November 12, 2007

In the nowhere of the blogosphere....



... I'm trying to put on a necklace and to fend off a tsunami of possibly doughy Clinton sycophants.

ADDED: Not only did I typo "sycophants" as "syncophants," but the video is entirely out of sync! I'll see if I can fix it. Damn! [BUT: I think I know how.]... FIXED!

IN THE COMMENTS: I like what John Stodder says here. (And he may be interested to know what lawprof Jack Balkin said here, which I used to have up in the banner.)

91 comments:

Ann Althouse said...

I'll get the video up soon. Sorry.

Doyle said...

Fend them off? You mean trying to get in a couple pathetic fat jokes, don't you?

Take your time on the video. I'm all in favor of reduced Althouse emissions.

former law student said...

possibly doughy Clinton sycophants

Make all new posters supply their BMI with their first post:
http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/bmi/adult_BMI/english_bmi_calculator/bmi_calculator.htm

former law student said...

A propos of almost nothing: Driving up Hwy. 1 through Santa Cruz, I passed the State Farm office of Aleene Althouse. Is your name fairly common? If not, you could possibly have bunked at her place when you came to the Bay Area.

Paul Zrimsek said...

"Syncophants" is a typo of genius. They all do seem to show up at once, don't they?

Trooper York said...

We are having a special on syncopants, 20% off with the coupon from the Clipper magazine.

MadisonMan said...

I say psycho-phant, not sicko-phant.

Psycho, sicko, Like a sicko
Let's call the whole thing off.

Doyle said...

Fascinating. I especially liked the part where you talk about Kevin Drum and sort of stand by your insinuation that he's fat but not really.

Trevor said...

Stay classy, Althouse.

I'm sure Drum'll respond to your immature taunts now.

Ron said...

With the right BMW, the wrong BMI doesn't matter that much...

Morbidly Obese Ron ( I like it, has a nice Vincent Price ring to it!)

Ann Althouse said...

Don't forget to notice the symbolism of the necklace!

Bilby said...

For the people who hate you, I suggest sending them to this video (youtube, language).

rcocean said...

Althouse - don't start getting all symbolic on us again.

Anyway, I guess you feel your critics are trying to Necklace you - Soweto style.

Sorry, that's the best I can do. I'm still trying to figure out the ostrich in a cage post.

christopher said...

After that 60s picture Ann posted of herself over the weekend and now this video, I think we've finally got the answer to the question posed so memorably in "Repo Man.

Yes, Ann DID do too much acid back in the hippie days.

Wade Garrett said...

Go ahead, keep deleting comments you don't like. Do you delete comments because you're vain and paranoid, or are you paranoid because you delete comments?

christopher said...

Doughy sycophants?

Doughy?

Far be it from me to disparage anybody's appearance, but it's hard to ignore the, shall we say, irony attendant to Ann referring, unflatteringly, to somebody else as doughy.

Joe Clay said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Trooper York said...

That is the most avant-garde video featuring a necklace since the one of Kim Kardashian where she got a pearl necklace.

George said...

Antialthousiana...

Is that east or west of New Orleans?

Or is she Uncle Althousiana's wife?

rcocean said...

I see a lot of new names getting sucked into the vortex.

halojones-fan said...

Ann is wearing a necklace, and (as we all know) necklaces are intended to attract attention to the breasts. And there's those darn breasts again!

"Syncophants" is a pretty cool idea for a word; it's those people who have no convictions of their own, but instead passionately believe in whatever cause the person they're currently talking to espouses.

rhhardin said...

You don't see many fat old people out and about, I notice. Probably they're home blogging.

Verso said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
lurker2209 said...

Normally, Ann, I tend to come down on your side of these things (to the extent that I actually care). You're interesting, even when I think you're wrong, and you seem to say things that will throw other bloggers off and make them more interesting. But in this video, you do seem very distracted and a bit nutty. Perhaps the nuttiness was intentional, some sort of performance art? After watching the entire thing twice, I have no idea what this blogosphere dust-up is about from your perspective, or what point you're trying to make. I think maybe you went a bit overboard with this one.

jeff said...

"Like I said: I imagine the guys at InvadeIranToday.com -- or whatever -- love everything you write."

Uh, what? Why? Where have you read in this blog something about invading Iraq? Or are they especially sensitive about a bloggers breasts? Or calling people doughy?

"Vicious, mean-spirited, hate-filled personal attacks are conservative trademarks."

Oh, I see. You're doing satire. Fine job. Well, lets head back over to KOS or Huffington or Atrios or Firedoglake or Oliver's place or DU or any of the other very popular liberal blogs where you can not find any vicious, mean-spirited, hate-filled personal attacks from a liberal.
So do those glasses come in any other color than rose? Do they work in 3-D movies also? Cause it would be cool to have my own when I go see Beowulf.

christopher said...

Verso said...

Ann said:
So many strange, ridiculous interchanges with bloggers. A lot of people hate me. What's the deal with that? What's going on there?
You really don't know?

Ann, it's simple. You're a mean, nasty person.


You left out a few things.

Like the deeply shallow attitude. Like the 14 year old school girl breathiness. Like the sneering misogyny masquerading as feminism. Like the Olympian levels of self-absorbed Look at Me I'm Wonderful narcissism (see the above video). Like the whole fiction that she's a Lefty.
Like the really bad writing and tortured illogic.

I'm sure I'm forgetting something, some one example that sums up all of the above and more, but I'm drawing a blank.

Although I thought the post last week about how put upon she was when a cafe didn't offer her a real coffee cup was pretty telling.

It was Ann's Marie Antoinette "Let 'em eat cake" moment.

jeff said...

"Although I thought the post last week about how put upon she was when a cafe didn't offer her a real coffee cup was pretty telling.

It was Ann's Marie Antoinette "Let 'em eat cake" moment."

Really? You equate that with starving French peasants? So tell us more about HER shallow attitude.

christopher said...

jeff said...

"Although I thought the post last week about how put upon she was when a cafe didn't offer her a real coffee cup was pretty telling.

It was Ann's Marie Antoinette "Let 'em eat cake" moment."

Really? You equate that with starving French peasants? So tell us more about HER shallow attitude.


The world is going up in flames, and Althouse obsesses about the lack of amenities at her local coffee shop.

Jeebus, Jeff, you really are irredemably stupid...

George said...

It's all performance art, folks. The whole thing.

It's a linear painting (using the screen as canvas) stretching over a period of years, not inches.

Prof., get yerself a big flatscreen (or better a bunch of them) in some funked up art gallery in NYC, and run the archives in some kind of random/non-random/ distorted order or something, and sell the archival software for major buckos to some rich people. Or output various pages onto some non-electronic media (silkscreen?) and sell the pages.

jeff said...

"The world is going up in flames, and Althouse obsesses about the lack of amenities at her local coffee shop.

Jeebus, Jeff, you really are irredeemably stupid..."

Apparently so, since I COMPLETELY missed the referendum where you were granted full approval of the topics Ann is allowed to address on her personal blog. Astounding that she talks about going to get coffee at the SAME TIME as a baby seal is killed. The HORROR! And on her OWN BLOG.

Trevor said...

She can talk about whatever she wants, Jeff, just like we can draw conclusions about what that says about her character. When she spends hundreds of words describing her outrage over a paper cup and can barely muster a couple dozen words over torture, we see where her priorities lie.

jeff said...

"When she spends hundreds of words describing her outrage over a paper cup and can barely muster a couple dozen words over torture, we see where her priorities lie."

Yeah. On that day it was getting a good cup of coffee. Are you freaking kidding me? Are you telling me not a one of you complains to friends about getting the wrong order at the MacDonald's drive up window? Ever? All you talk about in your lives is "Big Picture" stuff? You guys do get the concept of a blog, right?

John Stodder said...

I actually like this blog a lot, although I sometimes wondered about why, until lurker 2209 gave me the key: "Performance art."

That's what this blog is. And it's the perfect kind of performance art for my tastes, because it involves a lot of things I'm interested in, and it is not predictable how it's all going to mix together.

