January 19, 2004
DANGEROUS MORON
"At what point," asks the Melbourne Age’s Terry Lane, "should we start to become concerned that the President of the United States is a dangerous moron?"
I don’t know, Terry. The point at which he wins two wars? The point at which he liberates two nations? The point at which he evaporates Osama bin Laden and captures Saddam Hussein? The point at which he steamrolls the next US election? Lane should be more concerned about The Age, which thinks it wise not only to run his own tragic columns but also to devote 936 words to the issue of a book shop moving from Acland Street to Swanston Street.
(Via Gnu Hunter)
Posted by Tim Blair at January 19, 2004 02:34 AMYou know that this just might be a piece of jaded journalism, when the only source of information quoted is from an LSD brain dead author at The San Francisco Chronicle.
Eight years it lasted, this luxuriously large space with its soaring split ceiling - part massive deco curve, like a surging wave of cream, part lofty charcoal heights, pierced with long-drop fans.It was a place of serendipity, of chance meetings and discoveries, of stories shared.
Oh my god, what lousy, cliché-rotted writing. This journalist's home must look like one of those places the health department is always having demolished because the inhabitant had ten rooms stuffed with a lifetime of things he couldn't bear to throw away, such as dead cats and food wrappers. ("The steak this piece of maggot-infested wax paper once held reminds me of a girl a friend of a friend almost had a date with. How can I throw it away?") Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 19, 2004 at 04:09 AM
That's from the bookstore article, by the way. And I forgot to mention, the writing in that article is the same style porn-novel writers use ("he gazed at the creamy swell of her thighs smeared with whorls and dots of chocolate sauce, her flesh billowing out of the pulled-taut amethystine satin garter straps like whipped cream overflowing the translucent waxy edge of a latte cup, and remembered the night at Border's when he had picked up a hooker with tawny, waist-length tresses that barely concealed her firm, rounded buttocks that were wrapped tightly in fuschia-hued latex hotpants...")
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 19, 2004 at 04:09 AMAt first I thought the excerpt Andrea posted was from the article about about "moron" Bush, lamenting the eight years of luxurious creamy Bill Clinton.
Posted by: aaron at January 19, 2004 at 04:39 AMI'm not the same Aaron who provided the nice description of the shocker in the previous post, btw.
Posted by: aaron at January 19, 2004 at 04:41 AM"he gazed at the creamy swell of her thighs smeared with whorls and dots of chocolate sauce, her flesh billowing out of the pulled-taut amethystine satin garter straps like whipped cream overflowing the translucent waxy edge of a latte cup, and remembered the night at Border's when he had picked up a hooker with tawny, waist-length tresses that barely concealed her firm, rounded buttocks that were wrapped tightly in fuschia-hued latex hotpants..."
Don't stop now, Andrea!
Just sent this off to the Age:
To whom it may concern:
I just finished reading your article written by Terry Lane, and I must ask: Is he serious? I am having difficulty determining if this is in fact some sort of parody, as his "sources" are laughable, the writing mediocre at best, and, as far as I can tell, he does not appear to have any qualifications regarding the assessment of IQ. On the other hand, I am a licensed psychologist, and if it helps, you may inform Mr. Lane that an informal estimate of President Bush's IQ would be above average, based on years of having administered such tests. Feel free to have Mr. Lane contact me should he desire any education on the issue -- it is certainly apparent that he needs it. If, however, this was an attempt at humor, please accept my apologies.
Jeremiah Dwyer
See, always willing to help!
Posted by: Jerry at January 19, 2004 at 05:48 AMOh, I'll let you guys finish. Read the bookstore article for pointers. (I'd say, "read some porn" -- but I don't want to assume you haven't. {innocent stare})
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 19, 2004 at 05:50 AMI figure having Bush as president beats having the moron who wrote the article as dogcatcher.
Posted by: JorgXMcKie at January 19, 2004 at 06:02 AM
Yep, that's right, just keep misunderestimating him...
Ar what stage should we start worrying that one of Australia's leading daily newspapers regularly publishes utter drivel written by a pathetic moron?
Posted by: Richard at January 19, 2004 at 06:15 AM("he gazed at the creamy swell of her thighs smeared with whorls and dots of chocolate sauce, her flesh billowing out of the pulled-taut amethystine satin garter straps like whipped cream overflowing the translucent waxy edge of a latte cup, and remembered the night at Border's when he had picked up a hooker with tawny, waist-length tresses that barely concealed her firm, rounded buttocks that were wrapped tightly in fuschia-hued latex hotpants...").
I love it when you talk dirty...
Posted by: Quentin George at January 19, 2004 at 06:23 AM"At what point," asks the Melbourne Age’s Terry Lane, "should we start to become concerned that the President of the United States is a dangerous moron?"
When you hear the words "I, Dennis Kucinich, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office..."
Posted by: Mike G at January 19, 2004 at 06:56 AM"At what point," asks the Melbourne Age’s Terry Lane, "should we start to become concerned that the President of the United States is a dangerous moron?"
The real question is who is the bigger moron, Terry Lane or his employers?
Posted by: cubanbob at January 19, 2004 at 07:07 AMThat's WOMEN'S porn. No guy reads that crap. See Lileks on the great male-female divide in this matter.
Posted by: Ron Hardin at January 19, 2004 at 07:50 AMI don’t know, Terry. The point at which he wins two wars?
At which point did George W. fight? I must have missed that. He must be pretty tough to win two wars all by himself. Hang on, wasn't there the world's most advanced/powerful/widespread armed forces ever or something? I'm sure they had something to do with it.
But seriously, calling the bashing of Afghanistan a "war" is stretching it a bit. As for how won it is, the Taliban aren't in power but they're not laying down either.
The point at which he liberates two nations? At which point has this happened? The Taliban aren't in power in Afghanistan, it's simply back in the hands of the warlords. Iraq is still occupied.
The point at which he steamrolls the next US election? Is this a prediction? Good on you for sticking your neck out. I think a win by GWB is likely, but "steamrolls"?
Posted by: fatfingers at January 19, 2004 at 10:31 AMOK, ff, how many states is considered "steamrolling?"
We should start taking bets.
As to Afghanistan, somehow I don't the their women would agree w/you. They are liberated from what they were living under. They do go to school and don't have to wear the burka. They can wear nail polish and makeup.
Posted by: Sandy P. at January 19, 2004 at 10:47 AMBush's SAT scores (1280, 95th percentile) suggest that, far from being a moron, he's actually rather intelligent.
Posted by: king of the world at January 19, 2004 at 10:55 AMDon't tell fatfingers. It would destroy his dream.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 19, 2004 at 10:59 AM"That's WOMEN'S porn. No guy reads that crap."
I dunno Ron. Some of the other guys here seemed to like it.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 19, 2004 at 11:10 AMAndrea,
Please, some more ...
You know what I mean - more of it please - if find it precious precciioouuussss my precciioouuussss ....
Posted by: Arik at January 19, 2004 at 11:27 AMOops, Bush's SAT score was acutally 1206 (right column, scroll down a bit).
Posted by: king of the world at January 19, 2004 at 11:38 AMKOtW,
Yeah, and Bush learned how to fly an F-104. That's something that any moron could do, right?
Terry Lane is a pompous, ponderous ass (not arse), from the Phillip Adams school of ABC Radio National interviewing, much given to pontificating and not much to listening to his interviewees. These tedious old bores all seem to end up at The Age, which must be the sunset home for terminally clapped-out hacks. Don't take him seriously - no-one else does.
Posted by: freddyboy at January 19, 2004 at 12:38 PMI don’t know much about Terry Lane but I can’t believe he would actually be paid for putting together this cut and paste article. This work is so poor that I take it that Terry is on some government funded work scheme, this is his first week and he is about 15 years old.
