"Did you know that if you can't catch your breath and start hyperventilating, you will lose feeling in your legs and hands..."

"... and they will start to cramp, which you will not feel but see? I did not know this, but I think it is a good thing to know as otherwise the loss of feeling and cramping are a bit frightening."

Info to remember, in case you get the flu that's going around.

Judge Posner includes a photograph of Bob Marley in an opinion and sloughs off worries about copyright.

The case was about dreadlocks (and the prison officials who cut them off), and Posner said his use of the photo fit the "fair use" doctrine:

"It's not as if we're selling our opinions in competition with a photographer... Using the photo in a judicial opinion couldn't conceivably be hurting the copyright holder."

Posner did not give the photographer credit, though it's a commercial photographer who uses Getty Images to collect fees. But Posner just grabbed the photo from the internet. He says "With the Internet, it's extraordinarily easy to find photographs of anything," so there's a good chance he encountered the photograph on a website that didn't name the photographer.

Posner seems to think it's quite fun to toss photographs into judicial opinions. It reminds me of the way some judges like to quote song lyrics or lines from movies. Blogging, I always feel that it's more questionable to use an image that someone else created than it is to cut and paste a block of text, but why should that be? I quote blocks of text all the time, but I remember, when I started blogging, worrying quite a bit about whether it was acceptable to copy that much text, so I'm relieved to hear a judge take a broad view of fair use and set an example.

Here's an opinion where Posner includes a picture of an ostrich with its head in the sand and a picture of (presumably) a lawyer with his head in the sand as he criticizes a lawyer who failed to cite a case that should have been cited. The lawyer filed a grievance against Posner for funning with him like that. The grievance was dismissed, and Posner offers the classic nonapology "I'm sorry he was upset by it."

There's more going on here than copyright. There's also the idea that judges are supposed to be neutral and sober. They wield power against real individuals, and it's a power that's supposed to come solely from law, not from any will of the judge's own. In that light, when the judge displays that he's enjoying the experience or playing to the crowd, entertaining the audience, we may fear that he's doing something wrong. This is why most judicial opinions are so godawful tedious, as the judges all sound alike and phrase everything in the dullest possible way. And there are no pictures!

This reminds me. We lawprofs have to make students read these texts, and we use casebooks that have edited the tediously verbose writings down, but the casebooks are still ponderous — in more ways that one. I'd like to take iBooks Author — an amusing new app — throw all the cases I assign into it. (All the judicial opinions are in the public domain, so there's no copyright issue at all.) Edit the cases down, summarize some things, and embed some pictures in a Posneresque way.

For example, take Griswold v. Connecticut (the old birth control case that flummoxed Mitt Romney in the debate the other day). There's a point in Justice Harlan's concurring opinion where he writes:

The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment stands, in my opinion, on its own bottom.

That's just begging for a photograph grabbed from the internet.

Should Althouse use iBooks Author to write a Posneresquely amusing Constitutional Law casebook?
	No. It would be undignified and unserious and thus not usable in a real law school class.
	Yes. Students (and other readers) will love it.
	No. It won't be that good. It might be annoying. And Althouse has better things to spend time on.
	Yes. I'd like to see Althouse's creative energy drained away in this idiotic project.
pollcode.com free polls

IN THE COMMENTS: Freeman Hunt said:

Posner is The Crack Emcee of judicial opinions?

Althouse Caucuses Open Now.

(I stole this idea from Drudge.)

Your vote for Republican presidential candidate:
	Michele Bachmann
	Herman Cain
	Newt Gingrich
	Jon Huntsman
	Ron Paul
	Rick Perry
	Mitt Romney
	Rick Santorum
pollcode.com free polls

Feel free to talk about the Iowa Caucuses in the comments. Also, a lot of us are doing the USA Today "Candidate Match Game" — suggested by Freeman Hunt over in the "Shhh" thread, where quite a few of us — including me and Meade —have revealed our results on the test.

What's so terrible about internet comments?

Rebecca Rosen complains about the structure of the commenting systems, which, she says, tend to make even well-written comments feel "more like lists of unconnected ideas than genuine conversations." In other words, chronological order is such an old, boring, and obvious order. But it's clear and comprehensible. Do you prefer comments "nested" under the comments they're supposedly responding to or comments that are re-ordered based on commenters voting on comments?

Does chronological order bother you — in comments sections and elsewhere? You know, you have to live your life in chronological order. And that's what's so cool about blogging. Like life, it's in chronological order. I used to resist chronological order. I have an old fantasy of living life out of order, having the power to reshuffle one's allotted days. But you can't do it. And if you abandon chronological order for you blog, it's not a blog anymore.

Respect chronological order. It's the order to beat. You think you have a better order? Prove it.

IN THE COMMENTS:Peter Hoh said:

There ought to be a way to highlight or star a comment like Freeman's "weird out, future man" comment.

That way, someone who is part of this community, but having a busy day, could still read a comment like that without having to plow through the whole thread.

Of course, one could do like I do when there's a long thread -- use the "find" function in my browser to see if Freeman stopped by to leave a comment.

My way to highlight or star a comment is front-paging! Now, you might think I should front-page Freeman's comment, which — I agree with you — was great, but under the circumstances — "standing between two mirrors" — it makes more meta-sense to front-page you.

RELOCATED FROM ALTHOUSE2: "So, your blog goes down right after being reported as a cesspool of [misogyny] and homophobia? Hmmmmm . . ."

Says LawGirl, over in the "weasel" post.

The anonymous professor who emailed lawprof Brian Leiter to attack my commentariat said "She has the free speech right to run whatever cesspool she wants, but is she prioritizing her desire for a widely read blog over her obligation to be a responsible member of academia?" — which is quoted by Freeman Hunt, who laughs, calls it the "quote of the day," and paraphrases it: "Free speech is incompatible with academia!" Freeman adds: "Free speech areas are cesspools. Restricted speech areas are responsible academia." Yeah, but can you really expect law professors to drape their brains around that?

Maguro said: "The email is so prissy and self-important that Leiter almost certainly wrote it himself. Anonymous colleague, my ass." Well, let's be fair. Professor Anonymous does call the blog comments here a "festival of misogyny and homophobia." Palladian said: "I hope there's an open bar at your festival of misogyny and homophobia."

Roger J. said:

Professor A: unless I have completely misread you over the last five years, I am thinking you arent going down without a fight--(just dont ask me for money however, my principles arent THAT strong :) )

Hey, good idea. Please! Encourage me:

I need some love!

dbp said:

An interesting logical loop here: Brian Leiter's blog posts an anonymous comment, which presumably is in agreement with the blog's editor. The comment is actively put forward by that blog, unlike at Althouse where comments are all posted and hardly ever deleted.

Both blogs contain what could fairly be described as scurrilous comments. The difference is that Alhouse neither approves or disapproves of the comments while Leiter clearly takes an editorial ownership.

"She has the free speech right to run whatever cesspool she wants, but is she prioritizing her desire for a widely read blog over her obligation to be a responsible member of academia?"

This had got to be the most lame use of a question mark in history. Oh, I make a big long ugly accusation then make it all right with a meaningless squiggle on top of the dot.

If the Leiter post led to the removal of the Althouse blog, then is there a case of slander here?

Good point. But it's not slander. If it's in writing, we lawyers say libel, not slander. But it's not libel. It's just opinion. Lame ass opinion from a lawprof who — in my opinion — envies my readership, which is bigger than his.

***

Now, maybe you're wondering just what the hell was in those terrible comments — that supposed "festival of misogyny and homophobia." You try the link at Leiter's, but it gets you nowhere, because Blogger removed my blog. But here's the cached version of the page the Leiter blog links to. Check out the comments and see if you can tell what's really upset the people who are on my case. There are only 32 comments. They are easy enough to read. I pick out a few.

Maguro said:

[The 3 candidates] seem notably lacking in victim-group credentials. Are any of them gay, trans or gender non-conforming?

This is a criticism based on one commenter's sense of what law schools do.

gutless said:

Is Margaret a lesbian? One imagines so in that her background doesn't seem competitive and yet, here she is. If so, she has the job. If not ,she is merely window dressing and the less offensive of the other two gets the nod.

That's obviously another criticism of law schools, reflecting an assumption that law schools make choices based on diversity factors. I'm sure the criticism hurts some people, but it doesn't say there's something wrong with being a lesbian or that the candidate is a lesbian. Maybe a nervous reader could take that the wrong way, in which case, I'd say: that festival of misogyny and homophobia is in your head. Good thing you hid your name!

