I'm weeks late on hearing this sorta famous Cee-Lo track, but it's so damned exuberant. Title NSFW, song too (obvs): http://dai.ly/cWaTMt4 hours ago
Best rental car ever: huge Lincoln Continental, clearly been rented to smokers. Wore plaid pants and hid body in trunk just 2 be appropriate 5 hours ago
RT @Stillers: Yahoo: Terry Bradshaw: Ben Roethlisberger deserves full punishment (SportingNews.com): Pro Football Hall of Fame Q... http ... 6 hours ago
Here’s the end result of my Rosstache efforts. I drew inspiration from my forebears in South Charleston, Ohio:
Thanks to everyone who donated to the Penrickton Center — the event was a hit, even with masses of hideous facial hair like this beauty floating around.
Stephen Colbert profiled the Illinois 5th Congressional District the other night, including an interview with our Congressional Representative here in the LP, Rep. Mike Quigley. The interview doesn’t seem to be online — if I find it, I’ll update this — but I did appreciate the props to the Wiener’s Circle.
Ever since I was about ten years old and watching Comedy Central when it was still known as The Comedy Channel, I recognized that the comedian Gallagher’s routine was overly and detrimentally simplistic: he smashed things with a hammer, and people laughed at it. At that age I was waking up to the benefits of layering meaning onto things, so even my ten-year-old self realized that there was no depth to smashing watermelons with a hammer and, subsequently, little to no artistic value. Enough people apparently disagree with this that Gallagher is still floating around these days, so his popularity was also an early lesson in the large numbers of people who can be entertained by dumb things. (Myself fully included, but I feel like the performer has to be at least somewhat self-aware of the dumbness before I can enjoy it. Otherwise I’m worried that they’re just as dumb as their art.)
To sum up that paragraph, Gallagher is terrible. That’s why I found his interview with intellectual hipster bastion The A.V. Club so utterly compelling: the interviewer took a completely awful performer, gave him enough rope to hang himself about eight times, and got a really curious and entertaining read out the other end. It does a great job of communicating the subject’s lack of talent without ever directly touching on it, simply by giving a man who smashes things for entertainment the space to rant about the celebration of mediocrity.
Golf clap to you, David Wolinsky, for recognizing when less is more to make your point effectively.
Today I got a letter asking me to subscribe to the Washington Times newspaper, the Rev. Sun-Myung Moon-backed conservative oracle. I don’t know how I got on their mailing list, as I’m the type (both actual and demographic) who’s unlikely to respond positively to a printed quote from Rush Limbaugh that “The Washington Times is a paper I can’t do without.” But the whole thing provided some unexpected fun.
First the letter noted how the liberal media doesn’t care to report the real news that affects people like me, and that the New York Times now has a section of the paper devoted entirely to corrections. (Don’t all newspapers have this? “Section” in this case just means, “A few paragraphs on the back of page one like newspapers have done for decades.”) But the stones were hurled powerfully out of the glass house when the same letter disparaged — not once, not twice, but thrice — the terrorist-loving platitudes of one “Barrack [sic] Obama”.
Sadly for the consumer marketing team at Washington Times, they can confuse the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee with military housing all they want and it won’t make much of a difference in my subscription status. After all, the liberal media thing has been working out pretty well for me.