Friday, April 15, 2011

Comedy Relief

Hack Matt Lewis, who typed at AOL but was fired or something following AOL's paying Huffington to take over their shitty sites & eliminate them (Nice work if you can get it, huh Adrianna?) landed on his feet at TheDC (Along w/ such luminaries as Mickey Kaus.) where today he comments on a column written by Reagan's secret sweetheart, Peggy Noonan. (Full load [if you dare] at Noonan's rosy site.)
I found the rest of the column a bit hard to follow, but it is worth noting that somebody prominent is saying Obama is likely to lose.
Compare & contrast: "Somebody prominent" & "rest of the column a bit hard to follow." We don't know if this says more about Matt's reading comprehension or Ms. Noonan's typing skills, but it raises the question, do reactionary pundits gain prominence by being difficult to follow?

Altered later (1819PDT, 15 April 2011). Can you spot the differences?


Whale Chowder said...

They sure don't gain prominence based on clarity of thinking or argument.

ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said...



bjkeefe said...

Jesus. Reading Matt Lewis? Who is talking about Nooners, to boot? You've got a stronger stomach than I do.

M. Bouffant said...

Edit Drone Notes:

We are simply a drone application regurgitating whatever appears in the reader.