So Brooks didn't get his scoop, but he did flutter back to his NYT perch and peck out a column about dignity that a lot of Times readers seemed to love. (It topped the "most emailed" list for a while.) He expatiated about the good old days when men like George Washington displayed their thighs in tight silk knickers... I mean displayed high standards of dignity. But there is still hope, he tells us:
[I]t’s not right to end on a note of cultural pessimism because there is the fact of President Obama. Whatever policy differences people may have with him, we can all agree that he exemplifies reticence, dispassion and the other traits associated with dignity. The cultural effects of his presidency are not yet clear, but they may surpass his policy impact. He may revitalize the concept of dignity for a new generation and embody a new set of rules for self-mastery.Yes, yes, there is the fact of President Obama. The fact of President Obama stirs hope in our loins. That man is the very embodiment of dignity and —d'oh! — there he is exemplifying looking at a girl's ass!
पोस्ट्स
७१ टिप्पण्या:
I can't recall ever accidently touching a guy's inner thigh, let alone having my hand sit there for a whole dinner. How does this happen? Nor could I imagine another guy letting that happen. It is strange.
Unless of course they are both gay...or as you suggest Ann, one of them is and one of them is just waiting to see if things will get gayer, so he can get a story. I bet Maureen Dowd told David this strategy would work.
Ann,
You're too stupid to know it, but you only discredit yourself by insisting that photograph of Obama shows what you pretend it shows. Anyone with a brain knows you know it does not show Obama gazing at the woman's ass. The obvious and logical conclusion is consistent with your past behavior: You're lying in an attempt to get a rise out of your political opponents.
Except for your band of followers, the world is laughing at you, and your posts on this subject remind everyone that you're not honest and will say whatever it takes to get a reaction.
Thank you for making your dishonesty so transparent.
Jack,
Only schmuck's go into a comment thread and insultingly spew their bile on a site's host.
Don't be a schmuck Jack. Just don't.
Jack, you are right. Obama never stares at female butts.
Perhaps he prefers putting his hand on David Brooks' inner thigh. Probably not, Michelle's guns are so much more toned.
The main fact about the fact of Obama is his determination to punish whitey; a fact that the-soft-and-comfortable-and-determined-to-stay-that-way Brooks would never touch upon with a thousand foot pole.
Thomas Carlyle on dignity here. (start at Toomtebard)
What dignity dwells in a suit of cast clothes! ....
How did the Senator eat with his hand on David's thigh? Did David feed him or even worse, masticate his food for him and french kiss it into his mouth?
I am going to skip breakfast now.
Even if one were to grant that Obama did, in fact, sneak a peek at the girl's ass (a claim that cannot be proven by the photograph or video, as Ann knows), the video still completely debunks Ann's ridiculous "analysis," in which Obama's entire posture is a reaction to the beautiful girl. Clearly, this is not the case. And clearly, by insisting that it is, Ann discredits herself.
Thank you, Ann!
I guess "never get caught on camera looking at some girl's buttocks" was not in the book of rules that Washington memorized.
I love the picture Fred4Pres posted. Clearly Obama needs an "Assman" license plate.
And this second picture, in completely new circumstances, calls into question the "innocence" people are claiming of Obama in the first.
David Brooks sounds like a Monarchist or something. The last President I can think of who was into dignity was Nixon, and we all know how that ended.
Dignity is the poker-face of an unrepentant scoundrel.
Thighs...ass...Meade must be back!
on obama ass the ass gazer: I gotta say it's a weird meme for you to be pushing Ann, I hope you are having fun, leading your sheep off the cliff.
It's peculiar how David Brooks makes such a big deal of dignity while throwing his own away.
Hot Air is running those sidebar ads that say "Obama asks moms to return to school."
How are Hot Air readers supposed to respond to such ads?
a new set of rules for self-mastery
Not only will Obama lower the oceans, but he will usher in a new age of self-mastery.
The old rules of self-mastery promulgated by that....ah.......what's his name again?.......oh, that's right: Jesus Christ
The old rules of self-mastery promulgated by Jesus Christ in the sermon on the mount apperently don't pursuade anymore.
