that was intended back when they chose the title, because Nancy Marchand, who played the mother, Livia, died. Maybe the show was better because they had to think up something else, that had so much less to do with Tony's being in therapy, but I long to see the show death kept from us.

JD Rhoades said...

People like you are going to call her a nutcase no matter what she says.

Nah, mostly people like me just ignore her, until it gets too juicy to pass up.

After reading a bit of your profile and writings, I can understand how Althouse's success in getting the attention you so richly deserve is absolutely killing you, JD.

Yes, I'm eaten up with jealousy that blogger after blogger isn't commenting on how batshit insane I am. No one's called me "Bug. Fuck. Crazy" in weeks now, and I just can't stand the pain. I am, like, TOTALLY jealous.

Pretty much it's Althouse setting hook, bait, and reeling them in.

So I'll put you in the column of people who think she's not nutty, but trolling (in the commonly accepted definition, not the one stever and seven machos made up).

The sad part is that you think that's something to be proud of.

I just wanted to add a post here to break up the boring litany of trolling by the same person, who apparently has no job. This could be an interesting thread if certain individuals who say much but add nothing would leave.

So you make a post that you admit adds nothing so you can stop a "litany of trolling" from someone who you say adds nothing? Good job, that.

it's too late, ann. everybody knows exactly what you were implying, so get off the "i really didn't mean it...wink, wink" crap.

Ann and her fanboys remind me of the type of asshole bully who makes nasty wisecracks, blows cigar smoke in your face, then slaps you on the back and goes "HAW HAW HAW! Just kidding!" Except they aren't, and everyone knows it.

blake said...

I wish I could say I was surprised by the incredible lack of humor in the anti-Althousian field.

Ace of Spades does this schtick where he's afraid of brown people and vaginas, in an obvious parody of how liberals view/portray conservatives. And yet, his detractors constantly use this as proof that he really is afraid of brown people and vaginas.

It reminds me of school days, as best portrayed by "The Simpsons," when Lisa opts to be a vegetarian:

Janie: Are you going to marry a carrot, Lisa?
Lisa: [Rolling her eyes.] Yes, I'm going to marry a carrot.
Sherri/Terri: Ohh! She admitted it. She's going to marry a carrot!

Joshua said...

And yet another reason for Bill not to have rings with messy ketch-up that could dribble, and be embarrassing and a pain to clean up :)

That's not ketchup, that's VINCE FOSTER'S BLOOD!! Right Jane?

Ann Althouse said...

Mike: "Seven, I'm surprised at Ann's patience. He really has degraded the environment around here."

Which he are you talking about? Anyway, remember it's more trouble to delete than to ignore. If you think there are people here who are ruining the dialogue, please help me by not interacting with them. I don't have a way to ban people. I can only delete posts.

Seven Machos said...

Yeah, J.D. Looking back at your posts and my posts, I am clearly a bully and you are a reasonable, humble mensch. And who could ever accuse you of trolling or clamoring for attention?

Oh well. It sounds like you are heading back to oblivion. Good luck to you.

blake said...

Eli,

Staying with an unfaithful spouse can be admirable for a lot of reasons. However, Hill spent a lot of time denigrating the traditional role of faithful wife and housekeeper and famously said that she was NOT some Tammy Wynette, standing by her man.

So, you know, which is it? Was she just putting on a show before, or is she putting on a show now?

It calls to mind the current battle over earmarks and immigration: To wit, few in Washington will say what they mean. It's not an amnesty if we don't call it an amnesty. We hate pork, but we need special ways of inserting it anonymously into the budget. Etc.

JBlog said...

Good Grief, can you even imagine another Clinton White House.

"Excuse me, Madam President, but Bill's feeling up the chambermaids over in the private residence again."

"Dammit! Get the tranquilizer dart gun!"

It wasn't funny the first time. It will be even less funny a second.

Meade said...

Joshua: That's not ketchup, that's VINCE FOSTER'S BLOOD!! Right Jane?
jane: [Rolling her eyes.] Yes, that's Vince Foster's blood.
Joshua: Ohh! She admitted it. She thinks it's VINCE FOSTER'S BLOOD!

