November 01, 2004


Roger L. Simon attends a Hollywood dinner:

Naturally, the subject of the election came up and I decided - maybe it was the vodka - to let it rip and say I was voting for Bush. One woman shrieked at the top of her lungs. The others just looked at me in incredulity.

Lots of fun on this in Roger's comments, including an update on Christopher Hitchens: "An email from Christopher Hitchens to my friend Ron Radosh indicates that Hitchens's comments on the election in Slate, which we posted here, were actually intended as an endorsement of Bush not Kerry as the editors indicated. When my daughter first sent me the Hitchens comments I told her they didn't look like an endorsement of Kerry to me, but then she sent me the Slate headline which indicated that they were. Now the record is clear. Hitchens is voting for Bush."

UPDATE. A prominent Wall Street Journal commentator is opposed to Bush's re-election.

Posted by Tim Blair at November 1, 2004 02:56 PM

Way to go, Treacher!

Posted by: Sortelli at November 1, 2004 at 03:24 PM

Similar to Tom Wolfe's sentiments in this article.

Posted by: bongoman at November 1, 2004 at 03:44 PM

yah, but is it a trojan horse that shits twenty dollar bills?

Posted by: roscoe.p at November 1, 2004 at 03:53 PM

Good job, Jim "The Trojan" Treacher! I like this one comment from ....

"If you can't see this article for what it is, I have very little hope for intelligent discussion here. "

Posted by: The Real JeffS at November 1, 2004 at 03:57 PM

Give them Puce.

Posted by: gubbaboy at November 1, 2004 at 04:11 PM

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Jim Treacher rocks.

Posted by: TIMKS at November 1, 2004 at 04:25 PM

Shrieking at one's opponent can actually be very therapuetic, but only if you're in the right and they're woefully, woefully wrong.

Mr. Simon, like many others, is coming out of a very dark hole, slowly but surely, and should be warmly encouraged by every right-thinking person.

Next stop: Iran!

Posted by: geezer at November 1, 2004 at 04:37 PM

9. Two words: You. Are. Dumb.
Grabbing guts funny. Reminded me of early high school when class dunce announced: "You are dumb Slatts, D-U-M dumb!"

Posted by: slatts at November 1, 2004 at 04:43 PM

What is the world coming to when the WSJ thinks you need to put a satire warning lable on obvious satire. Whose supporters do they think will be fooled without it?

Posted by: Pedro at November 1, 2004 at 05:30 PM

What is the world coming to when the WSJ thinks you need to put a satire warning lable on obvious satire.

I once would have agreed with you but now that I've spent the last two years reading the journalistic stylings of Robert Fisk, John Pilger, Michael Moore, Margo Kingston and the assorted lunatics on the Democratic Underground, I think it probably is a good idea to point out that it's satire.

Posted by: Randal Robinson at November 1, 2004 at 05:54 PM

That Lucianne thread Threacher linked to is hysterical. I know we're the party of the Common Man and all, but crime in Italy!

Posted by: Brian at November 1, 2004 at 06:14 PM



Posted by: Brian at November 1, 2004 at 06:19 PM

Did they just add that "this is satire" warning to Treacher's piece in the last few hours or did I miss that on the first read through?

Posted by: Sortelli at November 1, 2004 at 06:38 PM

i'm not sure where to put this, but: a few of us Sydneysiders who happen to be on Karl Rove's payroll are having a get together at the Rocks on Wednesday night to celebrate or mourn the US election results. if anyone's interested in coming, email me :)

Posted by: seph at November 1, 2004 at 07:16 PM

What time in Australia will we start to get US Election results coming in?

And what's a good place where I'd be able to see them online?

Posted by: Quentin George at November 1, 2004 at 09:06 PM

Obviously, some WSJ readers do not get Treacher's satire, while internet commentators are up to it like dogs to a thrown bone.

But then WSJ readers have comprised the engineroom driving the world's best economy - leading to the conditions everyone in the world is benefiting from - therefore they might not be up to speed on internet satire - so cut them a little slack, hmm?

Posted by: ilibcc at November 1, 2004 at 09:17 PM

#11 Bush invaded Iraq for oil and I havenít gotten my oil voucher yet. Stupid Frenchmen got oil vouchers for millions of barrels and red blooded Americans get nothing.

Posted by: perfectsense at November 1, 2004 at 09:24 PM

I find it highly amusing that Treacher's stuff has to be labeled as satire clearly (and I believe Bill at INDC journal has had to do that, too)... not because regular readers of the site are confused, but because there are enough people out there saying these things seriously that one doesn't know where the author stands.

I don't think IMAO or protein wisdom have had to put labels up (and I know the Onion doesn't), but I still find it so funny to read comments from people who don't get it.

But then, I've been to DU only a few times in my life. I guess those who have been exposed to it more might think these comments are real.

Posted by: meep at November 1, 2004 at 09:53 PM

You have to read the comment thread in Jim's original post to see why the WSJ people figured better safe than sorry. (Betcha they still get 50,000 outraged emails.)

Posted by: Andrea Harris at November 1, 2004 at 10:20 PM

Please tell me that Bush got the all-important Puce endorsment. Didn't he? It's our only hope if we've lost Treacher and the WSJ. I'm inconsolable until I KNOW we've got Puce in the bag.

