There must be a lot of people who don’t have much to do out there (unlike us, who have plenty to do but who choose to do it while also going at each other hammer-and-tongs), because one of the articles I wrote for that blog which is now employing my deep, analytical skill at written bloviation, seems to have popped up over at Digg.
To my surprise, the folks commenting on it seem to be much like us. That is, some of them like it, most of them hate it and a few of them seem to think I’m some sort of “I love Obama fanboy.” Well. How can a good conservative top that accolade?
You libbies here in LR will probably like it more than the righties, I’d say. Remember…I only put quill to parchment based on what the site editors want to say in the article. It’s also penned using my *nom de plume *mainly so as to avoid any bitter feelings emanating from the more established hacks at the New York Times or Newsweek over all the readership I’m going to be stealing from them ;-))
**
T.
I like hanging with fellow low-lives. Hoity-toity pretension gives me a rash Besides, I’d rather be with you guys than with the finest people I know (hee-hee).
Interesting article. I just want to make one comment about your blog, and that’s the fact that a lot of your articles don’t have any links to the material you’re writing on. I had to google it before I saw a link in the comments section of that Obama article.
I’ll pass that along to the site proprietors. I’m just a writing-for-slave-wages, galley-rowing-drone with no real relationship to it other than the fact they make me deliver three 500-worders a week, at present Though I have high hopes of graduating to the bigs, where I write five 500-worders a week and make more than a buck per 100 words (hahahahaha!).
Wouldn’t it be “dug”? Switch hit politically, and next thing you know the spelling ability goes to shat.
My wife says I’m whoring myself out. I tell her I learned how to do that when I went to law school those many years ago. (hee-hee).
Actually, having gone there is beginning to pay off. I never had a desire to do anything related to the law, don’t get me wrong, but it (law school) taught me how to argue both sides of an issue, though I’m a piss-poor devil’s advocate, generally. Besides, it was a CBA institution, which puts it right up there with one of those Andorra degree mills in terms of prestige (hahaha!)
You make the most sense. I was trying figure out what it’s called when you attract the attention of the Digg denizens, and I just couldn’t, so I looked for some sort of Internet verb I could make up out of thin air. “Dugg” has a much more formal air about it. Sweet.
I’d say. Remember…I only put quill to parchment based on what the site editors want to say in the article.
So you’re a whore who’s willing to sell out your core beliefs for a couple of bucks and/or some attention from the readers of a relatively obscure website?
editted to add: Damn, I wrote that before I read what your wife had said. She sounds like a smart lady!
Oh, I can argue intelligently from any point of view I choose - and I actually sympathize with many points - but the home I’m usually most comfortable in is Conservatism. And not that namby-pamby George Will style, either. But the world isn’t black and white (though I do believe in actual good and evil), and we have to live IN it, as opposed to ON it, to understand that (and thank YOU, Walt Whitman).
Anyway, my writing assignments the last few days have been on more humorous things: A transgendered and sex-reassigned 41 year-old wife who exercised her 73 year-old husband to death in a swimming pool and later copped to a reckless homicide plea, and today’s, which is about a man in the UK who got 20 weeks in the clinker for whistling. It’s a lot more complicated than would seem, though, so I’m trying to figure out how I’m going to handle the commentary. Do I go with the “Are you shitting me?” angle, or do I take a deeper look at our relationships with each other in an increasingly uncivil society? I like the second option better.