It's also an interesting medium in that you don't have to engage with all of it. I skip some posts because I'm not interested in the topic, or because I know what kind of rumpus is probably going on the comments. Although sometimes (like yesterday), I'm inspired to dive right in to the comments and not let people off the hook if they say something lame, and this place lets me do that--unlike almost every other blog where politics is discussed, where a moderator carefully combs the comments to remove the ones that challenging the prevailing bias.

I don't usually watch the vlogs, but I watched this morning's, and I thought it was hilarious that I was getting to watch this attractive woman try to put on a necklace while talking into the great vortex that is the blogosphere. You could just take that video, by itself, and put it up in an art gallery and people would say, "Performance Art."

It also explains why I don't mind that Ann sometimes misbehaves and why I defend her, generally, when she's pissing people off. She's created a character called "Althouse." It is part of her, not all of her. It is very much like the "new journalism" of the 70s translated into this multi-media environment. The best comparison I can think of is Norman Mailer, but you could also throw in Joan Didion, Hunter S. Thompson and a few others I can't think of right now. It is very much a self-referential form of journalism--some might say it's narcissistic--but once you get to know and accept the character, who is not a perfect person and never presented as one, it's an interesting slant on the news and culture of the day, filtered through one eccentric viewpoint, rather than even trying to be objective or consistent.

So, yeah, maybe it's outrageous that Ann would call Drum "doughy." Some of the more partisan firebrands here look for reasons to think it's a shot from the right. They don't get it. It's not about politics, it's stream of consciousness. It's the kind of thing people think about when they are offered information like Drum's BMI. And don't forget, who was it who decided, bizarrely, to post his BMI? Ann didn't break into his doctor's office - Drum put it out there. Do you think he didn't want people to notice it? You put information like that out there about yourself, you don't get to control how we react to it. Maybe Drum, too, is a bit of a performance artist. Maybe he wants people to speculate as to whether he's fat or muscular. I don't read him enough to know for sure. It's certainly not something a traditional columnist like Paul Krugman does, for example, but Drum is a blogger.

All of us who blog, or who choose to comment on blogs regularly enough so that people get to know our own beliefs and attitudes -- it's all a form of performance art in the stream of time. These words are going to be out there forever, but at the same time, most of them will disappear from our consciousness more quickly than a newspaper article, replaced with more and more stuff from the never ending stream we're all contributing to. Ann gets a lot of visitors because she's created an interesting character -- herself in part -- and created a blog that is not just opinion and news links but, sometimes, drama and, sometimes, art. She does it better than most. The point isn't to agree or disagree. This isn't one of those political amen colonies like Kos or Malkin. The point is to engage with the character.

Pogo said...

we see where her priorities lie

In contrast, Trevor bleeds and weeps for the world.

I would say it's the permanent state of outrage that I find funny and scary and sad about such people. I mean criminey, even revolutionaries like chocolate chip cookies.

Trevor said...

It reveals a pattern of dangerous shallowness, Jeff. Look a couple posts down and you'll see Althouse arguing that she wants less substance and more "gotcha" in her political coverage.

On the coffee cup day in question, she went on an extended rant about the mugless Starbucks and then just a couple posts later passed on Dershowitz's ridiculous argument that we should torture because it worked for the Nazis with barely an eye bat.

You can talk about your love of the serial comma or why airplane food sucks on your blog, but when you start to mix serial-comma blogging with links to an argument in defense of lynching, for example, it's possible someone might assume there's no there there.

jeff said...

"It reveals a pattern of dangerous shallowness, Jeff. Look a couple posts down and you'll see Althouse arguing that she wants less substance and more "gotcha" in her political coverage."

No it doesn't. It reveals what the writer wants to reveal. This is nothing more than a slice of life. This is not the entire substance. We see in Ann both what she wants us to see and what WE want to see. Nothing more.

"On the coffee cup day in question, she went on an extended rant about the mugless Starbucks and then just a couple posts later passed on Dershowitz's ridiculous argument that we should torture because it worked for the Nazis with barely an eye bat."

