Genghis on Debt Ceiling II: Return of the Boehner
Gallup: Obama 45, Romney 45
Fact That Things Suck Cited As Impediment To Re-Election
|
Genghis on Debt Ceiling II: Return of the Boehner Gallup: Obama 45, Romney 45 Fact That Things Suck Cited As Impediment To Re-Election |
Read |
Stalking a woman – on her wedding day – who spurned you is cause for termination in my book. And that’s exactly what Politics Daily legal analyst Andrew Cohen deserves after penning a column titled “On Her Wedding Day, Saying the Things Left Unsaid”
From WashingtonCityPaper.com:
Creepiest wedding gift in human history? You decide:
The present I humbly send her today is this column; this public note, this irrevocable display of affection and support and gratitude; this worldly absolution from any guilt or sadness she felt between the time she said no to me and the time she said yes to him. No one ought to have to carry that with them into a marriage. I showered her with as much love as I could muster when we were together. I still love her and always will. So I am only too happy to offer my toast to her now, one more time, before she takes her vows.
Politics Daily’s Andrew Cohen is obviously in a pretty weird place in his life right now. And he has decided to share it with us all! So let us count the backhanded compliments Cohen delivers, as “the great love of my life marries today and I am not the groom” [Thanks to Date Lab for the tip]:
* Crazy love: “not enough” or too much? And am I to blame for my own unhappiness, or are you? Oh, it’s probably me:
I had my chance, a few years ago, but did not realize until too late how fleeting my moment with her was meant to be. Whether it was my fault or hers, and, let’s face it, it was probably mine, I will wonder always about the life I might have had with the most loving and loveable woman I have ever known. Sometimes, I finally now understand, love, even crazy love, is not enough. Sometimes, as the romance novelists know, timing is everything.
What struck me quite hard is that in the column (which you can see here, until it is rightly pulled off the Internet) is that one word in the entire disturbed essay is highlighted. That word is “poison.”
I took a look at the page source and copy and pasted the HTML here:
I want to thank her, mostly, for rescuing me from hopelessness. When we met, back in the spring of 2005, I was nearly 40 and had been dating off and on for two years following an unexpected divorce. I had lost faith in relationships. I had given up on love. She arrived, unexpectedly, and showed me what was possible. She raised me up from the emotional dead. She drew out of me the
poison of divorce and betrayal. Eleven years younger but already more mature than me, she was dazzling, brilliant, funny, and sweet; she both gave and taught me patience and devotion and sacrifice. No woman before or since ever made me feel as desired, needed, beloved, appreciated as she did. No one has yet made me want her more. Some men live their whole lives without this kind of love. At least I had it for one brief, shining moment.
Politics Daily needs to immediately erase this column, and cut all ties to Andrew Cohen. This is beyond creepy. It’s stalking, if not worse.
Update: From comments: "I agree this is a weird, creepy column, but in Cohen's defense I doubt he had anything to do with "poison" being hyperlinked. That's almost certainly because of an automated ad-linker bot run by the host (in this case, AOL). He probably had no idea that would be linked until he saw it posted."
WKW: A cogent comment. Regardless, my opinion that Cohen has crossed a serious line and must be terminated remains.
Update 2: Lizzie Skurnick at Politics Daily has a rebuttal to Cohen, titled "How Not to Congratulate Your Ex on Her Wedding Day" that deserves a read.
Update 3: Cohen has no idea when to shut up.
–WKW
By Nancy Benac, Associated Press, May 16, 2012
After the nastiness of the Republican primary race, former candidates have collective amnesia about Romney disses
Note to self: you think you're so smart about this kinda stuff, but you yourself fell for it once again.....so much for all the prognostication about one of our political parties disintegrating from all the primary campaign animosity.
Pew Resarch Center for the People and the Press, May 15, 2012
For decades survey research has provided trusted data about political attitudes and voting behavior, the economy, health, education, demography and many other topics. But political and media surveys are facing significant challenges as a consequence of societal and technological changes.
It has become increasingly difficult to contact potential respondents and to persuade them to participate. The percentage of households in a sample that are successfully interviewed – the response rate – has fallen dramatically. At Pew Research, the response rate of a typical telephone survey was 36% in 1997 and is just 9% today. The general decline in response rates is evident across nearly all types of surveys, in the United States and abroad. At the same time, greater effort and expense are required to achieve even the diminished response rates of today. These challenges have led many to question whether surveys are still providing accurate and unbiased information [....]
On May 16, 2012 at 7:00 PM, the Ride of Silence will begin in North America and roll across the globe. Cyclists will take to the roads in a silent procession to honor cyclists who have been killed or injured while cycling on public roadways. Although cyclists have a legal right to share the road with motorists, the motoring public often isn't aware of these rights, and sometimes not aware of the cyclists themselves.
...
The Ride of Silence is a free ride that asks its cyclists to ride no faster than 12 mph, wear helmets, follow the rules of the road and remain silent during the ride. There are no sponsors and no registration fees. The ride, which is held during National Bike Month, aims to raise the awareness of motorists, police and city officials that cyclists have a legal right to the public roadways. The ride is also a chance to show respect for and honor the lives of those who have been killed or injured.
A new UCLA rat study is the first to show how a diet steadily high in fructose slows the brain, hampering memory and learning — and how omega-3 fatty acids can counteract the disruption. The peer-reviewed Journal of Physiology publishes the findings in its May 15 edition.
"Our findings illustrate that what you eat affects how you think," said Fernando Gomez-Pinilla, a professor of neurosurgery at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and a professor of integrative biology and physiology in the UCLA College of Letters and Science. "Eating a high-fructose diet over the long term alters your brain's ability to learn and remember information. But adding omega-3 fatty acids to your meals can help minimize the damage."
While earlier research has revealed how fructose harms the body through its role in diabetes, obesity and fatty liver, this study is the first to uncover how the sweetener influences the brain.
The UCLA team zeroed in on high-fructose corn syrup, an inexpensive liquid six times sweeter than cane sugar, that is commonly added to processed foods, including soft drinks, condiments, applesauce and baby food. The average American consumes more than 40 pounds of high-fructose corn syrup per year, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
"We're not talking about naturally occurring fructose in fruits, which also contain important antioxidants," explained Gomez-Pinilla, who is also a member of UCLA's Brain Research Institute and Brain Injury Research Center. "We're concerned about high-fructose corn syrup that is added to manufactured food products as a sweetener and preservative."
[Better write this down]
Christopher Doyon, a.k.a. Commander X, sits atop a hillside in an undisclosed location in Canada, watching a reporter and photographer make their way along a narrow path to join him, away from the prying eyes of law enforcement.
It’s been a few weeks of encrypted emails back and forth, working out the security protocol to follow for interviewing Doyon, one of the brains behind Anonymous, now a fugitive from the FBI.
Doyon, who readily admits taking part in some of the highest-profile hacktivist attacks on websites last year — from Tunisia to Orlando, Sony to PayPal — was arrested in September for a comparatively minor assault on the county website of Santa Cruz, Calif., where he was living, in retaliation for the town forcibly removing a homeless encampment on the courthouse steps.
The “virtual sit-in” lasted half an hour. For that, Doyon is facing 15 years in jail.
I agree this is a weird, creepy column, but in Cohen's defense I doubt he had anything to do with "poison" being hyperlinked. That's almost certainly because of an automated ad-linker bot run by the host (in this case, AOL). He probably had no idea that would be linked until he saw it posted.
Do you mind that I updated that post with your comment?
Not at all.
Such is the difference between two sides of the Atlantic.
You lot read it with cynicism and bile - yes, Wolfrum, if this entire piece on your column isn't an attempt to steal thunder, then I don't know what is - while we over here read it and most of us will nod knowingly.
Personally, I think it was rather brave. I wish more men could put their thoughts to women into words as cogently as Andrew has.
Married, Wolfrum? If yes, I'm surprised. If not, I have no problem figuring out why.
Also, life isn't so serious that you should be calling for his resignation. Go outside, take a deep breath and enjoy life.
I think I'm in love with Lizzie Skurnick, and I feel no embarrassment at declaring it to the entire Internet community (well, the part that reads dagblog anyway). As Lizzie details, Cohen crosses a number of lines of appropriateness and taste. But I don't think it has to be a firing offence; the exposure of his fragile ego to ridicule should be punishment enough.
Someone at Politics Daily, however, should have stepped in and said, "Uh, no, you can't do that." This kind of personal, confessional writing may be acceptable on dagblog (where we're delved into such personal things as the loss of loved ones and the decision to leave a city and woman you love). But not on a widely read, avowedly political blog. And even if it were on dagblog, NOT on her wedding day, dickhead.
What can I say, I'm a hardliner on some issues, especially journalistic ethics and stalking issues. Politicsdaily.com is the No. 700 in the U.S. Dagblog is No. 50k, for compasions sake. It's a big site, about political issues. And the politically minded are not always a stable lot. It's not a place to dedicate 1,000 words to how you feel the "love of your life"on a wedding. I stick with firing offense.
Grammar police: "...for compassion's sake." Although, I probably would have gone with, "...for fuck's sake." But that's just me.
I have to wonder what the hell his editors, who at least ostensibly are being paid for their discretion and oversight on what gets printed, were doing that day . . . *that* constitutes a firing offense, I would think.
Here is how I see it.. dun dun DUN.
He sat in front of his computer, tears rolling down his cheeks. "I Love Her", he thought, "She needs to know, it could change everything." The tears continued to fall over his cheeks, his hands were damp, he felt a huge release. He loved her so, he really wanted the world to know, for this was his masterpiece, he'd been waiting for this moment his whole life, he was going to become the new Hemingway. He felt proud. He shed just one more tear, cleared his eyes, looked hard at this beautiful essay, it was, to him, perfection. There he was, the only thing that stood between him and ultimately fame, was that button, the dreaded button, his hand seemed to react slowly, his thoughts streaming. He sat there for one more minute, and in the next minute he hit that button. PUBLISH.
He just sits there now, staring at his laptop, wondering what happened, how could things go so horribly wrong?
Hahahaha
I think you people are all sick. Seriously- I don't know how you could take something
that was meant and written with good intentions and twist it into some weird freakshow. The guy wrote that love letter with open-hearted intentions for the love of his life. That's clear.
How Lizzie could construe that as stalkerish or negative makes me think she is sleeping alone every night with nothing but her old maid outfit to keep her company. Or with a guy who dreams about slitting his own wrists. Get a grip, Lizzie.
Outfits? OUTFITS?
Seriously. Old maids get outfits? Why the hell didn't anybody inform me and where can I get one?
Why you can get the costume right here.... Costumes.
AMAZING. A+ WOULD READ AGAIN.