Posted by: Melissa at November 1, 2004 at 10:29 PM

If democrats had to pay a compulsorary WSJ license fee in order to read newspapers, then they would be about half as angry as I am with the BBC's constant campaigning for Kerry.

P.S. You can tell satirants from normal moonbattery by the lack of spelling mistakes.

Posted by: Rob Read at November 1, 2004 at 10:31 PM

Who is this Treacher man-woman? He talk much sense. Bring down bastard Bushes of world better than Kos do. I write Kos see if he run Treacher. Ha ha Tim Blair, your type finished now that Treecher in Wall magazine.

Posted by: Scott Campbell at Blithering Bunny at November 1, 2004 at 11:12 PM

Woah, I remember Lucianne. And now I also remember why I stopped reading it (right about the time the picture of the lady was replaced by the picture of the eagle).

Posted by: tachyonshuggy at November 1, 2004 at 11:44 PM

"I don't think IMAO or protein wisdom have had to put labels up"

Neither have I. But I don't mind that Taranto did.

Posted by: Jim Treacher at November 2, 2004 at 12:10 AM

heh. what a hoot.

tomorrow will be a nervous day in binglandia...

Posted by: Mr. Bingley at November 2, 2004 at 12:23 AM

The comments were funny, too. I particularly liked the "That's not funny" ones. They reminded me of this joke:

Q: How many radical feminists does it take to change a light bulb?

A: That's not funny.

Posted by: Ernie G at November 2, 2004 at 12:47 AM

Q: How many radical feminists does it take to change a light bulb?

A. Heaps. One to actually change the globe and the rest to workshop the long-term effects of the aggressive intrusion on the socket.

Wait, can I say that..? No ? How about this..

Q. What's the difference between a radical feminist and a wheelie bin ?

A. A wheelie bin gets taken out once a week.

Call me un-reconstructed, call me old-fashioned. Just don't call me late for dinner.

Posted by: jafa at November 2, 2004 at 01:24 AM


Your dinner is ready. Unthawed frozen fishsticks are nutricious and chewy.

Posted by: not a radical feminist and not a caterer by anatomical decree at November 2, 2004 at 04:24 AM

nutritious. It's a woman's right to be creative with spelling.

Posted by: still not a radical feminist at November 2, 2004 at 04:26 AM

You bitch, after all I've done for you, that's the best you can do !

'What have I ever done for you ?!...'

I'm talkin' to you aren't I..?

Posted by: jafa at November 2, 2004 at 04:34 AM

OK, jafa, NOW i'm a radical feminist!

Posted by: radical feminist who still likes men at November 2, 2004 at 04:44 AM

That's your problem.

Posted by: jafa at November 2, 2004 at 05:07 AM

"That's not funny."

Posted by: rad at November 2, 2004 at 07:15 AM

I tried to post the following at I hope you don't mind if I stick it here. Please excuse the vitriol -- it was for another blog after all.

As an ardent admirer of the USA, and especially of the spirit of its founders, I can't begin to tell you how delighted I was to read the reactions here. You may be acquainted with the recent activities of some of my fellow Britons, in particular the spectacularly stupid, Guardian-inspired, own-goal stunt perpetrated on the voters in Clark County.

I mention this with the thought that it might be a consolation to some of you posters here to know that an inability to see oneself as others might is a characteristic not confined to the American branch of Bien-pensantista Party.

Of course, those fellow countrymen of mine I mentioned above are also self-righteous, self-loathing, sanctimonious, anti-American, wittering-cretin, left-liberal ideologues. And I winced with embarrassment when they exposed their mean souls to decent Americans in Ohio. A hundred years ago we would have kept them* safely in the attic away from sharp implements Ė you know pencils, that kind of thing.

Yes, I was delighted. I was beginning to think we had a monopoly on supreme stupidity. I'm heartened to see direct evidence to the contrary Ė that there are other nations with factions in the race to the bottom besides my own and those festering pustules of demagoguery on the mainland of our benighted continent.

But more: I was delighted also to see that a fair number of the posters here were clued in and very sensible. Good. Some of us recognise we have a common problem. Itís a start.

Meanwhile, Iíll continue to enjoy the laugh. Great fun. Thank you.

God bless America.
George W Bush for President.
(But I really donít want to interfere. You decide.)

Very best wishes,
* British cretins to the attic, not Americans of course. Ed.

Posted by: JamesUK at November 2, 2004 at 08:16 AM

Thanks for your best wishes for the US and Bush and really for all of Western civ, JamesUK.

Posted by: radically anti anti-American at November 2, 2004 at 08:54 AM

Bienpensantista Party. Lol!

Posted by: Michael Lonie at November 2, 2004 at 12:19 PM


The polls open in the US at 7:00 am Eastern Standard Time on November 2. Polls typically close at 8:00 pm in each time zone, and all polls (aside from Hawaii) will be closed by 8:00 pm, Pacific Standard Time (where I live).

Oh yeah, and for some reason, November 2 in the US is November 3 in Australia.

If you're in Australia, you should start hearing preliminary election results for the East Coast about 20 hours from the time identified at the bottom of this post (I'm not even going to TRY to calculate LA/ Sydney time -- sorry). And don't forget that the East Coast is a Kerry stronghold, so the initial vote counts will probably not favor Bush, regardless of the eventual outcome.

Posted by: Sean at November 2, 2004 at 02:57 PM