We need a new set of rules from a new messiah.
Why is Althouse so deeply invested in her ass-situation interpretation, even though the full video indicates otherwise?
Must me some sort of woman thing. Empathy/Sympathy w/ younger (too young in this situation) girls who are ogled? or Jealousy/envy of younger girls?
Either way there's a tie to days long gone; younger days.
Hey, I give Obama a pass. It was a first rate ass, though perhaps a bit underaged.
There is also the picture of Prez O with his hand on Michelle's caboose as they board Air Force One on the way to Africa. So sweet.
reticence, dispassion and the other traits associated with dignity.
Yes, I've always found marxism to be much more palatable when it is enacted by people with dignity. I think all those people in the gulags were of a like mind that if only Stalin had been a bit more reticent and dignified, boy would they be having a ball.
And yes, the video only makes it clearer that he was eyeballing the girl's rear.
Appreciating her backside is in no way something discreditable. I don't really see the problem.
But it is funny how the press goes out of its way to debunk (incorrectly) the gawker mode of the man, yet you don't see them setting the record straight on so-called fake turkeys.
The real reason Brooks did not respond to his dinner partner is that his heart, and his inner thigh, belongs to another: Barack.
I assume (so to speak) that most men would gaze at the attributes of an attractive woman, given the opportunity. In fact, it takes a distinct effort to refrain, as those who take office sexual harassment policies seriously can attest. Why in the world is it so desperately necessary to rebut (so to speak) this? Obama is a man, ergo....
Love how the progressive truth squad is just hanging around waiting to leap on any statement critical of The One.
Chauncey (or rather his handlers) sure know how to manage the image battlespace. Leap on any statement that might show Chauncey in a less than flattering light, lest public perception start to move against him.
The byword of all Chicago pols:
Dignity above all....... dignity.
There is dignity that merely postures and then there is dignity of standing by ones word or slogging through on principle regardless of criticism.
Vicious, 1jpb.
I'm amused at the David Brooks story. What a freak he is. I've lost...okay, I had no respect for him. But still.
So to sum up, Brooks is still gay for Obama, but not for anyone else?
And David is the new (sockpuppet for) Jeremy.
Anyway, at least Barack Assuein Obama got to take home a big consolation prize from the G8.
Do you really think that repeating your lie about Obama will make it true?
Geez, your obsession with Obama is becoming nutty.
The new reality, then, is: Coulter + fat = Althouse.
We don't ogle ass here at Althouse.
We ogle dignified asses who ogle ass.
And that's just one of the many sports we are good at, Jack. ;)
What kind of woman has a "Testicles" label in her database?
Imagine making love to a new and intriguing woman. While in the throws of some odd position you notice that one of the drawers in her room is labeled "Testicles". Would you ask? Would you stay? Would you let her make breakfast.
Thanks to this blog, I can live dangerously in safety enjoying a deranged female.
"He may ... embody a new set of rules for self-mastery."
Maybe for the Democrats. Or was GWB involved in a set of sex scandals that I totally missed?
And if you accept the conviction of some on the left that GWB is an alcoholic and a cokehead, the fact that in 8 years none of the people who hate him so desperately were ever able to get a video or photograph of him visibly drunk or high must mean that he has the whole self-mastery thing totally mastered.
Obama is always getting in trouble for how he looks at things. There is his look of scorn and now his "ass checking" look. I wonder what other ways of looking at things Obama and his family will come up with. Will drool be involved?
Whatever policy differences people may have with him, we can all agree that he exemplifies reticence, dispassion and the other traits associated with dignity.
If this were a Republican, the operative word right now would be indifference, no?
It's easy to be "dignified" when you are the darling of the liberal consesus. Sadly, economic and geo-political reality has a way of chatching up on you. That's when your dignity is really tested.
Anyone with a brain knows you know it does not show Obama gazing at the woman's ass. (9:30 AM)
Who're we gonna believe, Jack the Pink or our lyin' eyes?
In order to catch two photos in such a short period of time, the cameramen must see this sort of thing constantly. But what I'm wondering is, now that we know Michelle Obama is in that kind of marriage, should we feel more or less sympathetic towards her? Is she putting on a brave face towards her husband's wandering eye or is she the constant nag who is driving her husband elsewhere?
What kind of woman has a "Testicles" label in her database?
Hillary, for another.
Favorite Rush Limbaugh on the label, real audio, Dec 10, 2003.
There is nothing wrong with a brief and discreet gaze at a well-turned ass.
What is amusing is how dedicated the Obama fan-boys are to claiming the picture is somehow a lie. If you want to believe that, I'm sure you'll find validation in the video. If like me, you don't care, you see from the video that his gaze was short and reasonably discreet.
But we know what he was looking at for at least 1:100 sec.
...Ann, I hope you are having fun, leading your sheep off the cliff. (10:28 AM)
"Leading your sheep off a cliff?"
Jeez! This Obot idolatry thing is really getting old.
yeah!
Obama sucks! Everything he does is WRONG!
He may ... embody a new set of rules for self-mastery.
George Bush embodied far more self-mastery than I ever could.
(It topped the "most emailed" list for a while.)
True since you put "most emailed" in quotes. But this was not necessarily the most emailed article. The NYT has no way of knowing which articles are most emailed.
master cylinder : Obama sucks! Everything he does is WRONG!
He was elected to the office of President with almost no useful experience of any kind. It's no surprise he disgraces himself, his family, and our country at every turn. But he is learning, and I'm sure he will improve with time. What sort of person he becomes, and if we like him when he gets there, we will have to wait and see. Right now Obama is the Democrat's Sarah Palin, and I can wish you all good luck with him.
JAC : The NYT has no way of knowing which articles are most emailed.
If they have an "email this article" link they do. I see many publications keeping track of stories this way.
Well put Penny, and still true regardless of what the truth is with any one particular ass viewing.
If they have an "email this article" link they do. I see many publications keeping track of stories this way.
No, that button keeps track of how many people use that button. I email articles on a regular basis and never use that button. I don't understand why anyone would use it. The NYT has no way of knowing when I send a NYT URL to someone.
No, that button keeps track of how many people use that button. I email articles on a regular basis and never use that button. I don't understand why anyone would use it. The NYT has no way of knowing when I send a NYT URL to someone.
I hope Althouse updates her post to include this vital information.
Has anyone besides me considered the possibility that Brooks is, perhaps, lying.
I can't imagine anyone -- male or female alike -- sitting there more than a moment or so and not pointing out to the person groping them that the advance is not welcome.
Unless it was welcome, that is.
It shouldn't be too difficult for an enterprising reporter to put the pieces together and find out who groped Brooks.
The column gives you a timeline to work backwards from.
We are going to know b4 the end of the week. Even sooner given that it's a republican.
I hope Althouse updates her post to include this vital information.
Yes, the NYT gives a false picture of what it knows about how popular its pieces are. The NYT perceives its internal emailing system as the be-all-and-end-all of popularity. But they're only detecting the behavior of the tiny group of people who are more comfortable with the NYT's convoluted messaging system than with the more straightforward practice of sending a URL. There are all sorts of ways this could be demographically skewed; it probably leaves out more young (maybe liberal) readers. I actually think that's important. Maybe not as important as the very serious matter of what Brooks was talking about in his comments about his thigh, so I don't know if it's worthy of an update in the post, but I think it's worth pointing out in the comments section.
If a female butt presents itself to you, the best course of action is to immediately look away, lest you have to pluck your eyes out, or explain your shame on the althouse blog.
I do love the Bush pic, in which he playfully is about to swat that athlete's butt.
JAC : No, that button keeps track of how many people use that button.
I think you mean "how many people use that button to email articles," which is probably where the NYT comes up with the rankings. Even if it doesn't capture everyone, it would still give them a statistical sample.
I email articles on a regular basis
Your correspondents must be very pleased.
and never use that button.
Now you're just being difficult. The NYT gives you free articles to send to people and you won't even bother to tell them when you do!
I don't understand why anyone would use it.
