O'Rourke wrote one of the finest paragraphs ever in political satire. It was in February of '91, after Chamorro's victory over Ortega. It is in his collection "Give War a Chance" Must read. It describes his thoughts on seeing Bianca Jagger the day after the election. "one bummed out show-biz lefty." Fantastic.

Happy birthday from another drunken Irishman.

In the same piece, he wrote:

"I'm not a liberal, so I'm not an expert in things I know nothing about..."

It's been my SIG line for most of the last 10 years...

I wonder if there is any prop in the world that provides a cheaper and more efficient means than the cigar for identifying a55holes. Phallic, cheaper than a Hummer and even smellier, the cigar gives the man who self-consciously poses for a portrait with one - clenched between the teeth or held aloft, as if in contemplation of important a55hole thoughts - a way to telegraph: "I may be a rich white guy, but I'm a slightly *rebellious* rich white guy."

Wow, another tolerant lefty weighs in on cigars!

Cigars do indeed taste better knowing each puff makes a lefty cry.

And the most influential P. J. O'Rourke essay in my youth was "Revenge of the Euroweenies," included in my second favorite O'Rourke book "Holidays in Hell." (My favorite has to be Parliament of Whores - especially his essay on the Department of Agriculture.)

I’ve always liked O’Rourke since discovering him in Car & Driver, of all places, when I was too young to drive or appreciate politics. Conservatives need to put him in the same pantheon as Buckley if for no other reason to remember that being a conservative does not preclude one from having a well developed sense of humor. Lefties need to do the same thing with whatever analogue exists on that side.

I have to say that the Twin Cities has the most humorless political spectrum I can imagine on this side of the Iron Curtain; of course, I never imagined that ‘bipartisan’ would mean ‘both Democrats and Greens’. Thank God (or Wellstone) for the bloggers of both flavors that manage not to ardently opine like they have a splintered stick up their butt.

Is this the guy who is so chronically un-funny on "Wait Wait... Don't tell me"?

Is that that radio show that's so chronically unfunny?

I tried pointing out to an online Left-Leaner that O'Rourke's writing was funny regardless of his political views... she couldn't get past the fact that she didn't like how he sounded in a radio interview in England.

(It might also have something to do with the fact that he sits on the right.)

I never realized he's on the radio these days.

Clown is right on the money!
Cigar...A55hole...Clinton
Cigar...Phallic (in the most literal sense)...Clinton!

"clenched between the teeth or held aloft, as if in contemplation of important a55hole thoughts - a way to telegraph: "I may be a rich white guy, but I'm a slightly *rebellious* rich white guy."

Yeah but clenched between teeth in a head that is in turn clenched between a buttocks a cigar is a way to announce: "I may be liberal, but I'm not an anti-tobacco liberal.."

"I wonder if there is any prop in the world that provides a cheaper and more efficient means than the cigar for identifying a55holes."

Ostentatiouly-displayed copies of "The NYTimes Book Review"?

Or the Utne Reader.

Clown is right on the money!
Cigar...A55hole...Clinton
Cigar...Phallic (in the most literal sense)...Clinton!

Posted by chriss at November 15, 2005 07:04 AM

You forgot
Cigar.....Castro (spits)

Doug and AK are both right: O'Rourke is chronically unfunny on Wait, Wait, which is chronically unfunny. It's a Russian doll thing, though, as NPR is a chronically unfunny network.

O'Rourke had a couple of funny pieces in the National Lampoon 30 years or so ago. Angryclown hasn't kept up with his work since then.

P.J. slim little volumes are always on the bedstead when I get grumpy and forlorn about nazi-liberals. His "Holidays In Hell" chapter on Poland is a hoot on 1980's Poland and Solidarity and the Commie government and popular culture then...he even like Joy Division in those pages..and loves red suspenders like myself...

A true wit...and a billiant mind to ferret out buggery and mendaciousness...

Let's get back on track here: "But taht morning, Bianca looked...her age. Here was a not very bright, discarded rock-star wife, trapped in the lonely hell of the formerly cute, one bummed out showbiz lefty."

Upon seeing her, I felt EVEN BETTER."

Mitch caught in another little fib...

From this blog...