So she posted what was on her mind as she read the paper and found a article she found interesting. BTW, this would work better if you could refrain from mis-characterizing Dershowitz.
In other words, much like thousands of people do when they hold conversations. So what?

Trooper York said...

Archie Bunker: This country was ruined by Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Maude: You're fat.
(All in the Family, 1975)

Trevor said...

"It reveals what the writer wants to reveal."

I think the writer is not always in control of what gets revealed. You seem to disagree. I don't claim to know the "real" Althouse. My critique is reserved for the character she's created on this site. Is it a performance? A mostly hyper-realistic creation? She says it is, seemingly, when it suits her.

But the fact is, lots of people read her. She has an influence and a platform to shape, somewhat, the nature of the national debate. I won't tell her what to talk about, but when she chooses to dig deeply into cups and mugs and to call for more useless horse-race, poll-driven coverage of politics, I'm going to call bullshit. When she calls someone I respect "doughy" and then retreats behind a "who, me?" screen, I'm going to call bullshit.

Paul Zrimsek said...

The world is going up in flames, and christopher obsesses about Althouse.

christopher said...

Paul Zrimsek said...

The world is going up in flames, and christopher obsesses about Althouse.


A moron's sense of irony. Typical.

John Stodder said...

You can talk about your love of the serial comma or why airplane food sucks on your blog, but when you start to mix serial-comma blogging with links to an argument in defense of lynching, for example, it's possible someone might assume there's no there there.

Then...why are you here?

I don't recall the sequence you describe, I don't recall the "defense of lynching" (and given the track record, I'm going to have to assume that's at least somewhat of a distortion), but assuming it happened just like you said...

Why are you here?

You want to read a blogger who writes as if he or she is carrying the weight of all the trouble in the world on their backs, there are many other writers who will gladly accommodate you.

But even the super-serious super-concerned people on my local Pacifica radio station play music occasionally. (They used to play more.) Bill Maher and Jon Stewart have become important voices on the left, but they still do gags and (especially Stewart) are willing to play the fool. When Al Franken got into talk radio, I hoped I'd get the guy I used to love seeing on SNL with some politics mixed in, but he decided we had no time for jokes, we've got a country to save! At that point, most people turned him off.

If the only people allowed to discuss torture or Darfur are those who talk about those topics and nothing else, then we're going to lose the insights of a lot of very smart people and probably go far astray. Humorless political fanatics, who one might regard as "deep," are actually a lot more dangerous, as the history of the 20th century clearly shows.

Give me "shallowness" any day. It's also called perspective.

Trevor said...

"I don't recall the "defense of lynching" (and given the track record, I'm going to have to assume that's at least somewhat of a distortion)"

It was an example. Serial comma is to coffee mug as torture is to lynching.

"Then...why are you here?"

Call it performance art.

jeff said...

The world is going up in flames, and christopher obsesses about Althouse.

That's an excellent point. Why are you here, rather than dashing about saving the world? I am sure there are homeless where you are. Why are you here bitching, when you could be getting them food. Raising money. Etc.

jeff said...

"I think the writer is not always in control of what gets revealed. You seem to disagree."

No, what I am saying is you can not possibly know the writer based on a blog. If you want to disagree with something that she writes, then do so. But don't give us this crap about how we KNOW she is shallow based on what she decides to post on a particular day. Stop telling us she is shallow because she doesn't post on subjects YOU find interesting.

Bissage said...

(1) Paul Zrimsek said: "The world is going up in flames, and christopher obsesses about Althouse."

(2) Bissage said: +1

(3) [C]hristopher, you’re young . . . I can tell. That’s okay, everybody has to start somewhere.

(4) You’re smart . . . I can tell that too. And I believe in you and think you’ll do great things someday.

(5) In the meantime, however, you should do the right thing. That’s right: Talk About the Passion.

(6) [C]ombien de temps?

christopher said...

Bissage said...
(3) [C]hristopher, you’re young . . . I can tell. That’s okay, everybody has to start somewhere.