Yes, I see your point. No one in their right mind would use an "email this article" link to email an article. Perhaps people in insane asylums like clicking on the links for fun?
The NYT has no way of knowing when I send a NYT URL to someone.
And yet they still publish a list of most emailed articles. Perhaps they do have access; a secret part of the Patriot Act?
so I don't know if it's worthy of an update in the post, but I think it's worth pointing out in the comments section.
If you take any reference to the popularity of Brooks' "dignity" article, the post still makes the same point. It was color commentary.
But color me shocked the NYTs would be accused of giving a false picture ofanything.
I do love the Bush pic, in which he playfully is about to swat that athlete's butt.
Yes, I love that photo too.
Whenever people use that NYT email this button they invite th NYT to leave a trail of graffity all over their hard drive.
Esta bueno que le pase ;)
JAC -
Your "analysis" only works if you assume that users behaved significantly differently with regard to the Obama article than it did with every other article that the NYT published.
Even if you assume that only 10% (or pick a percentage that suits you better) of users utilize the "E-mail" link provided, then you would have to be able to show that this percentage on this one article was significantly different than the percentages for other articles.
You're making a leap of faith which has absolutely zero basis in logic in order to try to make a case which also has zero basis in logic. The picture was headlined on the front page of Drudge for at least 2, possibly 3, days. Were any other NYT articles similarly featured so prominently? Drudge reported that he got more than 600 million page views in the previous month, but somehow you're asking people to believe that such a prominantly featured article on one of the most highly trafficked news sites in the world somehow didn't receive more attention than others that weren't?
You're grasping at straws here, and not particularly well.
Hilary not only has a label for testicles she actually has a jar with the real mccoy.
Jack-
Only a fool would think that Obama is above looking at the ass of a person he finds attractive.
And only an uptight prig would care that he would.
"...he exemplifies reticence, dispassion and the other traits associated with dignity."
He just doesn't care all that much. He appears dispassionate because he lacks passion for the country he leads.
"I do love the Bush pic, in which he playfully is about to swat that athlete's butt."
-The difference being that the athlete in question INVITED him to do it and he never actually went through with it.
JAC's observations are quite good. Note that you must be "signed in" at the NYT site to use their e-mail button. (The Brooks article is available for reading without signing in)
I never read a NYT article that requires signing in. And I suspect that the demographics of the "Sign-Ins" versus the unwashed peasants like me are quite different. And I think a survey of how many people use the "e-mail this" buttons on any site versus pasting a link would be very interesting. I don't recall ever receiving any except from some real rookies.
Regarding the BHO/ass issue, I found this picture. I didn't make it, I assure you.
JAC, do not underestimate the power of the NYT. They're onto your racket.
How far up the leg is considered "inner thigh"? Does just above the knee qualify, or does it have to be more than half way to paradise?
photograph of him [Bush] visibly drunk or high
He did fall off that Segway...in shorts.
Great point JAC. That list should be titled "Most emailed by the least savvy people."
"Has anyone besides me considered the possibility that Brooks is, perhaps, lying."
My original post on the subject implicitly said that.
Regarding the "email this article" button, the reason not to use it is that you give them two email addresses, yours and the recipient's. The flood of email solicitations I get when an well-meaning sender uses the button is VERY annoying, and I would never subject anyone I like to the same annoyance.
I went back and looked. You are quite correct, Professor, and I apologize for having forgotten that.
We have caught our Professor trying to humanize Pres. Obama's Too Cool and Too Dedicated to Power persona by alleging he notices a hot woman dressed for men's pleasure. The awful truth is that Obama is immune to such a normal attractions. He is 100% into his own power to seduce nations, and no normal female beauty is of any use in distracting him from this mission.
Hey, LoneWacko, you might put an NSFW tag on that link. The ads are rather explicitly pornographic.
Kylos makes a good point. If a site is going to have popup ads, I would rather they be for Netflix than for camgirls.
"he exemplifies reticence, dispassion and the other traits associated with dignity."
Like when he gave Hillary the finger?
http://tinyurl.com/7umsre
There are more asses and thighs in the news than when Clinton was in office!
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा