That Don't Blow
how much DC blows.
I got an honorable mention for two of my submissions for the Philisophical Drag Queen Name Contest: Object D’Sartre and Spinoza Bottle. Yes, you may touch me if you like. Or just bask in the glow of my aura.
posted by Jimmy 7:10 AM
AHHHHHHHHHHH, THAT'S THE PUDDING
You simply must read this post from Willy. As an athiest who occasionally ends up in a church, I can completely identify with him. But I couldn't put it nearly as eloquently, so go read it.
posted by Jimmy 7:06 AM
An "occasional reader" of genehealy.com writes:
Just found your blog via the Agitator. I like.
One note on your 12/10 post called "Shoeless Gene". You say that: "This dude would be in serious danger of
getting added to my blogroll if he lived in DC and posted more often."
I'm an occasional reader of genehealy.com. Gene does in fact live in DC -- Mt. Plesant, according to some of his past entries. Perhaps you should add him.
Will do! Thanks for stopping by. As I had to delete my favorite BDSM-curious blogger for lack of posting (sorry Yagi), a space has opened up on the blogroll.
And next a cordial note from the editor of Brainwash in regards to my post about AFF and the seersucker conspiracy:
Thanks for your note. I obviously don't agree with you. First, Brainwash is more than just about politics or the "big issues" of the day. Second, Raul genuinely likes to eat good food at nice places and wishes more of his peers would look into this activity -- I sincerely doubt he's trying to impress Carl Rove or anyone else. I also don't get from Raul's article that he would have his peers eat out exclusively, just in addition to clubbing, barhopping, etc.
You're wrong in claiming that Ed Feulner started AFF; he did not.
Anyhow, if you're ever at an AFF event again, please introduce yourself, I'd love to meet you in person. And if you'd ever like to submit an article for Brainwash, I'd love to see it.
Looking into the Ed Feulner thing. The staff here at DC Blows regrets the error. I guess it is possible to be a 20-something that likes fine dining and regattas. But the article was still best read as a conservative self-parody.
And next, a retort from Mr. Damas himself:
I was in turns pleased, disappointed and amused by your response in “DC Blows” to my two latest columns in Brainwash.
I consider all criticism, especially that which exceeds the length of its subject, a form of flattery.
Now seeing as Jerry Brito has already handled your mischaracterizations and factual inaccuracies regarding Brainwash and AFF, I’ll just make some comments on your treatment of my two most recent articles.
To begin with, I don’t see how you could determine that I “personally (As opposed to via some third party?) offered to fellate Larry Ellison” in my previous column, even if you were “reading between the lines.” The Ellison/Turner comparison has been made by countless writers, as it’s not a difficult parallel to draw. Regardless, the line corresponds with your “everything sucks”/proto-punk ethos, so it shouldn’t have surprised me. (Just between you and me, Brad: Relying too heavily on those kinds of “insults” might raise the ire of those more politically sensitive than yours truly. Of course, you may just be trawling for dates, in which case I say have at it.)
I was at first bothered by your stereotyping of DC’s conservative set, but then you tipped your hand. Somewhere between reading about your self-described “bar-hopping hooligan lifestyle” and the listing of “important truths about life in your twenties,” which includes that old truism, “A dive bar is more fun than a fancy restaurant,” I realized you were just pulling my leg.
You had me going, though, you old joker!
How else to explain skirting my main point, restaurant checks are often much less expensive than bar tabs, only to trot out those well-worn clichés about blue-bloods and blazers? Ingenious. Who but the adept satirist could resurrect that exhausted “conservative vs. libertarian” quarrel, cloaked as a substantive, bullet point-worthy argument? Quite a stroke, there. And who but the finest wit could attack an acknowledged puff piece, insulting author, editor, publishing organization and membership? Hilarious!
Seriously, though, let’s get dinner some time.
ps: It’s no contest: Brooks.
Wow. In my post I called him a smarmy, pretentious prick. This e-mail sure proved me wrong.
posted by Jimmy 6:16 PM