I've seen your piece of shit blog, Biss. Believe me, you've got no business condescending to anybody.

jeff said...

Well, christopher, if personal blogs are the standard let's take a look at yours. Well, son of a gun. Profile not available. Who would have thunk.

christopher said...

jeff said...

Well, christopher, if personal blogs are the standard let's take a look at yours. Well, son of a gun. Profile not available. Who would have thunk.


Proving exactly nothing beside the fact that unlike Bissage I don't have a piece of shit blog.

Man, you've nailed me again. I don't know how you do it...

jeff said...

Lord christopher, you are a dumb one.

You said:
"I've seen your piece of shit blog, Biss. Believe me, you've got no business condescending to anybody."

Yet you have no problems with condescending to everyone. And since you used his blog as evidence, the obvious question would be, what background do you have to be condescending. You choose to hide behind your nickname.
This really isn't rocket science.

How do you constantly manage to not understand this stuff?

Bissage said...

Hey christopher, if you’d like to think of yourself as someone who makes a difference in the grand scheme of things, how about you spend less time visiting my blog and more time making the world a better place?

I don’t need the traffic.

And besides, my blog is not a piece of shit.

It’s an infected pimple on the backside of the internet.

Get it right!

christopher said...

And besides, my blog is not a piece of shit.

It’s an infected pimple on the backside of the internet.


At last, something we can agree on.

MadisonMan said...

I think the professor should re-tell the story of how her Dad would read the paper: By blurting out snippets of stories he found interesting, and then watching/participating in the conversation that ensued. That's what I see this blog as: Virtual Newpaper Story-blurting, and viewed in this context (given that one's own Father is similar) - combined with the art student background thing - it makes perfect sense.

Trooper York said...

I didn't know her father was Fiorello H. LaGuardia

former law student said...

LaGuardia read the FUNNIES
On the radio
Let's please try to get things right.

christopher said...

jeff said...
you have no problems with condescending to everyone. And since you used his blog as evidence...


Actually, I've seen his posts here. Believe me, I didn't need his piece of shit blog to know he has no business condescending to anyone.

jeff said...

"Actually, I've seen his posts here. Believe me, I didn't need his piece of shit blog to know he has no business condescending to anyone."

We can't read your mind, christopher. We can only go on what you say. And at least he has the courage to have his blog listed in his profile, rather than hiding behind his assumed name. Pretty easy taking those shots behind the anonymity of the internet.

PWS said...

I agree with most of what Stoddard said but Performance Art implies intentionality on the part of the blogger/artist.

Ann has said she just like to express herself. I don't think it's so much art as just an outlet and for her amusement.

Getting worked up about any single person in the media doesn't make sense to me. The media is secondary; the principals are acting. Keep your eye on the ball.

BTW - If your 6 ft tall and 207 lbs, BMI = 28. BMI over 25 is considered overweight.

Bissage said...

In all sincerity, I am deeply flattered that christopher has noticed and thought of my comments here at Althouse enough to have formed an actual opinion, no matter how pejorative.

This calls for a celebration!

I’m off to pick up a six of this quality beverage and get a tattoo that looks exactly like this one, except the portrait will be of me and the legend will read: “Yeah dude, I rock! – Bissage.”

That’s so cool!

Bissage said...

By the way christopher, if you say my blog is a piece of shit and I disagree and say it’s something else, and then you say we agree . . . well, that makes you kind of weak-minded, now doesn’t it?

Just saying.

Blake said...

That BMI calculator is madness.

5'11" and 133 is the low end of normal. Hell, no, that's Christian Bale in The Mechanic.

rcocean said...

"Ann is wearing a necklace, and (as we all know) necklaces are intended to attract attention to the breasts. And there's those darn breasts again!"

Interesting. I never noticed this because I care about breasts and not about necklaces.

Trooper York said...

Former Law Student, it was a joke, try not to take things so literally. A little artistic license if you please.

Caroline said...

"It reveals a pattern of dangerous shallowness..."

