obvi

Yeah, man, totally. It's so ridiculous that the news is dominated by conservatives! I mean, where can progressive viewpoints even get exposure these days?!?! Dissent is being totally crushed!

the simon cowell of indie rock

John Roderick, from one of my favorite bands, The Long Winters, blogged his experience at Bonnaroo this year. It's awesome, cos he's such a hater sometimes, and he can't stand hippies. Anyway. Here's what he thinks about The Hold Steady, which, he's totally right:

The Hold Steady
These fellows have a rabid popularity that leaves me deeply conflicted. Although their live show is undeniably full of energy, full of engagement, and full of whimsy, their music is full of s--t. ...
I felt like I was at a dot-com Christmas party and a bunch of drunk webmasters got up on stage to jam, with the company cut-up rapping their mission-statement out of a three-ring binder. And everyone at the party said, “Whoa, those guys are actually good. They should form a band.”*

do it, beetch!

Girl-on-girl action, Abe Vigoda, butt-sniffing... Yes!

It's Triumph at the Tony awards!

lolprez

Becuase I'm fair and balanced...

lolgorez

The more things change... Or maybe the other way around. This is too like Bizarro-world to even try to explain. You'd think it was Cheney c. '02, if you couldn't see the well-coiffed dude yerself. But oops, wrong Bush.

"Just so we’re clear on this, the 1992 version of Gore accused Bush 41 of lying by minimizing the threat that Saddam posed to the US and the world. The current version of Gore accuses Bush 43 of lying by overstating the threat that Saddam posed to the US and the world. A competent MSM would ask Gore to explain why he’s such a Goldilocks on such a difficult issue, if naked politics can’t explain it."*


Man, I'm still watching as I type this... it just gets better and better! The CIA! Terrorism! Nuclear weapons! Condescending laughter! Love it! LOVE IT!!!

it's all a big nothing

I find myself comparing Chase's blackout to the scene in Alfred Hitchcock's Frenzy in which a serial killer enters the apartment of his next victim. The door shuts and the camera starts winding slowly down a staircase as the audience waits for her scream. The camera reaches the ground floor. No scream. It backs out the front door. No scream. The sounds of the old Covent Garden (back when it was still a vegetable market) come up. No scream. Then Hitchcock cuts away. But Hitchcock isn't saying, "I'm not going to tell you whether the woman was killed." He's saying, "I don't need to tell you whether the woman was killed, because you already know. Of course she got killed. He's a serial killer, for Pete's sake!" Frenzy was Hitchcock's second-to-last film, and his last great one, and that tracking shot is the distillation of a half-century's experience crafting suspenseful narratives. *

Probably the most credible explanation I've seen to this point.

one nation under dog

I hate everything.

marriedtothesea.com

no title... just gonna let the awesomeness roll