Thorley Winston said:

I think it’s generally a bad idea to announce the “finalists” when conducting a job interview, particularly for the top position. IMO there shouldn’t be a public announcement until they’ve made their selection.

I agree, but the Law School chose to put the names and their credentials on its official website, obviously inviting public comment. I linked, opening it up to the comments. You know we are a public law school, and it's appropriate that people around the state receive information and have an opportunity to speak. And yet, feelings can be hurt. People in legal academia like to think that their feelings are righteous indignation having to do with women and minorities... but are they really? Think carefully!

Titus said:

If the woman candidate has big tits I say hire her. Otherwise, go with one of the men.

You can't go wrong with big tits.

tits...yum

All right, that's absurd and over-the-top, by our dear, treasured Titus — a gay man. He's been talking like that on this blog for years. The regulars know him. And they know I love him. If that's what Leiter and the Anonymous Professor feel such angst about... it's because they don't understand the community here. They're like Sean Hannity fretting about Common in White House.

COMMENTS (Relocated from Althouse2):


Which brings me back to the conclusion that I think is painfully obvious about him: he deserves every ounce of criticism that he is bringing upon himself.

Freaking idiot.

MAY 13, 2011 6:43:00 PM CDT 
 Danny Vice said...
There are a couple of avenues available to you Ann if you want to preserve your posts. Granted, it will be pretty time consuming, considering the thousands of posts you've published, but the option is there to grab these posts while they are still accessible.

I trust someone on your end has shared some of these options with you. If not, please email me.

Dannyvice (at) hotmail.com

MAY 13, 2011 6:47:00 PM CDT 
 Lincolntf said...
This post has been removed by the author.
MAY 13, 2011 6:49:00 PM CDT 
 Lincolntf said...
Hmmm, the blog has always struck me more as a tidal pool of mythology and arachnophobia, but I'm a lousy reader.

MAY 13, 2011 6:51:00 PM CDT 
 nevadabob said...
They're 86-ing comments here too.

MAY 13, 2011 6:52:00 PM CDT 
 edutcher said...
To be sure Titus is an acquired taste (there's a metaphor), but, let me think, let's work on that phrase, "obligation to be a responsible member of academia"...

Does that include Ward "Little Eichmanns" Churchill?

William "Guilty As Sin" Ayers?

Cornel "Sun People" West?

We may have our disagreements with her, but the lady gives us a forum unrestricted in most ways. As I said, when the roll is called up yonder, the looker with the platinum bob will be conlawproffing with George and Ben and Jimmy while these "academics" will be sharing a barbecue pit with their heroes from Al Qaeda.

MAY 13, 2011 6:52:00 PM CDT 
 Pastafarian said...
You know, there have been many, many more offensive threads in Althouse blog history. Any of the threads to which I've contributed, for example.

I can recall one that featured Freeman Hunt, of all people, dropping f-bombs like Rahm Emmanuel on an acid bender. Good times, good times.

But I will agree with this much of this turd's thesis: If the mysterious outage is politically motivated, then I suspect that it's the politics of your commenters, more than your own politics, that led to it.

MAY 13, 2011 6:55:00 PM CDT 
 TWM said...
"All right, that's absurd and over-the-top, but our dear, treasured Titus — a gay man. He's been talking like that on this blog for years. The regulars know him. And they know I love him."

Oh crap, does Meade know he signed-on for a threesome?

MAY 13, 2011 7:00:00 PM CDT 
 nevadabob said...
"We may have our disagreements with her, but the lady gives us a forum unrestricted in most ways."

In their eyes, that is her sin. She allows people to express themselves however they see fit.

That's racist and homophobic and misogynistic.

People (in their view) need to be controlled so we can end the hate speech once and for all and get on with the war in EastAsia.

Or is it Eurasia today?

I forget.

MAY 13, 2011 7:01:00 PM CDT 
 Michael K said...
If Blogspot did this for political reasons, you need to be out of there as fast as possible. I use Word Press which has a pretty good rep as blogging software and can be customized as Patterico has done. I also use a separate web host, called Blue Host, and have had no problems and doubt very much if Blue Host cares what is on blogs it hosts.

Academics are such humorless people, present company excepted. I have a friend, a science associate professor, who is sweating out tenure after having to leave another institution when it was denied for political reasons. And that is science, not sociology.

MAY 13, 2011 7:08:00 PM CDT 
 TWM said...
Time for Althouse.com . . . you're that big . . . and that threatening evidently . . .

MAY 13, 2011 7:09:00 PM CDT 
 EnigmatiCore said...
Well. On the off chance that guy is not a Google employee and that their abuse system is not manned by him, I flagged one of his remaining comments as abuse and detailed his abuse of power (including, apparently, the ability to mess with Google accounts-- I had to have them send a verification code to my cell phone and enter it in order to access my account because of 'suspicious activity').

That jerkwad belongs nowhere near any position with any kind of authority.

MAY 13, 2011 7:11:00 PM CDT 
 Michael Haz said...
You broke from the borg. The borg will kill you.

MAY 13, 2011 7:11:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
It's obvious to me what the problem is here. I have told you time and again. Stop with the politics. More posts about American Idol and dogs urinating. These commie pinko bastards are very vindictive pricks. You need to lay low.

You said you wanted your blog to be a mixture of Fellini and the Monkee's.

Neither one of them gave a shit about labor douchenozzles.

I hate to say I told you so...but I told you so.

MAY 13, 2011 7:18:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
And they dumped Tourettes Rocker Boy last night and you didn't even have one post on it.

Shame on you.

You. An American Idol blogger.

MAY 13, 2011 7:18:00 PM CDT 
 Pastafarian said...
This really shines a new light on the cowardly banning and deletion at Lawyers Guns and Money. Maybe they're just afraid of being shut down by their liberal over-lords.

I'm not sure if they're on Blogger -- the meager traffic of their little-known boutique blog is so small that they're able to handle it with their dedicated server, a repurposed Commodore 386. The average comment thread there is about 20 comments; there are several that have one or two. The longest I've seen is a little over 100 -- driven mostly by my participation. So they might have their own domain.

MAY 13, 2011 7:19:00 PM CDT 
 JoeDetweiler said...
My understanding is that nitecruzr is just a volunteer, and that seems to me to be the problem. You should be talking to an employee and Google should be seeing to it that you are talking to an employee.

http://www.google.com.tw/support/forum/p/blogger/thread?tid=051824dc719f3fae&hl=en

MAY 13, 2011 7:19:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
Hey I was banned from Television Without Pity after four comments.

They are like Nazi's over there.

Don't think I forgot about you Kay Howard. You are in the book. Just sayn'

MAY 13, 2011 7:22:00 PM CDT 
 Pastafarian said...
Trooper, I was a little disappointed to see that you hadn't contributed to the cesspool of homophobia and misogyny. When I heard that one of the comments speculated on the candidate's tits, you were the first person I thought of.

MAY 13, 2011 7:27:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
Hey I am a well know lover of tits. I coddle them. Put them in the best of lacy bras. Tits are my friend. They should be yours.

MAY 13, 2011 7:29:00 PM CDT 
 Ann Althouse said...
"And they dumped Tourettes Rocker Boy last night and you didn't even have one post on it."

I tweeted it.

MAY 13, 2011 7:30:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
I was busy at a benefit while all this was going on. I asked some of my detective friends to look into it. But so far nobody has a reasonable explanation.

Except that stuff like this is gonna to happen more and more in Barack Obama's America.

MAY 13, 2011 7:30:00 PM CDT 
 blake said...
If your blog returns, you should immediately download it.

Given your traffic, you should consider getting a blogging application that allows you to compose locally and post to multiple blogging sites.

Really, at your level, you should probably get your own domain and hosting service.

MAY 13, 2011 7:32:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
I do notice that none of the "liberals" or "progressives" who post daily on your site has anything to say in support of you. Where is AlpaLiberal, Jeremy,Robert Cook, Jay Retread and all the rest. They are oddly silent about the destruction of a blog that they write multiple posts on to support their point of view which is displayed without censorship or fear or favor.

I hope you see who you can depend on. Just sayn'

MAY 13, 2011 7:33:00 PM CDT 
 NotYourTypicalNewYorker said...
The culture war imperceptibly widens.

Here, there...

The losers start stepping out of the tree line for better shots.

MAY 13, 2011 7:36:00 PM CDT 
 Coketown said...
Oh my God, Titus is gay?!