Beware Ms. Althouse; your peccadillos may destroy the world!
;)

(How often do you get to use the word peccadillo? Had to look up the spelling...)

Trooper York said...

Well tc keeps accusing Simon of using a peccadillo, but I think that’s crazy talk.

TitusRK said...

This video would of been more enticing if the necklace would of "accidentally" fell in your blouse.

You would of acted embarrassed and then coyly (if that is a word) pulled it out while pretending to be embarrassed while at the same time looking seductively at the camera.

Also, what would of been really exciting is if while pulling the necklace out of your blouse you "accidentally" exposed your bosom.

Could you imagine the response by the blogosphere? The community would be in an uproar and on fire.

Perhaps something for your next vlog? Just a thought.

jeff said...

Titus, I tell you, sometimes you crack me up.

amba said...

Bad link to Stodder's comment (that's presuming you can link to individual comments here at all; I've never been able to do it).

It cracks me up that Stodder compares you to Mailer, after your not at a;; fond eulogy of Mailer.

Simon said...

FLS, according to that link, I'm moderately doughy. I can live with that, and I suppose it at least puts me out of danger of being hit on by Titus. ;)

Trooper - LOL. I assure you that it is indeed crazy talk, although that is by no means to deny a few peculiarities, most of which are at this point fairly well-advertised in this vicinage.

TitusRK said...

Simon, I don't hit on anybody.

People hit on me.

Ann Althouse said...

amba: link fixed.

TitusRK said..."what would of been really exciting is if while pulling the necklace out of your blouse you "accidentally" exposed your bosom. Could you imagine the response by the blogosphere? The community would be in an uproar and on fire. Perhaps something for your next vlog? Just a thought."

They day may come when I will have lost my mind, maybe to Alzheimer's, and I'll probably do just that. You'll all laugh or whatever, but it will mean that I'm going.

Manfred said...

I'm amazed that Althouse et al. repeatedly pontificate about BMI which is simplistic and therefore terribly inaccurate.

Clearly "doughy" is characterized by body fat percentage and not BMI:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fat_percentage

Focus people!

MadisonMan said...

titusRK: What happens when doughy people hit on you? Do you have standards?

Simon said...

Titus, I apologize if my comment could be read as denying for an instant your status as a magnet among men.

tc said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
reader_iam said...

Annie, I e-mailed you quickie-clear instructions on linking to Blogger comments (using an Althouse post comment--not on this thread--as an example).

Regards.

Simon said...

MadisonMan said...
"titusRK: What happens when doughy people hit on you? Do you have standards?"

Titus, I have a better question: what if TC hits on you?

Simon said...

Reader, I think I beat you to it by a matter of minutes. ;)

TitusRK said...

No need to apology Simon I just have to be the one being pursued. I can't pursue anyone. I find it degrading and I won't take the risk of being rejected. Therefore, I patiently wait for someone to pursue me.


I don't think I have ever been obviously pursued by someone who is doughy. To be honest, it is rare to even see a "doughy" gay guy out anywhere in NYC. Everywhere I go the gay guys tend to be in pretty good shape, gyms, yoga, restaurants, clubs, bars, etc. It is really rare to see a doughy gay guy in NYC. It is sad but if you didn't know gays tend to be very superficial and working out and having a decent body is a requirement and a sad fact of life in NYC. It's the same in Boston. When I lived in Wisconsin I never worked out. About a month after arriving in Boston I got my first gym membership and it is the one thing (I know sad) that I have been totally loyal and committed to. The longest I have never worked out in the past 20 years is probably 1 week. Even when I go on vacation I have to find a gym.

TitusRK said...

Simon, also the guy pursuing me has to be moderately hot.

TC scares me but if he is really hot I am open to being scared. Hot trumps everything.

Crazy, dumb, any religion, ethnicity, poor, etc.

My exceptions are safety and drugs. If they are not willing to be safe and if they do any drugs (with the exception of pot) I would not consider it. End of discussion. Good bye.

greenpoint said...

You've definitely made my Monday scintillating -- what a fabulous vlog on so many levels!

TitusRK said...