Posted by: Simon at January 19, 2004 at 01:02 PMWith just a quick look at whitehouse.gov one can easily learn that G.W. Bush has on his resume:
Yale University, bachelor's degree, history
Harvard University, Master of Business Administration
Now unless he ordered these degrees over the internet, it would seem to cast doubt on the moron charge. But then what would I know? I'm just a dumb Yank and not a omniscient journalist of Mr. Lane's caliber.
Posted by: MB at January 19, 2004 at 01:28 PMNot quite Andrea, we want pictures; not word pictures, real pictures. Quit straining our imaginations ...
Cheers
JMH
You want pictures of George Bush's degrees? (confused)
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 19, 2004 at 02:01 PMAndrea,
NO PICTURES - just more of your beautiful, seductive words flowing like silken tendrils over the scantily-clad feverings of my heated imagination as it bursts forth in a great sweaty upheaval of . . .
er, ah, gotta go now {sneaks off guiltily}
Posted by: Arik at January 19, 2004 at 02:24 PM[i]NO PICTURES - just more of your beautiful, seductive words flowing like silken tendrils over the scantily-clad feverings of my heated imagination as it bursts forth in a great sweaty upheaval of . . .[/i]
Is it getting hot in here or is it just me?
Posted by: Quentin George at January 19, 2004 at 04:19 PMSorry...that should be... (keep forgetting to use real html tags here, not the crap other boards have.feel free to delete above post)
NO PICTURES - just more of your beautiful, seductive words flowing like silken tendrils over the scantily-clad feverings of my heated imagination as it bursts forth in a great sweaty upheaval of . . .
Is it getting hot in here or is it just me?
Posted by: Quentin George at January 19, 2004 at 04:22 PMYou guys seem to be doing quite well on your own...
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 19, 2004 at 04:53 PMYou guys seem to be doing quite well on your own...
From a Mel Brooks movie:
Aristocrat (during the French Revolution): The peasants are revolting.
Flunkey: Yessir, they're disgusting
Posted by: Zhang Fei at January 19, 2004 at 05:57 PMSandy P., I don't know how many states constitutes a steamrolling. How many in a landslide? Plus, it isn't just the number of states but the percentage of voters that I think is relevant.
And I think you'll find that for the vast majority of women in Afghanistan, their situation hasn't changed much in years. In Kabul (in some suburbs) you might get away with nail polish, but not anywhere else.
Everyone else, especially Andrea Harris, I never said GWB is a moron. I just objected to Tim's ridiculous proof of GWB not being a moron. Of course, Tim never deigns to reply, but that's fine. He has you guys!
Posted by: fatfingers at January 19, 2004 at 07:38 PMIn Kabul (in some suburbs) you might get away with nail polish, but not anywhere else.
Hey fathead, at least you don't get whipped for trying to buy it anymore.
Everyone else, especially Andrea Harris, I never said GWB is a moron. I just objected to Tim's ridiculous proof of GWB not being a moron.
If you don't believe he's a moron, why do you need proof that he isn't? You, however, have proved yourself a moron on this blog many times, old boy.
Look fatfingers,
it's perfectly normal to say someone has "won" a war when he was merely the commander in chief of a victorious army.
In addition, Afghanistan had a genuine civil WAR, which was decided by US intervention, which Bush ordered.
Now a moron may also be capable of these things, but it's fair to assume that Tim was simply referring to the fact that Bush doesn't seem to fail very often.
Words from the mouth of Paul O'Neill! Fall to your knees and worship the almighty, the omnipotent, the faultless...oh, wait, I meant to say "God", not "Paul O'Neill"...this Midwestern fundamentalist has spent too many hours on his knees praying towards Virginia and, er, Virginia and not enough time in diversity training.
