One of my favorite games as a kid was to have my dad read me the headlines of op-ed columns and let me guess what the writers were going to say. We used to call it “The Great American Thesis Guessing Game,” and we’d pass many joyful hours this way, usually as I waited for my various spelling bees and model U.N. to begin or on the train to an educational weekend trip to Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, or Colonial Williamsburg (where I learned all about early American trucker hats). It was my absolute favorite game after memorizing every state comptroller and listing all the elements on the periodic table in weight order.
Maybe I was feeling nostalgic for those bygone days (the humdrum accomplishments of being an “adult” are so boring compared to the achievements I enjoyed as an adorable, opinionated child genius), since this morning I decided to play my favorite game with John “Norman’s Son” Podhoretz’s latest New York Post opus (Popus?), BUSH’S BIGGEST FLAW.
Ooh, ooh! I can guess! I can guess!
·He loves too much?
·Lips move when reading?
·Adult-onset backne?
·Doesn’t like cats?
·Cannot—simply can not—change printer toner?
·Obsessed with reality TV?
·Lacks “salty” taste-buds?
·Memory wipes clean every three minutes like a goldfish?
·Never washes hands after going to the bathroom?
·Right so often, he makes everyone around him look bad?
·Loves Maroon 5?
·Never cries at the end of Titanic?
So, Pod-man, what’s Bush’s “biggest” flaw?
“His capacity for complacency.”
Damn. How could I have missed that one? My dad’s gonna be so disappointed when we go to bird-watching this weekend.
(With thanks to Chris M., again.)
Categories
Last Derrida Post Ever
We couldn’t help but notice that since we issued our “modest defense” of Jacques Derrida, various arms of the media empire seem to have rethought their initial scorn towards the late French philosopher and his work. This critical reappraisal is most apparent in the New York Times, which offers this panegyric, revealing, among other things, that Derrida gave carnival masks to young children of American academics.
The Guardian has a more diverse sampling of opinion from across the pond, some pro and some con.
Less hagiographically sympathetic (and somewhat saucier) than the Times op-ed is Marco Roth’s piece in the upstart literary journal n+1, which has the virtue of describing a hot chick with whom the author attended Derrida’s lectures in Paris:
…I watched the raven haired girl who always wore a miniskirt and a fur coat, the sort of Parisienne I fantasized about meeting before my trip. She filled line after line of graph paper in a neat miniscule hand, never stopping. She seemed to be able to take him down verbatim. At the end, she would dash out of the hall. Where?
To sum up, the new media consensus seems to be “Derrida: Not Necessarily A Pernicious Nihilist Who Threatened The Very Foundation Of Western Society And Cutlture.” And, as always, dear reader, you heard it here first.
EARLIER: Confessions of a Teenage Deconstructionist
EVEN EARLIER: Jacques Derrida, 1930-2004
These people might benefit from President Bush’s repeated invocation of “education” as the great social cure-all in last night’s debate.
In today’s New York Times, we elite-coasters finally get to meet – up close and personal – that rare breed of imbecilic American voter who hasn’t been able to glean a fucking difference between Candidate A and Candidate B (perhaps better known as President George “God says I can kill people” Bush and Senator John “You may want to reconsider the implications of engaging in such an act of wanton destruction, for acts of such nature rarely lead to success, and more often bring us down the path of national woe and angst, which is German for despair” Kerry).
While we wait for the poll tax to be re-jiggered such that one needs to pass a fucking news-reading test in order to exercise their precious right to vote, here are some tragic highlights of the Times’ “After the Final Debate, Some Voters Are Still Sitting on the Fence”:
The Great Undecided Masses, on Kerry’s indelicate reminder that the Vice President’s daughter is a homo:
“That is very unfair,” blurted Patsey Farrell, 64, one of a handful of undecided voters gathered here to watch the final presidential debate Wednesday night. “I’m sorry, that’s too personal. That’s too hurtful.”
Painful, hurtful, Mrs. Farrell? Not unlike the idea that President Bush wants to introduce a galvanizing amendment to the U.S. Constitution that alienates an entire class of citizens? You dimwitted bitch.
The Great Undecided Masses, on discomforting moments in the debate:
Mr. Uhde cringed when Mr. Bush made an attempt at a joke about “credible news organizations” – and also when Mr. Kerry defended himself against Mr. Bush’s accusation that he voted 98 times to raise taxes by saying “everybody knows” you can play with the votes.
“Not everybody does know that,” Mr. Uhde said, annoyed at being made to feel stupid. “Not everybody understands when you say, ‘play with the votes.’ He’s not explaining why he did it.”
Here’s some credible news for you, Mr. Uhde. You are, in fact, pretty fucking stupid.
