Oh, I'm blogging as a Democrat? Well, I read it in the New York Times, so it's probably true. Did Rutenberg read enough of my blog to see that I'm voting for Bush, or is he just concluding from the fact that I don't mind saying that I observed spittle in the corner of Bush's mouth that I must be opposed to him?...The NYT also got my URL wrong and used the term "Web blogger," with doesn't make sense, because "blog" comes from "web log." Why the second "b"? (But, then, why the second "g" in "blogger"?) Back in the old days, discussions of the word "blog" were insanely common. Many people disliked the sound of the word and felt compelled to say so.
I was thinking about the perverse recognition I received long ago because, watching last night's debate, I recoiled at a blob of spit that bounced forward and then retreated on the right side of Bernie Sanders's mouth. Too bad I don't — I can't! — live blog like I used to. I could even have made a little video clip of the moment, which I can't find now, because the word I remember him saying, the only word I could search for in the transcript, is — of all words! — "the."
I'm fascinated to see that the old NYT article was written by Jim Rutenberg, because the NYT just gave him the position — "media columnist" — that had been empty since the death of David Carr.
“Our hunt for David’s successor has been exhaustive, and we were privileged to have had extraordinary candidates from both inside and outside The Times,” the newspaper’s executive editor, Dean Baquet, and its business editor, Dean Murphy, said in a memo to the staff. “Jim brings to the job a passion for the story, a track record in covering the industry and the experienced eye of an astute observer.”Well, he called me a "Web blogger" and a Democrat, got my URL wrong, and boxed me in as a person concerned with saliva 12 years ago, but I await his columns, none of which have yet appeared.
Of course, I am still a blogger concerned with saliva.
पोस्ट्स
२० टिप्पण्या:
Oh, I'm blogging as a Democrat? Well, I read it in the New York Times, so it's probably true.
au contraire
From the point on the spectrum where the NYT resides, you are a National Socialist White Power Wisconsinite.
They just are lazy slugs...
Well, you are a web blogger blogging away on the world wide web internets.
"why the second "g" in "blogger"
Because phonics. Otherwise, the o would be pronounced long. (Yes, there are exceptions, of course, because English is an unruly mutt language and full of exceptions to every rule.)
Don't you want a big sloppy kiss from Bernie?
He even got a haircut for you, Althouse! It's "clean for Gene" all over again. He groomed himself! Don't be scared of the passion. Kiss your granddad already!
W w w dot glob. Period.
"Me? I'm not a drooler. I'm the assistant. I don't know what Miss Jones or Miss Kelsey could do without me. There are fifty-five low-grade droolers in this ward, and how could they ever all be fed if I wasn't around? I like to feed droolers. They don't make trouble. They can't. Something's wrong with most of their legs and arms, and they can't talk. They're very low-grade. I can walk, and talk, and do things. You must be careful with the droolers and not feed them too fast. Then they choke. Miss Jones says I'm an expert. When a new nurse comes I show her how to do it. It's funny watching a new nurse try to feed them. She goes at it so slow and careful that supper time would be around before she finished shoving down their breakfast. Then I show her, because I'm an expert. Dr. Dalrymple says I am, and he ought to know. A drooler can eat twice as fast if you know how to make him." - from 'Told In The Drooling Ward' by Jack London
You can read the entire short story here:
http://www.eastoftheweb.com/short-stories/UBooks/TolDro.shtml
"Better to be a Web blogger than a wet globber." -- W. E. B. Du Bois
That's what you get for being a law professor! You get stereotyped. More in-depth journalism by the NY Times!
".....boxed me in as a person concerned with saliva 15 years ago, but I await his columns, none of which have yet appeared."
Time flies when you are having fun.
2016-2004 = 12, not 15.
I guess she got 15 by assuming it was still 2015, and that the election in question wasa the first one in which George W. Bush (Bush 43) ran, in the year 2000.
Anyway, the correct numer of years is 11 years because that was in October 2004 (it couldn't be 2000, because the blog wasn't around them) and now it is only January = ~11 years and 2 months.
I think most of the more read blogs started in 2004 or so.
I myself had what might be called a blog in 1994 - in one conference of a BBS, but that doesn't count, really.
Old media and GOP dowagers are still very uneasy about the Internet. They are no longer gatekeepers and it upsets them terribly.
They feel they must warn me about the Internet, because you don't know who these people are. Even when you know the bloggers' names, had meetups and all, no: We don't know who they are.
They hope it will go away.
"2016-2004 = 12, not 15."
Sorry. I was distracted by the 2000 elevtion, in that other psot.
My experience with the NYT's -and with many other newspapers- is that whenever they write about something I have personal, in-depth knowledge of, they get it wrong. Often totally wrong, as in the present case.
"....Of course, I am still a blogger concerned with saliva."
Stop with the straight lines already.
Meade is making fun of my typos as 4:50.
All I can say is... The iPad made me do it.
"hic!"
Sorry. I can't help it. My iPad turns me into a troll.
'psoted' or besotted?
"GOP dowagers"?
There's one dowager and she is a Democrat:
dow·a·ger
ˈdouəjər/Submit
noun
an elderly woman with a title or property derived from her husband.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा