So I landed a gig writing for National Lampoon. I must say, it’s surreal working for them and I feel somewhat out of place considering I’m not even close to being in the league of John Belushi. That being said, I do have one thing going for me… I’m not dead.
Hope to see you folks over there and at some random point, I’ll be revamping the show entirely.
Thank God football season is back.
Howard Stern, a benefactor and collector of fine stutterers, kicked off the NFL season by introducing us to Buffalo Bills cornerback, Ellis Lanksder. I don’t know how to end this paragraph really, but, I can imagine some parallel between Lanksder’s speech and the way the Bills like ummm… su… su… su… suck my balls.
Show Cancelled! Watching UFC fight w/ my boys.
9:22 Three attorneys who all represent Joe and Katherine Jackson. Basically, they’re about to feel how Michael felt when Joe punched and probably molested him. That’s what his will is for. Which just popped up. Like Michael’s manhood at a Barney show.
9:25 Attorneys filed paperwork before knowing a will existed. That’s because when the will is fully disclosed, Michael will be giving it to Joe and having the last laugh. The will will control. Not Joe. Joe gets shit.
9:27 Joe Jackson was a “loving father.” By “loving” he means sodomizing a child with a broomstick.
9:28 I’m shocked. The Jackson attorneys do not see a conflict of interest. One fine barrister represented Michael, Joe, Katherine, The Family… I can’t see any possible disputes there. Except maybe the lawsuits or allegations of Joe punching 10 year old Michael in the face.
9:29 King calls these attorneys “legal eagles.” These are those sorts of eagles who fly into a pile of horse dung and search for worms and rhinestones.
more about "It’s A Twister! It’s A Twister: Ope…", posted with vodpod
WordPress is unable to press the video you must see before reading this. Kindly click:
HBN: 7 Hypocritical Moments in Fox’s Letterman/Palin Report (VIDEO: OR GET THE CLAP)
How do I love/hate thee? Let me count the ways…
1) Gladstone, a brilliant satirist and humorist from Cracked.com, tells it like it is (from Ali’s perspective) on the whole Letterman/Palin faux debacle. A “debacle” undeserving of a French adjective or, in Palin’s case, a word with more than one syllable — like, “debacle.”
2) Remember kids, this blog is about me. Gladstone is a friend of “Unsuable Signal” and one of the funniest guests we’ve ever had. So, check out the episode where we had callers from Ireland and attempted calls from Australia. Since Australians are well known Commies — not a total loss. I mean, they do control Blog Talk Radio. We also have the beginnings of my radio career where my well timed Tourette’s Syndrome with coprophiliac features came in quite handy.
3) Dennis DiClaudio wrote a piece about myself and Gladstone on Comedy Central’s Indecision. This of course, induced a massive nerdgasm catapulting me into a month-long state of euphobia.
4) Sweet Irony: As you may or may not know, Tommy Christopher landed a gig at Asylum today. Totally Awesome! Even Awesomer? On the front page today I noticed Gladstone’s Hate By Numbers series along with Tommy’s first article. What I’m certain neither of them know, until perhaps now, is they have polar opposite views on Letterman’s “apology.” To sum up Tommy’s position (with a bit of conflation): Dave’s a statutory rapist:
Letterman’s attacks were made in an exponentially larger, broader forum, and included the statutory rape of a minor child. They cannot be taken down or redacted.
Tommy knows my position. It’s complex. Dave’s not a rapist. He’s a Meth addict.
6: Gladstone and Tommy need to hook up. They can give each other cyber-Chlamydia. Or genital warts. Two hysterical STD’s.
That’s loving hate by numbers. And that’s all.
9:00 RECAP Janice had an emergency: She couldn’t take a dump for seven days. New Sheriff in town — John Salley. Name of town: Rockridge.
Welcome To The LiveBlog of “Celebrity” Day 16.
The two hosts are in the jungle with a plasma.
9:03: John’s first day as captain. Sanjaya is a dirty pig. Tell us something we don’t know about that fuckstick.
9:04: John’s “cracking the whip” according to Holly. You know, she’s right. Black men are often pegged with “cracking whips.” John’s a total cracker.
9:05: So far, Janice has not pooed.
9:08: Patti Blagojevich just wiped her behind with a batch of dead crickets. Whoops. That was my imagination.
How do you begin an article about “hate-fucking” famous conservative women?
A first sentence ought aspire to reach out and grab the reader’s larynx, but, the thinking dude’s writer I am does not want to employ some tawdry ploy such as that. Further, I just can’t think of a hook to really encapsulate the gravamen of the forthcoming. At the moment, I think it better merely to set out and calmly explain the issue. It has to do with doing it.
Some Guy (link removal explained in the previous article I shall not link to) from Playboy ran a column of the top 10 conservative women he would like to “hate-fuck.” Guy deftly entitles his article, “So Right, It’s Wrong.” Personally, I had never thought of this play on words. Hmph. Better press on.
In a spirit of love, peace, and harmony (values all Americans share) the author elucidates a novel theory of working across party lines. A way to reach out and touch:
Michele Bachmann
Who: Bachmann is a lusty congresswoman from the Twin Cities who’s got some great twins of her own. She’s rumored to have a Clinton-level libido, and with that batshit-crazy look in her eyes you just know she’s a screamer.
How Could You? She’s called for McCarthy-esque investigations into the patriotism of her fellow congressmen, encouraged armed revolution against the White House-backed cap-and-trade proposal to reduce carbon emissions and suggested an AmeriCorps bill would lead to re-education camps. We could go on.
The Hate Fuck Rating: Chemical castration has begun to look appealing.
Abashedly I admit, I read Playboy almost exclusively for the content. “For the articles:”
The magazine’s roster of contributors was as distinguished as any in English-language journalism. Vladimir Nabokov, John Cheever, John Updike, Irwin Shaw, William Styron, Gabriel Garcia Marquez and such cartoonists as Dedini, Barsotti, Kliban: they could be the front table at a New Yorker banquet. Skeptics suspected that Hefner got the second-best from the best, or work the New Yorker had rejected, and that Playboy settled for B material from the A team in order to appropriate their literary celebrity. Some folks in publishing had a dismissive term for Playboy fiction: “shit from names.”
But that depends on your definition of shit. In the 60s and 70s, much New Yorker fiction had a sere, affectless style — embodied (or disembodied) by the stories of Donald Barthelme — that spoke to a narrow band of Manhattan intelligentsia. Playboy spread its net to include all forms of fiction, from Styron and Ken Kesey to the science fiction of Ray Bradbury and Philip K. Dick. Further, The New Yorker could intimidate readers into accepting its crabby tone, because the magazine knew best; it really was written for a certain kind of New Yorker. Playboy had to sell each story to consumers from every level of sophistication. They bought the magazine to look; often they stayed to read.
Yes. Something Wicked This Way Comes. Something for the wise fool apparently.
After hearing some of the outcry from the left and right, I must confess, I’ve never seen such division and inconsistency on the blogosphere. Certainly, Playboy’s (now defunct) policy of boning the likes of Michelle Malkin and Michelle Bachmann is something we can all get behind eh fellas?
Not so fast. Tommy Christopher, guardian of liberal values and gatekeeper of Conservative chastity-belts nationwide, trumpets a call to boycott Playboy and rightfully exposes Playboy’s surreptitious hatred of all women.
Over the years, “tasteful” porn dinosaur Playboy Magazine has been the subject of pop cultural debate for decades. Is the nudity exploitation, or
empowerment? Does the magazine celebrate women, or degrade them? If so, are the articles really worth all of that?
I received several of the answers via my Twitter feed this morning. Washington Times columnist Amanda Carpenter sent this jawdropper about the magazine’s latest feature:
“I’m in Playboy for GOP women they’d like to “hate f***” They didn’t even get my employer right. What should I do? Mon 01 Jun 11:51 via web
I’m steamed. That list is vile, insulting and WRONG on factual matters. Mon 01 Jun 11:54 via web” …
I outgrew my fascination for Playboy magazine the very instant I was able to purchase one for myself. Hopefully, any other men who claim to love women will kick the habit, too
What’s this? Empathy? Empathy for the plight of a woman? All women? Conservative women? By a man? Impossible. How dare Mr. Christopher step in the the pumps of even his most ardent rivals and try to imagine how it must feel to be objectified? What a jerk. And just what does Mr. Christopher mean by “‘Tasteful’ porn dinosaur?” I have often found porn dinosaurs to be a bit large a course for my dainty appetite.
Folks, I must be honest, I intend to follow Mr. Christopher’s advice about kicking the Playboy habit despite not having one. While I might have a different view on empathy, the argument concerning imminent destruction of my Playboy collection in the ol’ shoebox beneath the bed must go. For, in order to love women, I must never read Playboy again. Thus, I propose a bonfire of the maladies. Burn them. Burn them all.
Later, I hope to find a categorical policy on matters such as this like Mr. Christopher.
Suffice it to say, Mr. Christopher must not be swayed by The Right’s reaction at Hot Air and their “two Wrongs make a Right” theory on metaphysics and epistomology. (See the boldface? I can make that joke too! Maybe I’m Playboy’s next Ray Bradbury)
As Ed Morrissey reported, Playboy is now doing a feature called “Top 10 conservative women we’d love to hate f***.”
Playboy writes about conservative women in a way that would have the angry hags from the NOW picketing outside their bunny-clad doors if they did anything remotely similar about liberal women — though I don’t know whey they’d be so ticked off — it’s not like anybody from NOW would be on the list.
Figuring that one good spurn deserves another (after all, what liberal doesn’t like “fairness”?), I thought I’d return the favor.
Oh sweet vengeance! Blow that Hot Air baby. Show me the money shot…
From Comedy Central