(h/t: blake)

Mike said...

It hasn't worked.

steve simels said...

Pop quiz:

Ann Althouse is

(a)a one-woman non-sequitur generator

(b)Ms L'Histoire C'est Moi

(c)The Miss Havisham of Wingnuttia.

YOU make the call!!!!

lee david said...

Hey LOS,

Do you have any deeper insights on why someone who hasn't watched the Sopranos might see Hillary giving us the carrot, as in the Althousian sense of giving us the carrot, besides, get real?

Maybe it's femdom dildo imagry and she just wants to 'stick it to us'.

This eddy in the vortex should be good for at least two hundred maybe three if we work real hard. And I'm counting on you to do your part. Hang in there man.

Pogo said...

Re: "Yes, I'm eaten up with jealousy that blogger after blogger isn't commenting on how batshit insane I am."

Actually, JD, I believe you are. I think it really kills you, as you find her undeserving and certainly the wrong sort. That book pic says it all: hey I wrote a book, so why are are you all looking at her, she' so crazy, c'mon guys, looka me, c'mon man, she didn't even write a cool book that's got explosions n stuff (see my pic?)"

Your rage is almost palpable.

Hucbald said...

Either this entire post is a joke, or I am correct in my assertion that psychologists and psychaiatrists are at exactly the same level of spohistication as practitioners of voodoo.

If the admission that there is a possibility that you would actually vote for Hillary Clinton for the most powerful office in the world is not a joke, then my contention is most certainly true.

That said, I thought the vid was hysterical. Not as good as the 1984 video, but close.

Indigent A-hole said...

You make a great deal of uninformed assumptions for a professional!

For instance- "Surely, a guy who named himself after the biggest, most ferocious dinosaur will have a useful perspective on sexual imagery in film"

Hmmm why would that be? Because T-Rex had a reproductive system? Because they boned up on sexual imagery?

I guess if your process is to make absurd statements and wait for someone to notice then you hit the jackpot.

If you were looking to be more respected as a blogger you failed horribly.

JD Rhoades said...

Actually, JD, I believe you are. I think it really kills you, as you find her undeserving and certainly the wrong sort. That book pic says it all: hey I wrote a book, so why are are you all looking at her, she' so crazy, c'mon guys, looka me, c'mon man, she didn't even write a cool book that's got explosions n stuff (see my pic?)"

Your rage is almost palpable.


Heh. Another fool who thinks an Internet connection gives him the ability to read minds.

Luckyoldson said...

lee david,
why not actually watch the sopranos before delving into ann's insanity.
(and your term; "the Althousian sense of giving us the carrot"...says it all. duh)

as for the clinton video...it was a take-off on a very talked about final scene from a very-talked about and revered series.

the fact that ann and some of the others here see some kind of illusionary sexual innuendo attached tells me most of those here aren't getting fucked enough.
(and i don't mean by bush and company...they're doing everybody everyday.)

Luckyoldson said...

JBlog said..."Good Grief, can you even imagine another Clinton White House."

yeah, those eight year of unsurpassed economic growth, no wars, little if any unemployment, paying off the national debt, and creating a massive surplus...who in their right mind would want to trade what we have now...with something like that?

than again, bill did get blowjobs so i guess the 3,531 dead and 25,950 wounded americans, our worldwide reputation in shambles, endless governmental scandals and being mired in the middle of a civil war in iraq is a fair trade-off.

duh.

Luckyoldson said...

jd,
whay do you even try to discuss anything with pogo?

you're wasting your time.

just slap him around for fun...then move along.

*and don't get fen-fen involved...they're dating.

Verso said...

What poor, poor Ann Althouse fails to grasp is that it is she who is swirling 'round and 'round in Bill and Hillary Clinton's vortex.

Obviously.

Pogo said...

Re: "...the ability to read minds"

Neither mind-reading nor telepathy are needed when your personality is quite evident in what you've written so far. You've laid it all out there for us in your bio, blog, books, and such. Mostly, I see rage, hence your novels.

I could have missed the mark, perhaps, but I'll bet it's spot on.

Chris said...