MAY 13, 2011 7:38:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
This post has been removed by the author.
MAY 13, 2011 7:39:00 PM CDT 
 garage mahal said...
I do notice that none of the "liberals" or "progressives" who post daily on your site has anything to say in support of you.

I'm here. I think the theory that Google shut down this blog pretty goofy though. Fittingly it was hatched by Moe Lane @ Redstate.com

I do feel bad if all the old content is gone though. If nothing else all my old comments gone would be a sad day indeed.

Seriously I hope you get your blog back, fully preserved.

MAY 13, 2011 7:40:00 PM CDT 
 Coketown said...
I also 'encouraged' the blog by buying through the Amazon portal instead of going to Best Buy, even though it means waiting several days to get my merch and have a more fulfilling life.

I encourage everyone else to encourage her in this way. Words of encouragement are less motivating that transactions of encouragement.

MAY 13, 2011 7:40:00 PM CDT 
 Pastafarian said...
blake -- wouldn't that cost a butt-load of money, given what has to be pretty substantial traffic, and a content-rich site, what with all of the photos and the enormous archive?

MAY 13, 2011 7:41:00 PM CDT 
 The Drill SGT said...
All right, that's absurd and over-the-top, but our dear, treasured Titus — a gay man

"treasured"?

amusing and entertaining? perhaps

treasured? no :)

MAY 13, 2011 7:41:00 PM CDT 
 nevadabob said...
I find it striking that Althouse is censoring and memory-holing comments that are critical of Google's leftist and socialist politics.

Looks like Google's action is having the correct effect.

They've convinced Althouse to strangle her commenters.

MAY 13, 2011 7:42:00 PM CDT 
 Barry Dauphin said...
You're too big for Blogger.

MAY 13, 2011 7:43:00 PM CDT 
 Shannon Bell said...
Hey Ann,

Just my opinion, but screw Google and blogger. Buy an awesome URL, go with Wordpress and be done with it.

Who knows what kind of games these jokers are playing.

MAY 13, 2011 7:44:00 PM CDT 
 Shannon Bell said...
Oh, by the way. Thanks for that awesome link at Insty's place yesterday!

MAY 13, 2011 7:45:00 PM CDT 
 Michael Haz said...
Wouldn't have happened if McCain had been elected. Google are Obama's people. They're like Organizing for America, except they hold a horrible lot of power.

MAY 13, 2011 7:46:00 PM CDT 
 Coketown said...
I doubt the old blog is lost. And I highly doubt this is a sinister plot by Google to silence people of Althouse's political persuasion--whatever the hell that persuasion is.

And if it is lost, don't worry: Trooper has the last 4 1/2 years printed out and spiral-bound in a handsome collection titled, "The Collected Wisdom of..." And since they're criminalizing prostitution in Nevada he'll have plenty of time to re-post everything. Idle hands, etc.

MAY 13, 2011 7:51:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
I didn't include you Garage. I don't consider you a real liberal.

You are just stupid.

(You are a Packers fan)

But you know I love you guy!

MAY 13, 2011 7:52:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
Seriously, the same thing happened when the blogger lady got engaged. Garage was one of the few to quickly and unambigously wish them well. The rest were silent for a suspicious long time until they felt they had to begrudingly acknowledge it. Look it up....oh wait a minute.....

MAY 13, 2011 7:53:00 PM CDT 
 Lincolntf said...
The Google/Blogger conspiracy might be a longshot, but the nitecruzr pissant is all too real. Dickless little shit.

MAY 13, 2011 7:54:00 PM CDT 
 Seven Machos said...
I'd be just shocked and amazed if Blogger really took down Althouse for political reasons. That is just not done in the United States. I just figured it was ridiculous technical problems and you, Althouse, took down your own blog in disgust until you found a new home.

Anyway, color me skeptical of the conspiracy for now. If it's true, it's sickening and disheartening and really suggests something seriously morbid about the American left. We all know they are closet fascists, but to be so obvious about it isn't usually the way it goes.

MAY 13, 2011 7:57:00 PM CDT 
 Seven Machos said...
May 13, 2011
Blogger is back

What a frustrating day. We’re very sorry that you’ve been unable to publish to Blogger for the past 20.5 hours. We’re nearly back to normal — you can publish again, and in the coming hours posts and comments that were temporarily removed should be restored. Thank you for your patience while we fix this situation. We use Blogger for our own blogs, so we’ve also felt your pain.

Here’s what happened: during scheduled maintenance work Wednesday night, we experienced some data corruption that impacted Blogger’s behavior. Since then, bloggers and readers may have experienced a variety of anomalies including intermittent outages, disappearing posts, and arriving at unintended blogs or error pages. A small subset of Blogger users (we estimate 0.16%) may have encountered additional problems specific to their accounts. Yesterday we returned Blogger to a pre-maintenance state and placed the service in read-only mode while we worked on restoring all content: that’s why you haven’t been able to publish. We rolled back to a version of Blogger as of Wednesday May 11th, so your posts since then were temporarily removed. Those are the posts that we’re in the progress of restoring.

Again, we are very sorry for the impact to our authors and readers. We try hard to ensure Blogger is always available for you to share your thoughts and opinions with the world, and we’ll do our best to prevent this from happening again.

Posted by Eddie Kessler, Tech Lead/Manager, Blogger

http://buzz.blogger.com/2011/05/blogger-is-back.html

MAY 13, 2011 8:00:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
Hey I just heard they buried the Althouse blog at sea....you know they didn't want to offend the Muslims or something....I don't know ....does that sound reasonable to you....yeah it must just be a crazy conspiracy theory...yeah...yeah...that's the ticket.

MAY 13, 2011 8:00:00 PM CDT 
 The Grand Inquisitor said...
"OpenID nevadabob said...

I find it striking that Althouse is censoring and memory-holing comments that are critical of Google's leftist and socialist politics.

Looks like Google's action is having the correct effect.

They've convinced Althouse to strangle her commenters."

Is she really doing so? That would be quite a surprise, and frankly, I don't believe it.

I wouldn't be surprised if the same people who deleted her blog are now deleting comments critical of their behavior, though.

Althouse linked the redstate theory about Google, so why would she be protecting Google from similar theories?

MAY 13, 2011 8:00:00 PM CDT 
 Seven Machos said...
I'm quite sure Althouse isn't doing whatever the fuck the tool Nevada Bob said.

MAY 13, 2011 8:02:00 PM CDT 
 blake said...
Pasta--

I hosted a bunch of sites on an old machine for years at a nominal cost. Not as heavily trafficked as Althouse, I'm sure.

Aha. So, GoDaddy gives you 10GB of space and unlimited bandwidth for $3 a month if you buy three years at once. $5 for 150GB, which is a LOT of space for text and pix, and the pix are probably gonna stay on flicker, mostly.

Jeez, for $7 a month, it's all you can eat: However many websites, however much bandwidth, however much space, a thousand email accounts (Althouse could offer accounts to donors!), and some other perks.

Curiously, they don't offer as good a deal if you go for their "blog/podcast" offer.

Anyway, $252 over three years doesn't seem like a lot of money to me.

Plus, the data's all yours.

For this deal, Althouse would probably have to buy (or have donated) services to set up her blog. But, you know, blogspot.com kinda sucks, so she might find newer and better technology.

MAY 13, 2011 8:03:00 PM CDT 
 edutcher said...
TWM said...

"All right, that's absurd and over-the-top, but our dear, treasured Titus — a gay man. He's been talking like that on this blog for years. The regulars know him. And they know I love him."

Oh crap, does Meade know he signed-on for a threesome?

With Titus, are you sure it would only be three?

Trooper York said...

I do notice that none of the "liberals" or "progressives" who post daily on your site has anything to say in support of you. Where is AlpaLiberal, Jeremy,Robert Cook, Jay Retread and all the rest. They are oddly silent about the destruction of a blog that they write multiple posts on to support their point of view which is displayed without censorship or fear or favor.

I hope you see who you can depend on. Just sayn'

The One Whose Name We Cannot Mention found us, but only because he was trolling elsewhere.

PS Keep it down, we don't want the rest to find out we're having fun without them.

PPS Agree with Shannon.

PPPS BlogHer is taking up Ann's cause with a fetching photo of Herself.

MAY 13, 2011 8:04:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
It does seem kind of fishy that as big a blog as Althouse is taking so long to get back on line. I mean this is a big dealio. Shouldn't they be paying attention to this or what?

MAY 13, 2011 8:07:00 PM CDT 
 Seven Machos said...
I agree it's all very fishy. I just can't believe it all. The blog gets destroyed with no warning whatsoever and it just happens to be during a time of tumult and outage at Blogger?

Doesn't add up.

MAY 13, 2011 8:09:00 PM CDT 
 blake said...
With Titus, are you sure it would only be three?

With Titus, could you even be sure it was one?

By the way, I think the Google "conspiracy" thing is far-fetched. The most likely issue is just exactly what it seems: a technical glitch of the sort Google isn't supposed to have.

However, could someone(s) in Google use this as a cover to eff with someone (t)he(y) didn't like? Or minimally put that person at the end of the service line?

Sure. Probably not Sergey or Larry--that seems too far-fetched for words. But some middle manager type getting pissy? Petty bureaucrats are petty bureaucrats wherever.

(Typed on a Google CR-48. Heh.)

MAY 13, 2011 8:11:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
I wonder if they will release some photo's from the situation room at Blogger? Just sayn'

MAY 13, 2011 8:11:00 PM CDT 
 Tibore said...
It's back! I just checked it. It's completely blank, but the original URL is responding.

Now, the question is, where's all the previous content?

MAY 13, 2011 8:11:00 PM CDT 
 Lincolntf said...
Yup. The big blog is showing signs of life. Conspiracy theory over (?), Google volunteer hatefest continues.

MAY 13, 2011 8:13:00 PM CDT 
 Michael said...
Nitecruzer looks like Jeremy's dog, the one on the right.

MAY 13, 2011 8:13:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
I also think that the other big time bloggers are taking this too casually. If they can do this to Althouse they can do it to anyone.

MAY 13, 2011 8:13:00 PM CDT 
 FlaviusJulius said...
It is back up.

MAY 13, 2011 8:13:00 PM CDT 
 FlaviusJulius said...
This post has been removed by the author.
MAY 13, 2011 8:13:00 PM CDT 
 Seven Machos said...
Seconded Tibore.

MAY 13, 2011 8:14:00 PM CDT 
 EnigmatiCore said...
Your blog is back up (sans any of your previous posts, which I assume will be forthcoming).

A Blogger employee seems to have put a stop to Nitecruzr's nonsense as well, as the Google 'help forum' thread is open for comments once again after the Blogger employee commented.

Hopefully they will take his keys away.

MAY 13, 2011 8:14:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
I told you man. They buried all the old content at sea.

It's the latest thing.

MAY 13, 2011 8:14:00 PM CDT 
 garage mahal said...
You are just stupid.

Awwww! Thanks Troop.

MAY 13, 2011 8:14:00 PM CDT 
 Seven Machos said...
Or minimally put that person at the end of the service line?

This I can certainly see.

Move, Althouse. Fuck this shit.

MAY 13, 2011 8:15:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
You know I love you man.

Anybody that loves road kill sandwiches is ok in my book.

MAY 13, 2011 8:15:00 PM CDT 
 EnigmatiCore said...
It will be interesting to see what happens to Mr. Croll now. I might even have to read his blogs to find out what he eventually says about the whole kerfuffle.

MAY 13, 2011 8:16:00 PM CDT 
 The Grand Inquisitor said...
I won't out nitecruzr, but apparently he wrote a wikipedia entry about himself, and how famous he is for defending freedom of speech while having such a useful blog.

What a dweeb. He wanted to be famous, and now he'll have his little 26 minutes of fame/lame.

MAY 13, 2011 8:17:00 PM CDT 
 madawaskan said...
Althouse

You can find a lot of your stuff in this "feedburner".

feed://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/eOqB


I'm not going to hot link it so you can *see* the complete address.

MAY 13, 2011 8:17:00 PM CDT 
 Tibore said...
Yeah, the old content is gone. But the Google cached versions are intact, at least. Not the best thing, granted, but that should mean that somehow the old posts can be resurrected.

MAY 13, 2011 8:19:00 PM CDT 
 Lincolntf said...
"I might even have to read his blogs to find out what he eventually says about the whole kerfuffle."

Guerrilla marketing by being an insufferable prick? So dumb it actually worked. Anyway, you should have plenty of material to look at. According to his "bio" he's got at least half a dozen pseudo-eponymous blogs.

MAY 13, 2011 8:19:00 PM CDT 
 garage mahal said...
Odd seeing the comment on the masthead at the original blog. And the blog being gone. Maybe her husband didn't stop reading Althouse afterall

MAY 13, 2011 8:19:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
Yeah we never figured out who that woman was....Michelle.....hello...
Michelle....Buellar...anyone...

MAY 13, 2011 8:21:00 PM CDT 
 madawaskan said...
It has the photos also.

It looks like because there is so much data associated with your blog that it took them longer.

I know in some management decisions sometimes you make the decision to "sacrifice" the bigger table...

Hard to explain-but that's probably all that happened.

I mean really how big a threat can the only blogger who voted for Obama because McCain scared her because he was too much of an ideologue but at the same time not Conservative enough-really be?

MAY 13, 2011 8:21:00 PM CDT 
 FlaviusJulius said...
Where is my Profile pic?

MAY 13, 2011 8:23:00 PM CDT 
 madawaskan said...
This post has been removed by the author.
MAY 13, 2011 8:24:00 PM CDT 
 madawaskan said...
I think the only person that followed that *logic* married you and came to that conclusion after a 2 1/2 year delay...

And was probably threatened with...

sex.

Or no sex-or well-*scary sex *but with not too much idealism.

Jeebus.

MAY 13, 2011 8:26:00 PM CDT 
 blake said...
It's not really back, just responding. At least, =I= wouldn't consider it back if someone said "Hey! You're back--you just lost everything you've done for the past 8 years!"

I presume this means Althouse is at the front of the queue now. That's what I'd do were I in charge of this mess. It's one thing to be politically strident and another to have it seem as though that were impacting your business decisions.

(It does, of course, but they pick on the small fries whom no one cares about.)

MAY 13, 2011 8:26:00 PM CDT 
 Browndog said...
Not seeing many conservative bloggers rushing to Ann's defense--as I've seen them do with other bloggers with similar issued in the past.

Maybe they're still stuck on the "glitch" meme...waiting to see how this shakes out.

I saw it was removed this morning and was surprised. Now, I'm just shocked. Still.

Kinda shocked at myself for feeling a little bummed not being able to read Althouse.

MAY 13, 2011 8:28:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
It's a really big deal if all the old content was lost.

I mean we lost about 1000 comments of Titus pinching a loaf and Loafing Oaf pinching Sarah Palin's vagina.

MAY 13, 2011 8:28:00 PM CDT 
 Lincolntf said...
AoS put up a thread on the possible bannage,with links, etc.

MAY 13, 2011 8:29:00 PM CDT 
 Noah Bawdy™ said...
Your main blog is coming up now, no posts though.

MAY 13, 2011 8:30:00 PM CDT 
 Coketown said...
I would consider it a great personal tragedy if the Downward Spiral post from last fall was lost.

MAY 13, 2011 8:30:00 PM CDT 
 Seven Machos said...
Somebody pointed out no word verification right now.

Fuckinay! Anybody want to buy some cheap herbal Viagra? I give very good price.

MAY 13, 2011 8:32:00 PM CDT 
 Michael said...
Well, I would say that this incident is not a positive advertisement for buying a cloudbook powered by google with all your work and software residing in the google administered "cloud." Good luck with that comrades.

MAY 13, 2011 8:33:00 PM CDT 
 chickelit said...
Trooper York said:
Garage was one of the few to quickly and unambigously wish them well.

Why that's just fogblather, blogfather! Here, check it out yourself: link.

Garage didn't even post in that thread.

MAY 13, 2011 8:33:00 PM CDT 
 Henry said...
Shocking Meat Video is back!

MAY 13, 2011 8:35:00 PM CDT 
 Anga2010 said...
First they came for the CrackMC, but I didn't care because I'm not CrackMC...

MAY 13, 2011 8:35:00 PM CDT 
 Browndog said...
What the hell is this?

I just checked the old site--

It's there, empty.

But, this is the masthead:

Althouse

"I'm so glad you posted this. I've been trying to convince my husband
not to read your blog for weeks and this finally did the trick."

MAY 13, 2011 8:37:00 PM CDT 
 Palladian said...
Notice that the archives list the post counts for each year. The content isn't lost, it just hasn't found its way home yet.

MAY 13, 2011 8:38:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
I don't know if it was that post but I seem to remember Garage wishing her well. I could stand corrected.

I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

You have to be nice to stupid people. Just sayn!

MAY 13, 2011 8:40:00 PM CDT 
 Prosecutorial Indiscretion said...
This post has been removed by the author.
MAY 13, 2011 8:43:00 PM CDT 
 edutcher said...
Trooper York said...

It does seem kind of fishy that as big a blog as Althouse is taking so long to get back on line. I mean this is a big dealio. Shouldn't they be paying attention to this or what?

I think Insta and Jacobson are. And I mentioned BlogHer, but, yes, if the Google Thought Police are pulling something cute because Ann doesn't censor - and because she took a stand in the recent troubles in Madison - then the Conservative and Libertarian blogospheres ought to be a lot more wound up about this.

MAY 13, 2011 8:44:00 PM CDT 
 garage mahal said...
Trooper
I'm almost positive you are correct. One of those threads anyway.

MAY 13, 2011 8:45:00 PM CDT 
 chickelit said...
I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

You have to be nice to stupid people. Just sayn!

I like garage too. He's one of the few people I've ever spoken to IRL from this blog.

MAY 13, 2011 8:46:00 PM CDT 
 Roger von Oech said...
Ann:

Good luck fighting your way through this current crap. I know you'll prevail!

For what's worth: I remember your saying a few years ago that you liked Blogger because it was free (as opposed to Typepad), and you didn't have to worry about having to pay to have access to your old posts. I assume you've changed your opinion.

MAY 13, 2011 8:47:00 PM CDT 
 Trooper York said...
That's how I remember it Garage. You were conspicious by being one of the few who did have something nice to say.

MAY 13, 2011 8:47:00 PM CDT 
 Seven Machos said...
Althouse ought to leave blogger. No matter what Google did to cause this, it's unacceptably bad.

Technical glitch. Bad.

Political censorship. Bad.

Chicanery because of glitch. Bad.

MAY 13, 2011 8:48:00 PM CDT 
 chickelit said...
garage mahal said: Trooper
I'm almost positive you are correct. One of those threads anyway.

Well maybe. It wasn't the engagement thread though. Check for yourself above.

Oh, and I think reader was the first to congratulate them after their wedding.

MAY 13, 2011 8:48:00 PM CDT 
 Chip S. said...
My first thought in seeing that the blog was a desaparecido was the same as garage's, and that the woman in question had mad hacking skills.

MAY 13, 2011 8:48:00 PM CDT 
 DADvocate said...
reflecting an assumption that law schools make choices based on diversity factors.

My assumption is that nearly all departments/schools/colleges in a university make choices based on diversity factors. My father was a psychology professor at a large state university. During the late 1970s/early 1980s, his department needed to hire a new department head. They tried for 2-3 years to hire a minority/female, preferably a female minority.

They failed because the supply was limited, the demand high and their salary too low. Instead they settled for the president of the APA who was merely a white male.

MAY 13, 2011 8:48:00 PM CDT 
 chickelit said...
@Palladian (if he's around):

Do you happen to know what happened to backtype.com? They no longer seem to host back comments from Althouse.

MAY 13, 2011 8:49:00 PM CDT 
 Matt said...
Your blog is back. Sadly, with no posts.

MAY 13, 2011 8:51:00 PM CDT 
 blake said...
Notice that the archives list the post counts for each year. The content isn't lost, it just hasn't found its way home yet.

Well, not to get too geeky 'cause I'm sure you're right BUT I would imagine the post counts are updated when posts are made, and not recalculated on every page load.

In other words, the counts being there just mean the counts are there, not the posts.

MAY 13, 2011 8:53:00 PM CDT 
 Chip S. said...
Uh oh. I just realized that I've contributed to the cesspool of homophobia by presuming that someone with a husband was a woman.

MAY 13, 2011 8:53:00 PM CDT 
 Michael said...
Why has your blog been on useless, clueless Blogspot since 2005 anyway?

I don't mean to blame the victim, but really, you could at least pay for your own server and use Blogger to publish it, or better yet WordPress.

This is like asking Ford why your Pinto blew up. That's what Pintos DO.

MAY 13, 2011 8:56:00 PM CDT 
 Quayle said...
If you were teaching a class - say at Northwestern - and you lauded big tits on a woman, you'd be a smash hit with the professoriate.

But you're commentators on a blog? You're unworthy of your title and position.

MAY 13, 2011 8:57:00 PM CDT 
 Chip S. said...
But you're commentators on a blog? You're unworthy of your title and position.

Unworthy of the exalted title of blog commenter?

MAY 13, 2011 9:02:00 PM CDT 
 Quayle said...

Unworthy of the exalted title of blog commenter?

Unworthy of the title professor and as a member of the academy.

MAY 13, 2011 9:05:00 PM CDT 
 RuyDiaz said...
I'm sorry but, it was Titus who offered the only (remotely, if at all) mysogynistic comment? That's pretty much all Titus does!

Between the snarky law professor, and Blogger Trouble, it has been farce all around.

MAY 13, 2011 9:06:00 PM CDT 
 RuyDiaz said...
Uh oh. I just realized that I've contributed to the cesspool of homophobia by presuming that someone with a husband was a woman.

Oh, shoot.

When I was a 14-year-old boy, back in 1990, I remember wondering just how big Benazhir Bhutto's breast were. It was hard to estimate, with her dressing in that unflattering Islamic dress and all.

That's mysogynistic and Islamophobic: take that!

MAY 13, 2011 9:12:00 PM CDT 
 Ralph L said...
Is it misogyny to admire someone's tits, or just to talk about them? I doubt he's interested in her "gyn" parts.

Leiter's blog could be a hotbed of Cfud-caliber anti-semitism. He's got a post called "Hung from Temple to Colorado."

MAY 13, 2011 9:13:00 PM CDT 
 blake said...
Unworthy of the title professor and as a member of the academy.

Probably the nicest thing anyone's said about Althouse all day!

MAY 13, 2011 9:14:00 PM CDT 
 Chip S. said...
@Quayle, Oh, OK. I reread your comment and now I get it. One of those times when "you're" vs. "your" wasn't clear from context.

Did you see that Northwestern recently dropped that sex class? Too high a ratio of hardware to soft porn.

MAY 13, 2011 9:19:00 PM CDT 
 starboardhelm said...
Ann, I would love to host your blog on my own server at writecraft.net (as althouse.writecraft.net or any domain name you want) for a very reasonable rate. I will even migrate your database if you can get a copy out Blogger. If you're interested, please contact me at support@writecraft.net.

MAY 13, 2011 9:19:00 PM CDT 

Mayor Bloomberg's plan to repopulate Detroit: Let in immigrants — but they have to agree to stay in Detroit.

On "Meet the Press" today, a propos of nothing David Gregory asked and with zero follow-up from Gregory, Bloomberg came out with this:

This is a country that was built by immigrants, this is a country that became a superpower by--because of its immigrant population. And unless we continue to have immigrants, we cannot maintain as a superpower.

And I'll give you a good example of how you can fix some of the problems in America. Take a look at the big old industrial cities--Detroit, for example. Got a great mayor in Mayor Bing. But the population has left. You got to do something about that. And if I were the federal government, assuming you could wave a magic wand and pull everybody together, you pass a law letting immigrants come in as long as they agree to go to Detroit and live there for five or 10 years, start businesses, take jobs, whatever. You would populate Detroit overnight because half the world wants to come here. We forget, we, we whip ourselves a little bit too much. We still are the world's greatest democracy. We still have hope for--if you want to have a better life for yourself and your kids, this is where you want to come. And you could use something like immigration policy, at no cost to the federal government, to fix a lot of the problems that we have.

We've been talking about this over in the Tree Bud Café. Irene said:

I thought this was very odd. "Gulag" came to mind.

Freeman Hunt said:

I'd comment on the Bloomberg comment, but it's hard to type with my jaw sitting on the keyboard.

Irene said:

Freeman, that was my reaction. Imagine if Donald Trump or Sarah Palin had said it....

Blooomberg = Trump after Finishing School.

Bloomberg has the Mr. Moderation act, but underneath it, perhaps he's out of his mind.

And newspaper articles are too damned long.

Says Michael Kinsley in an article in The Atlantic which he sure as hell better not expand into a book.

(Thanks to Freeman Hunt for linking to that in the comments section of the post about books that are inflated versions of articles that ran in The Atlantic.)

Kinsley says:

Take, for example, the lead story in The New York Times on Sunday, November 8, 2009, headlined “Sweeping Health Care Plan Passes House.” There is nothing special about this article. November 8 is just the day I happened to need an example for this column. And there it was. The 1,456-word report begins:

 Handing President Obama a hard-fought victory, the House narrowly approved a sweeping overhaul of the nation’s health care system on Saturday night, advancing legislation that Democrats said could stand as their defining social policy achievement.

Fewer than half the words in this opening sentence are devoted to saying what happened. If someone saw you reading the paper and asked, “So what’s going on?,” you would not likely begin by saying that President Obama had won a hard-fought victory. You would say, “The House passed health-care reform last night.” And maybe, “It was a close vote.” And just possibly, “There was a kerfuffle about abortion.” You would not likely refer to “a sweeping overhaul of the nation’s health care system,” as if your friend was unaware that health-care reform was going on. Nor would you feel the need to inform your friend first thing that unnamed Democrats were bragging about what a big deal this is—an unsurprising development if ever there was one.

Oh! That should hurt. It's not just padded. It's padded with cheerleading for the Democrats. No wonder we feel such revulsion.

Scozzafava endorses the Democrat!

Well, then!

IN THE COMMENTS: Jason says:

[T]his is just plain dishonorable. All the people who endorsed her look bad, so does her party.

Freeman Hunt say:

And I'm with Jason, it's dishonorable. Lots of GOP establishment people went to bat for her, and now they look extremely foolish for having done so.

Let's analyze this picture of Obama and the Justices (and Biden).

Keep in mind that this is the shot the White House chose to put up on its Flickr page. (There's also this pic of Obama shaking hands with his appointee Sonia Sotamayor — with Scalia looking thoroughly delighted.)


(Enlarge.)

That's Biden, on the left, with his back to the camera, talking to Breyer and Roberts. The charming Roberts looks charmed by the gasbag VP, while Breyer — though more liberal than Roberts — looks like he's sleeping on his feet.

The short hulk by himself with his back to the camera is Scalia. Also alone, lurking in the background, is the newest Justice, Sonia Sotomayor. Or is Ruth Bader Ginsburg back there too (in the ladies section?) out of camera range?

Brooding over on the extreme right are Justice Thomas and Alito.

In the center, there's the President. As Stevens looks on, Obama laughs at Justice Kennedy's vain effort to enlist the Prez in a game of pattycake. Oh! Pattycake! Such fun!

IN THE COMMENTS: Freeman Hunt says:

Imagine holding a party. Your spouse takes pictures. When the guests leave, you say, "I'll email a group picture to you all."

The guests check their email accounts the next morning to find a picture wherein all of them have their backs to the camera or are by some other means obscured. Except you. You stand, fully visible, smiling broadly, center frame.

He he he.

Yay! A baby!

Congratulations to Freeman Hunt — a longtime and highly valued commenter here — who just had a baby and is tweeting about it a lot and posting pictures: 1, 2.

Should the President be working harder?

Excuse me if I don't find this as charmingly cute as the NYT does.

IN THE COMMENTS: Freeman Hunt said:

"Mrs. Obama and her staff also visited Miriam’s Kitchen, a soup kitchen, where the first lady bumped into Bill Richardson, a 46-year-old homeless man. Mr. Richardson was so stunned that he could barely stammer thank you as Mrs. Obama scooped a helping of mushroom risotto onto his plate this month."

LOL Okay, so it's not that Bill Richardson, but the mental image was still funny.

AND: Glenn Reynolds answers my question — Should the President be working harder? — "I think he should take as much time off as he wants."

Rodrigo Díaz says:

Can you imagine the OUTRAGE, had GWB been this person with the brewski? The country is going to hell… This ass hat at a B-Ball game.

"Who would have thought it? Prince Harry is just a normal bloke in spite of the weird circumstances of his upbringing."

"Sure, I am all for abominating racism like any other form of odious collectivism... but this hypersensitivity to any politically incorrect use of language is really annoying."

***

I loved the part where Harry's spoofing a phone conversation with the Queen:

"Granny I've got to go, send my love to the Corgis and Grandpa.... I've got to go, got to go, bye. God Save You ... yeah, that's great."

IN THE COMMENTS: Freeman Hunt says:

A royal Kowalski!

Walt Kowalski is the Clint Eastwood character in "Gran Torino," the movie we've been talking about over here. I'd written:

Does the movie legitimatize racial epithets? We have our snarling but lovable geezer spitting a hundred racist slurs — especially to refer to Asians — over the course of the movie. And, in trying to teach his young mentee how to man up — and not be a pussy — he encourages him to banter playfully using words like "wop," "mick," and so forth. You might want to say it's a hilarious slap in the face of political correctness. But I think the movie is pretty effective in selling plain old-fashioned racial talk.

Freeman now says:

I think you're right about Gran Torino making a case for racial language in general. Having the character talk like that to everyone, people he liked and didn't like, people of his own race and not, sort of popped the bubble that these words should have special, almost magical, powers to offend. Especially with the juxtaposition of the racial insults against the real insults. The times you felt he was really cutting were the times when he called young men "pussies" because they deserved it.

"They have bits sliced off and tied up and sucked out. I want to say to them, 'You lazy f---ing fat pig.'"

"'Just go for a run and stop eating burgers. You might fucking die.'"

Ricky Gervais opposes liposuction, tummy tucks, and gastric band operations. He also would like you to shout "Fatty!"at him when he walks down the street. Or perhaps "you fucking fat bastard," which is what he says to himself when he looks in the mirror in the morning.

He's a comedian, and that's all very funny, but he's raising some important issues. (No, not whether comedians should be more sensitive, and in any case, to the extent that it is an issue worth examining, he's already said that he's allowed to say cruelly harsh things about fat, because he's fat and admits it.)

1. Is it unethical for doctors to perform serious operation on people who have the alternative route of eating less and exercising?

2. Has the fat acceptance movement caused the obesity epidemic?

***

I got that link from Freeman Hunt's Twitter feed — just as I was finishing listening to "The Ricky Gervais Guide to Medicine," which I downloaded today on iTunes.

ADDED: More on the fucking fat bastard here:

'I work out every day,' says Gervais, who recently had a swimming pool built beneath his London home and has installed a gym at his New York apartment. 'Don't sound so surprised. I'm fat because I eat too much and I'd rather not give up food. It's not glandular, it's greed. If I didn't work out I'd still eat as much but instead of being probably 20 pounds overweight, I would be 40 pounds overweight and growing.' In any case, 'I don't think a comedian should be worried about their weight'.

Has he ever been on a diet? 'No.' At some points in his life – notably as a student, when he had little money, and had to cook for himself – 'I didn't eat and I was thin'. But 'for the past 15 years I've eaten and I've got fat'.

"Twitter = Terse. I like terse."

Comments Freeman Hunt on last night's post about Twitter.

Nothing prevents us bloggers from blogging tersely wherever we are already blogging. When I started blogging, I worked hard at terseness, and I still do. Nevertheless, there's a temptation to expand and elaborate. Terseness is a discipline. Some of use can achieve it without imposed constraints.

Twitter wants to make us all Instapundit.

***

I tried very hard to make this post terse, but it's way too long for Twitter.

***

Hey, follow me on Twitter.

So Obama has chosen Rick Warren to give the invocation at the inauguration ceremony.

How interesting! A clever choice. It made me go back to my notes on the Saddleback Forum, the hour-long interviews that Obama and McCain gave to Rick Warren back in August. I liked Warren's style and thought Obama had a good little talk with him. Obama obviously has a problem going back to his own spiritual mentors, and this is a good chance to show some warmth to the Christian evangelicals that he offended with his unfortunate remark about bitter Americans clinging to religion.

Andrew Sullivan says "Ugh":

Warren is a man who believes my marriage removes his freedom of speech and cannot say that authorizing torture is a moral failing. Shrewd politics, but if anyone is under any illusion that Obama is interested in advancing gay equality, they should probably sober up now. He won't be as bad as the Clintons (who, among leading Democrats, could?), but pandering to Christianists at his inauguration is a depressing omen. More evidence that a civil rights movement needs to realize that no politician can deliver for us what we have to deliver on our own.

Who needs omens when Obama was always clear that he opposed same-sex marriage? He said so every time he was asked. It's funny that Sullivan is telling other people to "sober up," when he was the one who was most unsober about Obama during the campaign season.

ADDED: "The rapid, angry reaction from a range of gay activists comes as the gay rights movement looks for an opportunity to flex its political muscle."

IN THE COMMENTS: Blake challenges me:

Wait, didn't Althouse also take similar stances as Sullivan? Not on gay marriage, but in terms of him saying one thing and meaning the exact opposite?

Am I misremembering?

I respond:

Blake, I wrote [the day after the forum]: "Obama garbled: "The reason that people believe there needs to be a constitutional amendment, some people believe, is because, uh, of the concern that, uh, uh, about same-sex marriage. I'm not somebody who's [sic] promotes same-sec [sic] marriage, but I do believe in civil unions. I do believe that we should not, um, that that for a gay partners [sic] to want to visit each other in the hospital, for the state to say, you know what, that's all right, I don't think in any way inhibits my core beliefs about what marriage are [sic]." I think all those little glitches, especially the glaring grammatical error "what marriage are," strongly suggest that he is hiding what he really thinks."

I thought about that when I wrote this post, but I think that privately Obama supports gay marriage, but as a political leader, he has chosen to take the more moderate position. I think he was lying about his "core beliefs" there, but I think he was telling us his official answer as he has consistently.

Now, I do understand why people who put gay rights first detest the symbolism of picking Warren. But who do they think he should have picked instead?

Now, here's why I'm not on the same page as Sullivan:

1. Though I voted for Obama, I didn't fall in love with him. Throughout the campaign season, I looked at him with a critical eye and often thought he was playing us. I was never set up for disillusionment.

2. I thought and continue to think that Obama is reasonably compassionate toward gay people, but that he's coolly practical about amassing and preserving his own political power. He has remained the same. I'm sure he'd be all for gay rights if he'd become a law professor, but he's got a more complex task at hand, and I respect that.

3. I think same-sex marriage is far down on the list of issues for the President to concern himself with and think gay people, like everyone else, need to be realistic about where politicians should be investing their political capital.

4. I reject the hostility that Sullivan shows toward "Christianists" who hold traditional values that he wishes would change. They are an important part of our culture, and Obama needs to relate to them in a positive way.

5. I don't believe the image of the angry, spiteful gay is helpful to the gay rights cause.

Back to the comments. Blake responds:

Yes, perhaps that's what I was thinking of.

I seem to recall other occasions -- non-gay marriage related -- where Obama said one thing and you were of the idea that he felt the opposite.

I'm not trying for a "gotcha" or anything. McCain may have been saying what he actually felt, but you never knew how he was gonna feel the next moment.

Definitely. I think the public Obama persona is an elaborate creation -- an impressive one. I try to imagine what the real Obama is like. For example, as I've said many times, I don't think Obama is religious (and that's why he's able to use religious rhetoric well).

Freeman Hunt says:

Where does the belief come from that Obama secretly supports gay marriage? Just a guess? Based on what? I'd be more likely to believe that he doesn't care in the slightest about gay marriage or any other gay issue. I bet such things barely register as blips on his mental radar, and that when they do register, it's only insofar as he has to handle such issues delicately in politics due to conflicting constituencies.

I tend to assume he's like all the liberal lawprofs I know, but I concede that these people may be chameleons. They are seeking power and prestige in their domain. (Why won't I say "our domain"?) But you have a point.

Peter Hoh says:

Though it's not perfectly apt for this situation, I'm reminded of Megan McArdle's First Rule of Politics:

small groups get favors from the politicians they support only to the extent that it does not annoy large groups who voted for those politicians.

I think he's still worth reading, but Andy's getting too worked up over this. Calm and steady wins the race. He admired that in Obama. He should take the same approach with regard to the effort to recognize same-sex marriage.

Yeah.

Palladian writes:

[Quoting Zachary Paul Sire:] "Inviting 'Rick' is not a slap in the face to gays as much as it is a disingenuous olive branch to evangelicals. And they're falling for it!"

So your candidate is a liar and a phony who makes false statements about his religious beliefs in order to garner political support? Classy!

"Obama is all about trying to please everyone with gestures and concessions."

Again, you admit that your candidate is a big phony, a big panderer and a big ass-kisser?

"Until he actually starts enacting policies and putting forth his specific agenda, no one should be freaking out."

So when this mythical policy-enacting phase begins, he'll eschew all these lies about religion and beliefs and his true, godless socialist qualities will shine forth?

"And let's be honest. Warren is, as everyone knows, a tool."

Wait, you just admitted that your candidate is a liar and a phony and only says things for political expediency and you're calling Rick Warren a tool? What makes you think you aren't the tool that Obama is using, my little salami-smoker? [NOTE: Both Zachary and Palladian are gay and have been talking to each other in such terms here for a long time. (Titus too.)]

"We should be proud of Obama for using him as well as he is."

We should be proud of Obama for lying about his beliefs and being too ashamed and afraid to admit his true beliefs and feelings about gay rights? So lying and slinking around in the shadows is now a point of pride? Wow. Furl your rainbow flags everyone! Gay pride now means hiding your true feelings and lying your way into high office!

"If this endears another couple hundred thousand evangelicals to Obama, and thus helps him out in 2012, then that's fine by me."

It's fine by you that Obama is lying, just because you think this will give him some political advantage in the next election, even though you don't actually know what he's going to do or whether you'll actually want him to be re-elected? Lying and selling out my true beliefs and double-crossing my countrymen for political gain is admirable? Wow. Reminds me why I don't belong to a political party. I'd rather be a loser than sell my soul to win.

"Trust me, Obama doesn't give a fuck about Rick Warren."

Wow, how admirable a quality in a President! He selects someone who he "doesn't give a fuck about" to give the invocation at his inauguration! Why that kind of cynicism sounds like CHANGE I CAN BELIEVE IN!

Zachary Paul Sire responds to Palladian:

So when this mythical policy-enacting phase begins, he'll eschew all these lies about religion and beliefs and his true, godless socialist qualities will shine forth?

One can HOPE!

Lying and selling out my true beliefs and double-crossing my countrymen...blah blah blah

You can drop the naive act. As if you, or anyone, ever believed that any politician in modern history didn't lie or mask their true intentions to get elected. Spare me the drama.

I have my suspicions of what he'll do (lead an incredibly balanced, pragmatic administration without ruffling anyone's feathers), and until I'm proven otherwise, I make no judgments about the man "selling out beliefs."

He's playing a game that all of them sign up for, not committing moral suicide.

Palladian says:

"He's playing a game that all of them sign up for, not committing moral suicide."

I don't trust the character judgments of those that are already morally dead.

Zachary Paul Sire says:

I love that Sullivan failed to mention how Rev. Joe Lowery, co-founder of the SCLC and a same-sex marriage supporter, is also on the bill for inauguration day, overseeing the benediction. I guess acknowledging that balance would've undercut his blog post and made his whining look even more childish than it already is (if that's possible).

Titus says:

I am a gay and I don't give a shit if Rick Warren gives the invocation.

How's that for the how some in the gay mafia feel?

None of my gay mafia friends give a shit either.

Now if it was Pat Boone I may feel a little bad... but still wouldn't give a shit.

Rick Warren is physically very repulsive though and for that I do feel bad. I hate seeing a fat man.

He is too fat. He has no chin and he thinks he is funny.

Well, you know, Obama used to be fat. Now, he makes a huge point of keeping rail thin.

Tattoos, tattoos, tattoos.

Yesterday, I started a discussion about tattoos. Chip Ahoy said, for himself, he'd always wanted "a snake crawling out of my arse crack," that is a tattoo of same, not an actual snake. For me?

Something tattooed on a spot on the body that moves like an elbow or a knee so that a frog appears to croak or a woman's breasts bulge, or eyes widen.

A tattoo that appears to be a rip in the skin revealing underneath to be steam-punk mechanism of gears and levers rather than muscles...

Like a sly reference to the "In His Image" episode of "The Twilight Zone"? (Video.)

...or perhaps a sack of worms.

A tattoo to look like an alien being born by tearing its way out.

A realistic eyeball on the back of your neck. [When I was a youngster I asked my mum how she knew what I was up to and she answered, "Because I have eyes in the back of my head." Being a literalist, I took her on her word, and for years tried to examine her head more closely to confirm it. She was always such the bullshitter.]

Conversely, a realistic eyeball on your forehead that blinks when you furrow your brow.

Weighing scales that rise and fall depending on your arm movement would be too trite. Reject those.

Something in Latin that makes a person asking appear foolish for having asked isn't worth the joke. Reject that too.

Also reject some long passage or inspiring message that must be closely examined in order to be read. They're pretentious and the reader is ultimately let down for having troubled.

A dung beetle placed on your gluteus maximus appearing to be rolling a piece of dung away from your anus.

A radiation hazard symbol tattooed on your penis. Oh wait.

An archer fish depicted spitting placed near your urethra.

A Boxer dog tattooed on each breast so that when they sag they magically become Shar-peis.

For myself, I've always been partial to Egyptian designs, at least that's what I doodled all through college, and that's the art I sell, so the only tattoo acceptable for myself is a design of my own in the Egyptian style. It would be large, colorful, and dramatic. Probably a winged solar disc with something within the disc, possibly a uraeus.

There's an idea for you, a uraeus on your forehead.

Back to the snake!

Or a snake wrapped around your arm.

Or a gold bracelet with lapis lazuli. But then that begs the question, why not a real bracelet? I always thought if you were inclined to tattoo barbed wire around your arm, then real barbed wire would be much more dramatic.

A crown of thorns across your forehead.

Bugs crawling from out between your breasts.

An "R" and a "L" tattooed on the back of each hand appropriately. Or the word "Down" tattooed on top of each foot and possibly "Up" tattooed on your forehead.

"I'm with Stupid --->" tattooed immediately beneath your clavicle.

A diver hands clasped together aiming downward tattooed on you one side of your belly appearing to be preparing to dive into your pants.

An alligator snapping out of your crotch.

An elf, a fairy, a gnome, a leprechaun, or otherwise, some tiny being tattooed making it's way out of your pubic hair.

Ropes tattooed around your arms and legs so when you crossed your arms or legs it would appear as if you were suggesting bondage.

Robot parts tattooed on working segments of your body.

Open eyes tattooed on your eyelids.

A mustache tattooed with glow-in-dark ink, just for fun.

Jagged backhoe bucket teeth tattooed around your mouth.

Mucus tattooed draining from your nose.

Ants tattooed crawling in a line across your shoulder or torso carrying off some treasure like a leaf segment or other bug parts.

Bees laden with pollen tattooed to appear crawling out of your ears as if they [were] flowers.

A raptor on one knee and a bunny, chipmunk, fox, lamb or some other prey animal on the other knee, so that when your legs are crossed one appears to engulf the other.

Wow! Chip was a blog thread unto himself. Such overwhelming thread domination could have silenced everyone else. But we still had Christy:

A stylized slightly tilted fibonacci spiral that starts directly above the center of your left eyebrow, arches up and drops to end in a tight swirl beside your left eye. In blue, a strong blue. With wings coming off the outside edge of the curve that reach up and out to your hairline. A little black can be used to give definition to the wings.

Then, Dody Jane said:

I am going to answer seriously... I was in a writing seminar once called "Writing Family Stories". There was a man in the class of East Indian heritage - he was first generation American. 

He told a lovely story about being taken to India as a child. It was a pilgrimage of sorts. His mother had the back of his neck tatooed with a round black dot. She was not going on the trip. He was going with his father. She told him she had the tattoo placed at the nape of his neck so that God would be able to easily identify him when he looked down from heaven and protect him from harm while on his journey. The way he told the story was so incredibly moving. 

I think this is an ideal tattoo. I told my daughter it is the only tattoo I would sanction. Otherwise, I told her I am leaving everything to charity. She remains untattooed...

See, I hear that story, and I imagine God thinking: There's that kid with the dot again, whose mother thinks he's so special, like I'll be all screw the other kids, this one has a dot.

Freeman Hunt said:

I told my husband about this thread, and he had a recent tattoo anecdote I have to share:

Last week my husband was down in our basement with his friends for their weekly movie get together. One of the men took off a fleece pullover and inadvertently pulled up the t-shirt underneath, revealing what appeared to be a large flower on one pectoral muscle with his nipple forming the center.

"Wait a minute--what was that?! Is that a flower around your nipple? Lift up your shirt again."

"No. That's the only time you'll ever see it."

"Why do you have a giant flower around your nipple?"

"It's not a flower. I'm going to get it fixed. It was going to be something else, but it hurt too much, so they couldn't finish it."

"Well, right now it looks like a flower."

"I know."

Ha.

Ha, indeed.

"Dinosaur-human relations are not, to the best of my knowledge, part of the bailout debate and its partisanship..."

"... otherwise known as the subjects of this thread."

Said Freeman Hunt, in that thread yesterday that went awry.



Thanks to Palladian for the LOLdino.

Now, did Sarah Palin say that "dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time"? I don't know, but it's such a charming, distracting controversy, compared to the -- what is it? -- impending depression.

ADDED: A little theme music:



(Suggested by Pogo.)

Biden "is a distinctive blend of pit bull and odd duck whose weak filters make him capable of blurting out pretty much anything."

I was making fun of that muddle of images from a NYT article. In the comments, Reader_iam exclaimed:

OH THE VISUALS, OH THE VISUALS!
OH MY [MIND'S] EYES!
OH MY [MIND'S] EYES!

What an onslaught of imagery! An assault, really.

Freeman Hunt was all:

You mean the duck with the pit bull head dancing on a vaudeville stage with some kind of engine that requires filters coming out of its back and puffing smoke??

And Palladian made this:

Republicans "have a tradition of nominating fun, bantamweight cheerleaders from the West, like the previous Miss Congeniality types Dan Quayle and W."

Writes Maureen Dowd. Dan Quayle was a Senator from Indiana. I guess that looks like "the West" when you're looking from New York City. (You already know what's at that link, don't you?)

If Quayle was a "fun, bantamweight cheerleader from the West," then Obama must be too. Illinois -- for the geographically challenged -- is one notch west of Indiana. And Quayle was a first second term Senator when he was picked for VP in 1988. But And he'd been in Congress since 1976.

IN THE COMMENTS: Bissage said:

I read that Maureen Dowd piece twice but I still don’t get it. Sarah Palin can’t have it all? Only a loser rube would believe what's uncontested and be charmed by early stage Palin? Dick Cheney’s a bantamweight cheerleader? Heck, I didn’t even know there were weight classes in cheerleading. Color me confused.

Paul Zrimsek said:

Was Quayle ever considered fun? I recall that he was the Devil incarnate for a while for having the nerve to suggest that Murphy Brown was unwise to try single motherhood. Since we now learn that a woman can't combine family and career even with the aid of a husband, it may be that Quayle's been forgiven.

Freeman Hunt said:

I am getting extremely offended by this liberal meme that attractive women are nothing more than beauty queens regardless of their accomplishments. Palin has accomplished more in her short time in office than most accomplish over entire careers. But none of that matters; she's pretty, so that's all she is.

Absolute sexism.

Yeah, and it reinforces that sexist meme that feminism is a plot to help unattractive women get ahead.

Maguro said:

So being president of Harvard Law Review is now an important qualification for POTUS, particularly if the the other party's VP candidate went to the University of Idaho? LOL, good luck with that one.

To which Bissage responds:

Yeah, really. This ordinary-people-get-to-vote thing's a real bitch.

Mysterious fat.

We're still talking about fat. Back here.

Freeman Hunt said:

[I]t ... comes down to math... There is no mystery to getting in shape.

Noumenon said:

I think it's a complete mystery. As some magazine article I read pointed out, it's impossible to do controlled experiments with diet regimens because there's no proven way to lose weight and keep it off to use as a control group. We haven't a clue.

I said:

I agree that it's a mystery, but you can extract one truth: if you're still fat, you need to eat less. It doesn't matter why other people don't get fat when they seem to eat the same thing. Look at your own situation. If you're still fat, cut down. Eat less, and weigh yourself. Do it every day for the rest of your life. There's nothing wrong with you. It's just the natural impulse that allowed your ancestors to survive through famines. You have a healthy urge and a healthy body, but in times of affluence, that will make you fat. You've got to go against your nature and eat less. Until you're not fat any more. Or, as Roseanne Barr once said: "Just be fat and shut up."

UPDATE: Some people are getting very upset at that Roseanne Barr quote -- which is from that great concert she did before she had her sitcom. It's almost as if people don't remember that she's a comedian... and that she's fat. Some folks are reading this post as insulting fat people and calling them lazy. Huh? Where is that? And many, many of the comments here and on other blogs are testament to how amazingly strong the mental defenses are. People simply do not want to face the fact that if they are fat they've been eating too much, which is all I said. It is utterly irrelevant to that point that some people can eat a lot more than others without getting fat or that if you'd exercise more you could get away with eating more. If you are fat, you are eating more than you need to fuel your body as you are using it. That doesn't mean it's easy to just eat less, and it doesn't mean that there aren't some ways of eating less that are better than others. But, good lord, it's absurd to keep denying that you're fat because you're eating too much!