Posted by: Tongue Boy at January 20, 2004 at 12:15 AMfatfingers stated "it isn't just the number of states but the percentage of voters that I think is relevant".
Unfortunately for fatfingers, the U.S. federal electoral system proves him entirely wrong. Presidential candidates (yes, even Democrats!)conduct their campaigns accordingly, which is why some policicians skip one state to concentrate on another.
It seems in fatfingers world, if you can't win under the existing rules, make up new ones you like.
To paraphrase Sean Connory in the movie The Rock, "Losers whine about what's relevant-winners go home and read Andrea Harris".
Posted by: Biased Observer at January 20, 2004 at 12:17 AMPlus, it isn't just the number of states but the percentage of voters that I think is relevant.
Hurrah for you, Fat Fingers. We'll call you for your hat size when 3/4s of the state legislatures pass a constitutional amendment making you King of the United States. In the meantime, the correct answer is "No, the percentage of voters is NOT relevant." Thanks for playing, though.
Posted by: Tongue Boy at January 20, 2004 at 01:31 AMIsn't that Mel Brooks quote:
CountdeMoney (that's Mo-nay, Mo-nay): "Sire, the peasants are revolting!"
King: "You're telling me. They stink on ice. Pull!" (Bam! He shoots a peasant thrown into the air.)
Posted by: JorgXMcKie at January 20, 2004 at 02:30 AMAndrea: my comment didn't want to go due to something like "improper content" when I putthe right spaces in Countdemoney's name. Something about the combination of count and de. What's up?
Posted by: JorgXMcKie at January 20, 2004 at 02:32 AMJorg: I have MT-Blacklist on. The message that comes up tells you what to remove or fix so that it doesn't resemble a spammer's url. Yeah, some of them are really stupid. But there has been a rash of comment spam, and I got tired of removing it all.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at January 20, 2004 at 05:08 AMHahaaaa, rabid right-wingers are so hilarious when they fall over themselves trying to come up with convincing defences to provocative attacks like this. They take the bait every time!!!! And then like lemmings reel off their subject's list of qualifications and so-called accomplishments as if everyone assumes this supposed contrary evidence actually matters in the real world. Whether or not Bush is a moron, there's no doubt his defenders in this thread most certainly are.
Posted by: t at January 20, 2004 at 08:43 AMReading t's post at the end of this thread is wierd. It's kind of like walking through a noisy crowd at the pub, with various, vaguely related, conversational threads and when you get out in the hallway theres a completely paralytic hippie shrieking incoherent abuse at the wallpaper.
Just gotta step around him & continue on into the pisser ...
Posted by: Arik at January 20, 2004 at 01:36 PMmo·ron
Pronunciation: 'mOr-"än, 'mor-
Function: noun
Etymology: irregular from Greek mOros foolish, stupid
Date: 1910
1 : a mentally retarded person who has a potential mental age of between 8 and 12 years and is capable of doing routine work under supervision
2 : a very stupid person
- mo·ron·ic /m&-'rä-nik, mo-/ adjective
- mo·ron·i·cal·ly /-ni-k(&-)lE/ adverb
- mo·ron·ism /'mOr-"ä-"ni-z&m, 'mor-/ noun
- mo·ron·i·ty /m&-'rä-n&-tE, mo-/ noun
Quentin, when have I proved anything of the sort?
Maor, that's a good point. But it still doesn't mean Bush isn't a moron!
Biased Observer, you missed the key words "I think". I'm perfectly aware that to win the US presidential election you don't need to refer to percentages. Though in the context of the discussion of "steamrolling" and "landslides", I thought it relevant. One could win every state by one vote. Is that "steamrolling"?
I'm not making up rules. Try reading carefully next time.
Ditto the above for Tongue Boy.
Hi Arik! Good to see you here. I think you're wrong though. t's post is entirely in keeping with the general tone of this blog/forum. t is wrong as well. I'm not attacking provocatively. I'm just keeping the bastards honest.
Keep it coming!