"I'm saying outright: Come on, everybody, into the vortex. And in they hop. It's an anti-Althousiana fest. I love it!"

So, by your own admission, your posting (this one? all of them? who knows!) is simply your immature delusional way of feeding your own narcissism? A sad attempt to make yourself feel even marginally consequential to the world at large by trying to goad people into posting about you?

You really are a sad, sad little person aren't you?

You really should stop trying to find sexual meaning in EVERYthing, put down the box of Franzia, and perhaps see someone about these issues of yours, Ann.

As Josh says, the lady doth protest just a weeeeee bit much.

DavidEhrenstein said...

You're deeply deeply sick.
Get help.

lee david said...

Ann,

Are you saying that you think that the name was indeed intentional and the castrati association would have been worked into the plot if the mother hadn't died. Thats pretty darn subtle for a TV show. I'd have to give the writers a lot of credit if it was intentional. It would make me chuckle.

Luckyoldson said...

SteveR,
thanks for the valuable insight, but why would i care what you think about anything i do or say?.

as for jane, if you read her postings it does appear she's on some kind of medication. (jane: "Suppose they're other conditions characterized by spittle-flecked spasms and paroxysmal attacks.")

hmmm...very interesting.

*oh, and i stand by my previous comment: your idea of a "troll" is anyone who expresses a attitude or opinion, contrary to your own.

Paul said...

As I mentioned in your original post, Hillary is playing the Tony part, and Bill the Carmela part, not the other way around. Instead of BS about onion rings and carrots, let's consider the Freudian implications of the gender role reversal. Penis envy?

Luckyoldson said...

pogo...stop!!

please!!

your jealousy of jd is so apparent it's beginning to make my skin crawl.

you say you're an author, which i find hard to believe, yet you spend most of your time bashing someone who has actually published at least three novels.

most real writers appreciate the fact that others have had the good fortune of being published. you, on the other hand, continue to whine about how you somehow "see rage" in what he writes.

*give it a break...maybe even take some time to actually create something of your own.

Luckyoldson said...

Paul said..."Penis envy?"

according to ann it's more a case of bill being upset by having to stick his carrot in hillary, while actually wanting eat someone else's vagina. (that tastes like an onion)

*it' very, very deep and you're going to need jane and pogo to explain it.

Luckyoldson said...

mikey,
hang in there.

i have confidence in you.

lee david said...

Thanks, LOS

I just knew you wouldn't let us down. You even managed to get in a little BDS. The rest of you are doing well too. 200 is just around the corner. The site meter is humming and 300 can't be far behind. Go Vortex.

jane said...

The meds and queer smears are tired and juvenile, Luckyoldsonny. Do you put stuff like that in your scripts or whatever it is you claim to write? There's nothing remotely entertaining about underendowed men anonymously attacking people with grade school taunts. You're just a tedious oddity, that's all.

SteveR said...

*oh, and i stand by my previous comment: your idea of a "troll" is anyone who expresses a attitude or opinion, contrary to your own.

You are obviously used to being wrong.

boston70 said...

The conversatives fascination with the Clinton marriage is "fascinating".

Why no conversative fascination with Newt's marriages, or any of the other multi-married republicans? Oh that's right they are all about family values. What a crock of shit.

Ann Althouse said...
My favorite part of all this is that whenever you guys order onion rings, you'll have to think of me. I now own onion rings.

I won't be thinking of you because onion rings are gross.

PoS said...

This thin-skinned response does nothing to quell the idea that she's crazy.

JD Rhoades said...

There's nothing remotely entertaining about underendowed men anonymously attacking people with grade school taunts.

Ironic much?

JBlog said...

Eight years of unsurpassed economic growth? Oh right -- I suppose if you don't count the dot.com collapse.

No war? Oh yeah, unless you count Kosovo, Somalia, the Khobar Towers bombing, the African embassy bombings, the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, and the first attack on the WTC.

I guess he did manage to balance the checkbook though.

Bad memory? Or are you just nuts?

Duh.

catnip said...

Whenever we see them together, we think about their relationship and what he did to it.

Who's this "we"? Do you have worms?

jane said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jane said...

Rhoades, you're catching on!

But I least I have an excuse. Acc. to Lucky, I'm a Creationist who goes to Creation Museums and pets the dinosaurs, I watch Fox TV and take marching orders from Hannity et al., I'm a nutty conspiratorialist who thinks there were "plots" surrounding Bill's philandering, I can't write near as well as he (since he's absolutely dazzling in his comments), and I'm on meds. Don't worry, he'll come up with more killer insults 'cause he's a real writer, you know.

You see, I'm the mixed-up unsteady one...

Seven Machos said...

I love how the lefty loons are convinced that there was no war under Clinton. Tell it to all the dead Serbs, Iraqis, etc.

And the economy is exactly the same.

Joe Marasmus said...

We don't think you're crazy, Althouse. We just think you're an attention-starved Narcissist who deliberately makes stupid statements so people with websites can make fun of you. Then you claim, "It was all just a joke!" the next day. It happened with Jessica Valenti and you're doing it again.

Ann Althouse said...

I remember when lefties had a sense of humor. They were sexy then. Now... they're just political nerds. They don't no how to have fun. They're so damned protective of Bill Clinton, but at least Bill Clinton knows how to have fun. We would have mocked you, back when we were counterculture, radical hippies and feminists. But thanks for showing me what the all-time blogging hot button is. I plan to satisfy your rage needs on a regular basis.

David said...

(why "prepared"?)

That's easy. Carrot sticks aren't really cooked, per se, like onion rings. So, rather than say a blouse made entirely of cooked vegetables, or a blouse made entirely of raw vegetables, "prepared" was the fastest route to a compromise.

nathan said...

Ann--you are overly snippy and not all that amusing in your remarks...and of course, the typical defense is to call those on the Left names...how original!
we each interpret the Sopranos ending in our own way...so too, the comments let us know exactly how the commenters feel and they had no need to view the video to tell us. After Bush and Cheney, I will take Hillary ...Iraq, signing statements, deficit, stem cells. No thanks. Jersey rules

catnip said...

I remember when lefties had a sense of humor. They were sexy then.

What is with this obsession with sex? Seriously.

I plan to satisfy your rage needs on a regular basis.

I'll pass. Bush is filling that spot quite well, tyvm. (And no, that's not the "g" spot.)

JD Rhoades said...

They don't no how to have fun.

But they sure "no" how to spell, Professor.

Ann Althouse said...

Rhoades: "no"

I'm just tweaking you with puns.

Luckyoldson said...

ann says: "I remember when lefties had a sense of humor. They were sexy then. Now... they're just political nerds. They don't no how to have fun."

yeah, if only we could be more like duncan bombs away hunter, or evolution bad brownback or i got screwed lott or my wife's dying but i still date newt, or kill 'em all tacredo or my favorite...rock in the pond gravel.

now those people know how to have fun.

Luckyoldson said...

seven, do everybody a favor and read something before you blather on about "wars" during the clinton years and how the economy is the "same" now as it was during clinton's tenure.

here's alittle quiz for you:

Of all the items listed below, the price of only one item has gone way down since Bush took office. Everything else has become much more expensive.

Dozen eggs
Gallon of Gasoline
Health Care
Gallon of Milk
Ear of corn
8-ball of cocaine
College Tuition
Loaf of bread

Can you guess what that one thing is?

g said...

I'm a little amused at what you describe as being "all riled up" on the part of the left blogistan.

What you're seeing, Ann, isn't "riled up" -- it's laughter.

Your obsession with Big Dog combined with your overwhelming solipsism is an object of hilarity in the left blogistan.

Please disabuse yourself of the notion that anyone takes you seriously enough to get angry with you.

Victor said...

Prof. A - how do you know Roy is little? That's a frequent put down you use.

Odd (and sort of lame).

Maxine Weiss said...

Hey everyone: When do we turn the conversation to Ann's sons?

Uh oh. And that will really make her angry. You all know how highly agitated she becomes at the mere mention of her sons.

Who wants to start in?

Peace, Maxine

Seven Machos said...

I made a rule that I wanted to try to ignore Luck at some point this afternoon. But this is just too hideous to pass up. In the Luckster's world, George W. Bush is to blame for inflation. It's been low for 25 years, but any increase in prices is Bush's fault.

Yeah, dude. I remember those halcyon Clinton days. When milk prices were going down. Wait. What's that? Milk prices weren't going down? There was inflation under Clinton, too? If milk prices went down, our farmers would go bankrupt? The federal government tries very hard to keep agricultural goods priced artificially high? Oh. Never mind.

I'm going to come out and say it even though it's not my place at all: go away, Luckster. people who only seek to insult and are stupid should leave the intelligent, mature people on the left and the right to debate in peace. Please, dude. Go. Away.

TomT said...

anti-Althousiana

No disrespect, but tell me again you don't need therapy.

When you start using adjectives derived from your own name, it's time to take a step back and think about what you're doing.

TomT said...

Okay, yes, I realize that anti-Althousiana is a noun, but frankly that only makes things worse.

Ann Althouse said...

Tom T: You're new around here. Take time to consider whether it's an old subject with a context known to insiders. Spend some time looking around and trying to understand what's happening here. Maybe you don't know what it is.

Maxine Weiss said...

"Insiders" ???

You mean there are different levels and gradations of membership amongst the commenters?

Althouse is secretly grouping her commenters. Each is assigned a number and rated....

Charlie said...

"Whenever we see them together, we think about their relationship and what he did to it."

Actually, when I see them together, I think about their relationship and wonder what she did to turn him into such a sad, wet fart.

Charlie

Maxine Weiss said...

Tom T---You're new around here ...

You haven't passed your probationary period. Your comments haven't been fully vetted for the senior readership....those of us who've earned the right to fully speak our minds...

Tom T---Where do you get off, being new and all....you've got some nerve...

How dare you have the effrontery to...

Rick Moran said...

You should never have hit the "publish" button on this one or the other post, Ann.

When we amatuers start to play armchair psychologist, we end up looking stupid like Glenn Greenwald and his "analysis" of Bush's actions. If there has been anything shallower or laughably written lately than Greenwald's new book - excerpts at Salon.com - I haven't seen it. And you're not doing much better here.

You've done something that I didn't think possible - you've made people who despise the Clinton's actually stand up and defend them in a roundabout sort of way. The scene most certainly does not "cry out for a psycho-sexual interpretation." It's a political commercial for crissakes not frickin' Hamlet! And having been present during the creative process of these things, I can tell you that no one was thinking that anyone in their right mind would "cry out" and interpret this piece of fluff in a "psycho-sexual" way. If they did, they would have dropped the scene like a hot potato.

Face it Ann. You screwed the pooch. Sometimes it's best to take your lumps, apologize, and move on.

Dirk Gently said...

gee, ann, you didn't even mention my whopper

i'm crushed.

Seven Machos said...

3056 visitors since 12/1/06. That's 150 a day, but probably fewer if we include you and your immediate family, Whopper.

Maxine Weiss said...

I'd feel cheated.

Everyond deserves a Sunday birthday.

But, what if Leap Year obliterates the chance for your birthday to fall on a Sunday?

You'd be shattered.

Can you imagine? Let's say you just celebrated your birthday on a Saturday, a couple of weeks ago. And then .....then you receive the upsetting news, that....Leap Year is coming up, and your birthday will skip a day and end up on Monday, next year.

NOOOOO !!!

You'd be crushed. Everyone is entitled to a Sunday birthday. But next year, Someone won't get His chance, to celebrate his birthday on God's Sabbath.

And, he's devastated...whether he admits it or not. We know he's upset about the whole thing, and feels horribly cheated.

jane said...

Rick,

It isn't always about what a director, writer or artist intends- the subconscious and subtext will arise despite and often. Ask any psychologist or *smart* ad industry insider (and I don't think the writer and director of this vid were particularly savvy). They study these things and market to our below-the-surface cravings and insecurities all of the time.

And Ann was having fun. But it was more fun for some of us because there was some truth in what she said. I won't forget for a long time the image of Bill dejectedly holding up his joyless little carrot stick that Hillary forced upon him. How was this not a scene of emasculation?

America's in for a treat.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 230   Newer› Newest»