well i have a heads up for you. if you want chuckles read nicholas confessore's "here's why the centrist deomcrat is feeling unloved." it's a perfect example of bad writing and filled with howlers. you'll find it on the back page of the week in review section of the new york times.
the patron saint of the centrist is the toad looking daniel patrick moynihan. infamous for his own war on social security at an earlier time and aided by the new york times.
does the timid, to use c.i.'s phrase, have a thing for bad hair? possibly. have you seen gail collins's hair -- super cuts would be a step up for the editorial page editor! but between the buck teeth and the bushy eyebrows, possibly her lack of hair 'style' is the least of her problems.
but the real reason the new york timid supported moynihan is because that's what they all do, attempt to snuff out the progressive spirit in this country. c.i. pointed out in an earlier post that while struggling to make it, they received a bail out from wall street with the apparent understanding that they would snuff out the progressive spirit sweeping the country in the early part of the 20th century. they did their damndest to do that. and they're still doing it.
keepin' it faux at the new york timid.
which explains father confessor's valentine to the likes of professional bad hair sporters
no-joe lieberman and 'let me have it both ways' ellen tauscher -- how you going to explain that anti-immigrant vote to the constituents, ellie?
the faux objective paper assigns faux reporter confessore to hum the praises of faux democrats and it's like a symphony of kazoos buzzing around in your head.
but when it comes to bad hair, tausher and liberman are mere pikers compared to their buddies at centrists.org.
poor little scotty payne thinks that comb-over is working. hint, scotty, it's not. no, it isn't. you're shedding hair faster than nbc's joey sheds viewers. might wanna rethink that comb-over.
then we go to jeffy lemieux. little jeffy's a big boy. looks exactly like you'd expect a man named lemieux to look. jeffy, you also get the vote for worst dresser. who but little big boy jeffy would think to mix a garrish, eye sore tie with a blue shirt and brown jacket. and little jeffy can't even fix his collar which is why you can't help but notice the shirt collars bulging out from the buttens. who dressed you, jeffy?
then we have maya macguineas who thinks 'power hair' means stealing from ann archer's limp look circa fatal attraction. not working out for you, is it maya? has anyone ever thought to suggest you consider a veronica lake, peak-a-boo hair style to cover that one eye that's so much smaller than the other? just asking. and the heavily padded shoulders of that jacket, honey, you are stuck in the eighties. no wonder your org cant get it's head out of its ass. though possibly working for mccain might explain it as well?
which brings us to eddie lorenzen who might want to be called 'big ed' but would have to first give up that peter pan, bowl cut hair do. does mommy still cut your hair in the kitchen, eddie? are you a big enough boy now that you don't need to sit on a phone book while mommy cuts your hair? horizontal striped tie, blue shirt with vertical white stripes and what appears to a dark shade of pea green jacket (maybe it just needs dry cleaning?) you're look is all you ... because no one else would have it.
folks, these are the fashion disasters who want to steer our party to the right. they'd be kicked out of applebeas but somehow they think they can be power players in d.c. it's sad. looking at them. real sad.
but while they plot their revenge of the nerds style comeback, be sure the new york timid will be along for the ride to cheer them on.
that's why nicky 'kiss ass' confessore quotes eddie on democrats and mentions eddie worked for loser-boy charlie stenholm (billie was once represented by charlie and boy she can write a blistering e-mail -- billie i love your spirit!) before stenholm lost his seat due to tom delay's great fiber purge of 2003. sort of gives you the idea that these 'centrists democrats' of the title and little eddie are working for the democratic party, huh?
here's what it says on the web site i've linked to, please note it carefully:
Centrists.Org is a non-partisan, non-profit, organization formed under section 501(c)(3) of the tax code, and dedicated to public education on vital public policy matters. Contributions to Centrists.Org are tax deductible.
non-partisan org, well you are who you play with. it's not enough that you all share bad hair and bad fashion sense, now you're all in the sandbox together. who knows what you're plotting now?
let's talk little ed a minute more cause he worked with 1 of the groups pushing privatization in the late 90s. what? you thought the bully boy got that idea all on his own?
no, you had corporate servents on the public dole selling out your interests long before the bully boy sleazed his way into the oval office. same org that little eddie's online bio claims also speaks proudly of their hard work to pass nafta.
are you feeling the love yet?
me neither.
by the way little edsie, care to explain to me why the group you have worked with thinks it okay to post online a statement to the president in 2001, a report (final report) but warns against quoting from it without permission? just wondering, edsie?
your buds made it public and it certainly effects the tax payers so i'm curious as to why your little 'circle jerk' (see bill keller, i can use the term too!) thinks it okay to post 'social security reform lelegislation developed by the national commission on retirement policy' but seems to think you can play the riaa clamping down on napster?
right there on the title page it announces that it's a report from the president's commission and gives the date 12-11-2001.
i would urge everyone to read the report that they retain quote rights to. it's good for a hoot. and you'll realize that lieberman, this is his crowd after all, didn't suddenly decide that maybe hanging with the bully boy on privatized accounts was the right thing to do, he and his kind have leaned that way all along.
back in the early days of the common ills, you could post comments to entries. members hated that because these centrists jack asses would come by and post things along the lines of 'there's nothing more than beautiful than a centrist democrat.' yeah, like leaves changing colors in autumn, nothing soothes the heart more than watching so-called dems morph into repubes-lite.
common ills community member keesha had a snapping comeback to that idiot and i wish could remember it but i'll just note that keesha told it like it was.
and i'll note for all these other fence sitters, the only thing you get from sitting on a fence is a pair of pants riding up your crack. not a pretty sight, is it? no.
but the timid and their nicholas confessore rush in, where wise men and women rightly refuse to tread, to let you know that the whole shutting out of these fashion and hair challenged repube-lites with a twise is just beyond cruel.
silly nicky closes his article with this howler:
as the ascendant republican establishment deepens its beltway roots, an old species, the self-consciously bipartisan centrist, searches for a niche. but the partisan centerist has already found one.
nicky's blowing smoke out of his ass but how else can you write a valentine to repube-lites?
nicky gets 1 thing right. powerbrokers did move the democratic party to the center (and sell out the soul of the party) in the 90s. and that did lead to the republicans moving further right.
for those who just don't get, when we move to the center to accommodate, the right moves further right. it's like a game of tag and the repubes keep getting away and moving the country increasingly right. which is why so many of us are arguing for a hard left from the democratic party. in this round of tag, let them be 'it' and chase us.
let me note that betty has another post up. it's excellent and it's the start of you understanding "bettina." i think you'll enjoy it:
And at the bottom of the second page, I read that he has a new book coming out and my first thought is, "I have not finished Thomas Friedman's last book! After I finish washing out his silk boxers, I still have to take all the ketchups he brought home from McDonald's and squeeze them from the packets into the large empty bottle because he says fine eating places like McDonald's have a better quality of ketchup than anything you can buy in a store." That may be true but my fingers ache from doing the same with mayonaise packets and from the hot sauce packets he picked up at Taco Bell.
I say to him, "Thomas Friedman, when your friends took us to Elaine's Friday, there were no ketchup packets to be seen."
Thomas Friedman explained that his friends cannot afford the finer places that he takes me too. And that since they insist upon picking up the check to have the honor of bragging that they dined with Thomas Friedman, he cannot very well suggest that they take him to McDonald's or Sonic or Taco Bell or any of the other high class places he takes me. I am sorry that his friends do not have the money he has.
But I have asked for a food processor forever now because Thomas Friedman is on a hummus kick and he has told me that food processors are "declasse" and that we do not waste his money on "crap." So I use this mortar and pestle to ground the sesame seeds whenever the hummus mood strikes Thomas Friedman with him urging me to be "faster" and "faster" the whole time.
also worth noting is c.i.'s hysterical 'clubbing with the new york times:'
Moving on. You realize you've hit the frou-frou, chi-chi, upscale club scene as you hear Somini Sengupta work in the word "ennui" while doing a poor job of concealing a self-satisfied smirk. (The headline writer merely apes her lead with "Fear, Ennui and Doubt Underlie Calm in Nepal's Capital").
Sengupta, baby, stick to the art galleries when trying to score with impressive vocab, okay? Striving for tome poem, but coming off like fourth rate Cole Porter ["Come to the Supermarket (In Old Peking)"], Sengupta offers such passages as:
On a recent Sunday afternoon,
as the market women sat on their haunches hawking cabbages,
and the riot police milled about with eyes darting this way and that,
Nepalis revolting against their king's emergency rule decree
straggled up the narrow alleys in ones and twos.
Walk on. Walk on.org. Note the poster art as you're dragged to the next club while you give it up to Angela Jimenez and whomever decided her photo was just the thing to accompany Andrew Jacobs' "AIDS Fighters Face a Resistant Form of Apathy." Apathy. AIDS. Even more deadly new strain.
Does it bring to mind two bodies pressed tightly against one another? Does your mind conjure a framed crotch shot in some sort of hommage to the Rolling Stones album cover Sticky Fingers? Well in the minds of "Girls Just Want To Have Fun" Angela Jimenez and the editor/s it conjures up exactly that. Like drunken revelers at karaoke night doing the stiff-neck-head-jerk while singing/slurring "She like to par-tay all the time," I doubt either Jiminez or the editor/s realize how much they've embarrassed themselves. Flee the club quickly before you're tainted by association.
check out betty and c.i. we need more laughter, especially when there's a point to it.