The words with the biggest turn off for me in the gay world are PNP (party and play) and bareback.

Both cause an immediate softie and I always always have that conversation before doing anything, ever with anybody.

Simon said...

TitusRK said...
"I just have to be the one being pursued. I can't pursue anyone. I find it degrading and I won't take the risk of being rejected. Therefore, I patiently wait for someone to pursue me."

I think you shouldn't be afraid to feel however you feel about a person and let them (and others) think as they will. Even if it's not something that's going to go somewhere. What matters is the honesty of the emotion. Leave yourself open to the possibility of being smitten without any expectation of reciprocation. Brian Eno once said something that I've long thought was good advice, which was that being "cool" is really a state of detatchment, of alienation from one's own feelings, and as such is not perhaps something to aspire to, even when it's a self-defense mechanism as you describe.

TitusRK said...

also, for those interested, I have never taken it in the rear and give a lousy bj which usually lasts about 1 minute.

I am a top. I don't like giving oral and no one can touch my ass.

I guess that makes me boring to some but usually voracious bottoms dont mind one bit.

TitusRK said...

Simon, if you haven't noticed by my many posts I am incredibly insecure. Therfore, the fear of rejection is overwhleming. I am well into my 30's and will not be able to change this.

I also don't believe in therapy. I think only me, can help me. No one else.

I have been in one relationship and after it was over I was completely spent. He ended up dieing very young. I believe if you have found one true love you are very fortunate. The desire that someone may feel for me for a fleeting moment is enough. The thought of them getting to know me better and then not still desiring me is so intense and I won't let myself go there.

So I live with the fact that someone desires me briefly for one fleeting moment.

Sad, I know, but that is my destiny.

James Williams said...

The reason your blog is considered to be conservative is because it does not feature the hallmarks of liberal blogs; ie, irrationality, excessive profanity and ad hominem attacks.

former law student said...

Trooper York: F LaG had his priorities straight: you could have kept up with the news in many ways, but if you missed the regular installments of the comics there was no way to catch up.

Terry said...

You are so hot!

John Stodder said...

It cracks me up that Stodder compares you to Mailer, after your not at a;; fond eulogy of Mailer.

In the kind of writing I'm talking about, liking the person almost becomes secondary. A lot of people read a lot of Norman Mailer even though they hated him. A lot of people read this blog even though they try to tell us every day what a terrible blog it is and how stupid we all are for reading and commenting on it -- somehow oblivious to the irony.

It's a gift to be able to make people seek you out even though they claim to dislike you. Oh, they'll say things like, "It's such a trainwreck I can't look away," but we all know that's bullshit. When Ann talks about her anti-A's being "sucked into the vortex" this is literally true. By partially exposing herself, she induces others to do the same, even when maybe it's not in their best interest to do so.

Joshua said...

When Ann talks about her anti-A's being "sucked into the vortex" this is literally true.

No. It may be figuratively true, but it certainly isn't literally true. When did it become acceptable to use "literally" to mean its precise opposite?

jeff said...

"acceptable to use "literally" to mean its precise opposite?"

Acceptable? Never. Common practice? about 20 years ago. Where have you been?

Trooper York said...

Hillary felt very kittenish today. Her new life with her new lover had invigorated her and make very playful. She had to speak to the nation tonight, but she was distracted by her new life of sensual pleasure. She had slumbered, but now her senses were awake. But how to distract the country from her program of raising taxes and destroying capitalism. Suddenly she had it . She would wear a low cut blouse and her new bra. She could toy with a necklace at the beginning of the speech. Putting it on while arching her back and pointing the girls toward the lens. Then she could pretend to drop it with a girlish little giggle and a flirtatious smirk as she dipped down toward the camera and give a tantalizing glimpse of her famous cleavage, never displaying it outright, but giving hope to her mesmerized audience. She would adopt a girlish and coquettish demeanor sort of Suzanne Somers channeling Diane Keaton. And best of all, they would never know, she wasn’t wearing any pants.
Brought to you by Concerned Citizens Hoping to Humanize Hillary.