The Great Undecided Masses, on irony and their inability to get a fairly well-crafted joke:
Mrs. Farrell said that Mr. Kerry had proved himself a better debater, but that she was turned off by his comment about “marrying up,” perhaps because his wealthy wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, has left a bad taste with her blunt comments during the campaign.
“I think I trust Bush more than I trust Kerry,” she said after it was over.
Christ, Mrs. Farrell, you’re really testing our patience here. Try reading some topical news for once instead of inundating yourself with Bush campaign ads while you watch reruns of Hannity and Colmes.
The Great Undecided Masses, on being a selfish American:
Phyllis Bobb, 68, a member of the church, said of the president, “He’s not responding well.” Ms. Bobb, 68, said she would vote for “the person who will help seniors.”
Good going, Mrs. Bobb. It’s really impressive how you’re able to winnow down the needs of a nation of hundreds of millions of citizens (many of whom will likely be subjected to a bankrupted Social Security system, a widening class-system divide, and an environment on the brink of destruction) to the concerns of a smattering of near-death people in walkers. That’s some considerate shit.
The Great Undecided Masses, on skipping biology class in high school:
And during a discussion on abortion, Mr. Brokenborough, 52, turned away from the television to say, “Who is going to be the advocate for the baby?”
That’s a powerful question, Mr. Brokenborough. And who will be the advocate for my fingernails, which I just trimmed, or my hair, which I just had cut at a delightful salon on the Upper East Side, or perhaps the formerly functional legs and arms of several soldiers who subsequently lost limbs in the past few days of bombings and attacks in Iraq?
The Great Undecided Masses, on the merits of statistics:
But Mr. Kerry’s performance left Jay Edmonds, 77, wishing for a little more clarity. After the Democratic candidate cited the number of job losses in Arizona and the lower pay of the jobs created in their place, Mr. Edmonds shook his head.
“I don’t know about all those numbers,” he said. “I can’t add them up that fast.”
Well, Mr. Edmonds, I don’t think you add job losses to lower wages. In mathematical terms, this might be considered to be two different equations or aspects of the same problem – though nonetheless fundamentally linked. Sort of like an x- and y-axis, you fucking idiot.
The Great Undecided Masses, on senior citizens’ sleeping habits, taking into account the fact they often inexplicably get up at dawn:
Although several residents dozed off about 20 minutes into the Bush-Kerry show, Mrs. Small continued to watch intently.
Good for you, Mrs. Small. You may be uncertain as for whom you’re going to be casting a ballot in a few weeks, but at least you’re able to stay upright in your chair, all the while subjecting yourself to the theatrics of this third and final debate.
The Sun-Sentinel newspaper in South Florida, meanwhile, went another route and interviewed, get this, teenagers for their thoughts on the debate they’d just witnessed. You know, teenagers. Those young Americans who are old enough to be executed, yes, but not to vote. And, sadly, in contrast with the intelligentsia-stragglers profiled above by the New York Times, Florida’s population of the under-18 set comes off like a bunch of aspirationally-observant geniuses.
From the Sun-Sentinel‘s “Reaction from teens to the presidential debate”:
“Although this debate proved to be the most entertaining, the candidates’ contentions have surpassed repetitive and reached mind-numbing. There is a significant difference between using colloquialisms to appeal to the nation and simply conveying sheer ignorance. The president crossed that line.”
Anjali Sharma, 15, Pine Crest School
“Overall I think Bush gets a C-. At least he’s consistent with his Yale grades. Kerry presented a persuasive alternative to the spiral downward that the incumbent has (mis)lead us into.”
Bret Vallacher, 16, St. Andrews School
“Tonight’s final debate solidified much of America’s position on the upcoming election. From a debating standpoint, George Bush was constantly on the defensive while Kerry, for the third time, acted as the more presidential of the two. Bush failed to provide significant backing for his statements, instead resorting to childish defensiveness against legitimate political attacks.”
Eric Perelman, 16, Spanish River High School
“Since the second debate both candidates have grown hostile toward each other. But now both of them have seemed to even out the playing field. Unfortunately for Bush, his political growth is too little, too late. Overall, these debates have turned out to be quite a debacle for Bush’s campaign.”
Shivam Upadhyaya, 13, Stranahan High School
Note that this last kid is fucking 13 years old. Someone ought to introduce young Shivam to the Uhde family mentioned earlier.
We hold these lies to be self-evident…
Several prominent psychologists speculate that if Bush wins the election, the national suicide rate will increase by as much as 35%.
George Bush wrote a poem in high school called “Little Me, in Poppy’s Shadow.”
Teresa Heinz was a back-up singer for Bob Dylan’s Rolling Thunder Revue tour.
As a young man, Donald Rumsfeld used to run numbers with Malcolm X, then known as “Detroit Red.”
John Kerry keeps all of his kids’ baby teeth in a satchel in his pocket. He rubs them when he’s nervous.
The Bush twins were conjoined at birth, sharing a liver. This is why they get drunk so easily.
John Edwards‘s battle with a childhood illness formed the basis of the 1976 after-school special, The Boy in the Plastic Bubble starring John Travolta.
It has been proven that electronic voting machines are essentially the same technology as the Simple Simon light game.
Condoleezza Rice had a small speaking part in the film version of Hair.
Laura Bush is allergic to most root vegetables.
And, hey there, swing-state voters, don’t forget that Senator John Kerry used to be in a rock n’ roll band.
From last night’s third and final debate in Tempe, Arizona, between Democratic Sen. John Kerry and Republican President George W. Bush, a line uttered by Kerry in response to a question by moderator Bob Schieffer of CBS News about whether homosexuality is a “choice,” or genetically ingrained, or something that one ill-advisedly buys in the check-out line at Target:
“We’re all God’s children, Bob. And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney’s daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she’s being who she was, she’s being who she was born as.”
EARLIER: V.P. Candidate John Edwards on the gaygaygay issue
EVEN EARLIER: President George W. Bush on the gaygaygay issue.
Hopefully, the reminder that a cruel and offensively dehumanizing constitutional amendment is at stake puts all this in perspective for Democratic partisans who may have grimaced in awkward discomfort at last night’s utterances by John Kerry, as sampled above.
Categories
Why… Is Michelle Malkin the New Jadakiss?
Malkin and Kiss… Why?
The many questions of Michelle Malkin:
How… many hate crime anecdotes does it take before the mainstream media spot a trend?
But what… happens when the targets are the wrong kind of victim?
What… happens when conservatives and Republicans are on the receiving end of discriminatory threats or harassment or worse?
Hello…, reporters?
Is… anybody home?
Is… it my imagination or do I hear pins dropping in the grievance corners of America’s otherwise victim-friendly newsrooms?
Can… I get a hair appointment and pedicure before appearing on Scarborough Country on Friday?
Will… The pedicurist be an immigrant?
Should… I cancel it if she is?
Why… is my Amazon rank so low?
The Internets are on fire today, man. As they say in Latin, ¡en fuego, hombre!
First comes this excellent article from a newspaper called The New York Sun that not only tells us about blogs, but finally—finally!—explains that “jumping the shark” phrase our 15 year-old cousin always uses. (It has something to do with Happy Days.) There’s also an excellent little primer about a show called Oz, which we’re definitely gonna watch this week.
The article, by a writer named Eric Wolff (remember that name!), is all about a website called Gawker, which we plan to check out after we have our morning coffee! It also answers the age old question: Who gives the best soundbites, Condé Nast editorial assistants, or ‘cyber-hostesses‘? (It’s a draw! They both bring the noise and the bite!)
Then there’s this Tom Scocca piece from The New York Observer about a guy who runs a site called The Minor Fall, The Major Lift (definitely gotta check his stuff out) who was once annonymous but is now going by his real name, Alex Balk! Plus, he’s now writing for The New York Times! Like other bloggers! (Memo to self: Pick up the Times this weekend on the way to brunch!)
What’s exciting about this (and warrants all these exclamation points!!!) is that we can now see that far from being an annonymous wag, this Balk fellow was actually hiding in plain site all along, submitting to a website called McSweeneys and playing along on the Slate News Quiz with Emmy-winning TV writers and producers! Next Major Lift, Hollywood!?!
Phew! This entry has fairly knocked us out (we topped off our exclamation point quota in the second paragraph!), and now we’re off to go figure out how to get one of these blogs set up. Our 15 year-old cousin is great with computers, and we think the “domain” JackieHarvey.com is still available!
As they say in Latin, Excelsior!
Categories
Rooting for the Overdog
As gratifying as it is to win these games, they have become so excessively fraught that to watch them is emotionally taxing in the extreme. I thought I’d be able to relax and get some work done when the Yankees opened up an eight run lead, but the Red Sox regrouped, metastasized, and emerged with a deadlier-than-ever assault. Clearly, they pose a threat that requires constant vigilance. Some day, they will win — perhaps tomorrow. It’s not a question of if, but when.
It may be unpopular and controversial to put it this way, but I think we have to get back to the place we were, where the Red Sox are not the focus of our lives, but they’re a nuisance. We’re never going to end this rivalry. But we’ve got to reduce it to a level where it isn’t on the rise. It isn’t threatening people’s lives every day, and it’s not threatening the fabric of your life.