"When I was 20-ish, I was pretty much a liberal (if not necesarily a Democrat)"

From Mith's post at http://www.sheilaomalley.com/

"21 years ago, I was a hard-core Democrat"

Which is it Mitch? Or maybe it's neither?

21 years ago would have been around the time the U.S., under Ronald Reagan was circumventing trade policy, violating arms-export controls, withholding information from Congress, and was funding an insurgent (aka: terrorist) group in Nicaragua.

21 years ago, anyone who was a self-proclaimed liberal OR a die-hard democrat wouldn't be as giddy in his adoration for Ronald Reagan as I've witnessed here...

So, does anyone remember a few months ago, a rather extensive thread regarding claims of being a Republican "BUT"...

Mitch, your "I was a democrat BUT..." is about as genuine and believeable as Clintons Lewinski denial.

"Wow, another tolerant lefty weighs in on cigars!"

You're all wrong, "Tina." Angryclown enjoys cigars! Only the best though. Cubans, personally hand-rolled by Elian Gonzalez in a humane forced-labor camp.

Doug,

I suggest a good fiber supplement.

I underwent a slow conversion, starting around the time of the "Malaise" speech, and ending with me voting for Reagan in '84.

You wanna catch me in a little fib?

"Good point, Doug".

There you go. Notify Eva Young. It'll drive a solid days' worth of posting.

Doug -- You sure caught Mitch there with the whole "liberal but not necessarily a democrat" vs. "hardcore democrat" thing. I'll never believe another word he writes!
In 1986 I posted a sign in my college apartment window: "Impeach Reagan." This was a few weeks before the Iran Contra scandal was exposed. At the time I thought I was prescient. Now I realize I was an idiot. My politics of the 1980's would be hard to classify along party lines. Technically I was a democrat, but I hated that label because democrats were far too conservative for me.
Those were dark, dark days for me, let me tell you.

So, just for my own edification, 21 years ago, in 1984, you weren't really a liberal OR a democrat were you... you had already undergone your conversion, right...?

But, just to be clear, in 1979, when Carter gave his speech, (the beginning of your "slow" conversion, when you were 16 years old if my math is correct...) you were still either a liberal or Hard-core democrat... Let me guess... you registered as a democrat when you were, what, 12... Maybe 13...? Did they set up a carboard box in the cafeteria so you could vote for Artie Link too?

Yes Mitch, I believe that you were like every other 16 year old... glued to the TV watching President Carter give the most important speech of his 3 year presidency... Rigggghhhhhtttt...

I'm guessing your parents were Democrats too weren't they Mitch...

"21 years ago would have been around the time the U.S., under Ronald Reagan was circumventing trade policy, violating arms-export controls, withholding information from Congress, and was funding an insurgent (aka: terrorist) group in Nicaragua"

Ah, the good old days. I knew I loved that man's politics, thanks for reminding me why. God, I miss him.

.

Doug,

If you have nothing better to do than audit my off-the-cuff statements about my political history, then I hope it brings you a rich cornucopia of satisfaction.

Yes, I listened to the malaise speech, live if memory serves. I paid plenty of attention to politics back then. Didn't you? Well, that's fine - but don't blame me for the intellectual sloth of your youth.

Yes, my parents were and are Democrats. If you've followed this blog for any length of time, you'd have seen that.

Although I became disgusted with Carter, and then with the Democrats' policy on defense, I still considered myself a liberal and a Democrat until sometime before the '84 election. It wasn't a Road To Damascus moment; just a slow realization that the Democrat Party was wrong on most of the things that mattered, that I didn't agree with them on much if anything (a few small sympathies lingered on for years), that the Democrats of the day were the intellectual second or third cousins of some really bad people, and that I belonged on the other side.

Are you trying to have some big Perry Mason moment here? Good luck with that.

There's probably a post in this somewhere.

Vobo: rut-roh...

http://www.bovious.com/pics/dabestprez.jpg

Nathan said,

"Ah, the good old days. I knew I loved that man's politics, thanks for reminding me why."

Yeah... The good ole days when a sitting President could break the law, lie to the American People and Congress and still keep his job...

Of course if he lies and has a (D) after his name... well, we just can't have any of that for corn sake...

"Yeah... The good ole days when a sitting President could break the law, lie to the American People and Congress and still keep his job... "

But it was only sex! And on his own time! And grand jury oaths really aren't that big a deal!

Um, Doug, the last president to actually (not in fevered liberal imaginings) break the law DID have a D after his name. Reality can be discomfiting, no?

Doug, please, please tell me you saw the irony in your words even as you typed them.

Brian,

ROTFLMAO, COM, !!!

Mitch said,

"But it was only sex! And on his own time! And grand jury oaths really aren't that big a deal!"

Geeee... I guess you're right Mitch. It's not as if Reagan had extramarital sex with some plump intern after a lond day of supplying an enemy of the United States with weapons... See, that would have just been wrong... I'm mean the whole sex thing...

Selling weapons to Iran though...? That's Reagans own business. What business is it of ours how he spent his free time?

Oh, and Nathan? Clintons crime was lying to a grand jury under oath... remind me again why both Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney agreed to testify in front of the 9-11 panel as long as ther were not under oath, there was no recording made and there was no transcript of the session?

Chriss said,

"Doug, please, please tell me you saw the irony in your words even as you typed them."

The irony?

Oh I see the irony... It's that a Democrat can impeached for breaking the law - lying to Congress and the American people under oath about a blowjob while a Republican President gets elevated to Sainthood for lying to the same Congress and the same American people about his involvememt in selling weapons to Iran.

Doug, those of you who worship at Temple Beth Wellstone shouldn't throw stones at those of us who worship at The Church of Saint Ronald. Instead, you should ask yourself: What Would Wellstone Do?

.

Nathan said,

"Doug, those of you who worship at Temple Beth Wellstone shouldn't throw stones at those of us who worship at The Church of Saint Ronald."

Why? Did Paul Wellstone sell Weapons to Iran and then take the proceeds to fund death squads and an insurrection to overthrow a democratically elected government?

I did not know that...

Doug - read your bumper sticker again. Think about it. Think about it, again.

Ann Coulter was snarky.

Paul Wellstone - as much as I hated his politics, God rest his soul - was NEVER snarky.

Your comments are snarky.

Unless you want to be known by the company you keep, keep reminding yourself: WWWD?

.

Nathan,

I do not drive a Volvo. I drive Ford and my wife drives a Honda. I do not have a Wellstone sticker on my bumper and neither does my wife. Never did. I do not have a Wellstone sign in my front yard and I never did.

Paul Wellstone and his followers are welcome to do whatever their little hearts desire.

I'm more concerned with the lemmings who follow a President who is an untreated alcoholic, talks to God, doesn't read newspapers and makes Jim Brady's speech and diction seem clear and understandable by comparison.

But hey guys, by all means - stay the course. No matter the costs... Stay the course.

Which part is hyberpole, Doug?

"Which part is hyberpole, Doug?"

Ummmm... you mean hyperbole? None of it was.

(I certainly meant hyperbole.)

If you mean to say you used no hyperbole at all in spite of your use of the words:

Lemmings, untreated alcoholic, Jim Brady's speech... if you aren't engaging in any hyperbole, something else must be read into your statements. It's good to know.

While thinking about it, what's wrong with talking to God? Why is that bad?

Badda,

Hyperbole is an exagerated form of speech. Like, for instance, Im so hungry, I could eat a horse.

Calling the followers of Bush lemmings is simply slang to describe those who mindfully follow a terrible leader off of a steep cliff.

Untreated alcholic describing Bush is a fact.

Comparing Bush's inarticulate, slured and bungled speech to the speech of a man who was shot in the head is a statement about severity of Bush's inarticulate, slured and bungled speech. It's also an indirect accusation that Bush is either drinking again or suffering from brain damage.

As for Bush talking to God, I concede. There is nothing wrong with talking to God but there is something suspect in claiming that God talks to you.

csHi. Cool theme, but this is interesting too: stocking slut
http://soiledpanties.getgirlfriends.com/
stockings and suspenders photography
http://soiledpanties.getgirlfriends.com/stockings-and-suspenders-photography.html
girls in stockings free
http://soiledpanties.getgirlfriends.com/girls-in-stockings-free.html
private pantyhose
http://soiledpanties.getgirlfriends.com/private-pantyhose.html
elegant stocking pics
http://soiledpanties.getgirlfriends.com/elegant-stocking-pics.html