America's Geniuses Defend Maxim; Concerning Blowjobs; WBAI Yelps Back; How Can Taki Praise Kissinger?; Hipsters Berate Vizzini; Someone Notices Baltimore City Paper
Next time, could you use a higher res scan?
Mark Duffy, Manhattan
David Maloney, Pollok, TX
Required Reading for Hinterland Dorks
I just read your interview with the "Dudes" from Maxim magazine. I absolutely agree with you about their editorial content. My buddies find Maxim great, though they only skim the articles?they wouldn't change a thing. They even find the sex advice a boon. I, on the other hand, find the magazine to be a retread. And I don't think it will go away, because there are many young boys coming of age who are ill-informed and will find Maxim a great guy mag. Notice I didn't say "men's mag." Hopefully Maxim will eventually get tired of itself and will bolster its editorial content. They don't need to go overboard, but a definite change is needed.
David Booth, Long Branch, NJ
Marriage of Minds
I just finished reading your interview with the guys from Maxim magazine. I'm a 33-year-old male who loves the magazine. My wife got it for me and she reads?not looks at, reads?some of the articles. I read it from front to back, starting with the editor's comments.
I think your badgering of those two editors was the most tasteless item about the article.
Thanks for your time.
Luigi Buscemi, via Internet
See? Smart People Do Read Maxim
John Strausbaugh and Russ Smith: You are idiots! You put down Maxim mag because you don't find it entertaining or interesting. Obviously a lot of people disagree with you. I work for the U.S. Postal Service and I and many others pick up the mag to check out the pictures and the articles. If it was just to look at girls, we could see more in Penthouse or Playboy. The articles may not be essays, but who cares! Only you, I guess. Maxim did an article on Pattaya, Thailand, that was interesting enough that a friend and I went to Thailand for the first time last April, had a wonderful time and just returned with five guys who came over this time. All of us are returning in February with two or more additional friends. (One pal married a girl there, in case you think we just went there for sex, and I may be bringing a girl back in February.) Just because something doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean it's not any good.
A. Amancio, via Internet
Extirpating Sinfulness
John Strausbaugh and Russ Smith: What are you doing? Do you really think we need five crummy pages of your dull attacks on Maxim's editors (while still managing to not say anything)?
You: "Your magazine doesn't write about anything of consequence."
Them: "But it's vulgar and it's funny."
You: "But it doesn't write about anything of consequence."
Thanks, but we got it by line two.
Oh, and that whole thing about pee-shy guys not being a new idea... Who's on first now? Maxim's simple writing and huge success isn't exactly a new story either. Where were you a year ago when every magazine and major newspaper in the country was going bonkers with stories on Maxim and "the unexpected men's revolution"? If you still don't get it, call Susan Faludi.
Jeremy Davis, Manhattan
Russ Sucks. He Uses Prepositions
MUGGER: What's with the annoying habit of dropping the preposition "of" into your sentences? An example occurs in your interview with the Maxim editors, when you say to David Itzkoff: "...which tells me a couple of things." Knipfel does it all the time, too.
I think you are a great writer otherwise, neighbor.
Jim McCarthy, Manhattan
Fighting Illini
MUGGER: Out here in Illinois (flyover country), it is good to know that there is at least one Easterner with common sense. I have enjoyed your columns and opinions.
Ken Lawson, Stockton, IL
Don't Do Us Any Favors
I will now deign to pick up your horrible paper from the green box on my corner: Hail, Tama Janowitz! Finally someone who writes about food, and does so very well. Don't let her go, please.
Suzy O'Brien, Brooklyn
The editors reply: As though we, or Janowitz, need idiots for readers. If Suzy Q is only just now deigning to pick up our horrible paper, how is it she knew Janowitz had just started writing for us and that all our food writing until then wasn't up to her standards?
Quaint
MUGGER: I can picture it now: eight-year-old MUGGER Jr., in his Mets regalia, yelling, "Yankees suck!" at passing Yankee fans (11/1).
Somebody call Norman Rockwell.
Someone should have clipped you in the ear for allowing such an obnoxious display from an eight-year-old. And we wonder what's wrong with the world today.
Dan Rohan, Bronx
Ned, Are Congratulations In Order?
Don't you people know your history? In the wake of Sam Schulman's terrific fellatio article ("Taki's Top Drawer," 10/25), I was astounded to see neither Schulman himself nor some astute New York Press reader stating the obvious: that the views expressed in this Fellatio, Masochism, Politics, and Love book are almost precisely the views of the Ancient Romans.
Those nutty Romans, as we're all taught, were pretty open about sex. They accepted group sex, homo sex and kiddie sex. But one thing they did not look kindly upon was getting head.
See, the Romans defined sexual roles not by which gender you preferred, but by whether you liked being "penetrator" or "penetratee" in a given situation. A man was naturally inclined to be "penetrator," so it was acceptable for him to be on the positive end of an anal interaction. But being on the negative end, whoa. It was shameful and?even worse?womanly.
Blowjobs were viewed the same way. If you got one, you were just sitting there, chilling, not acting positively as a good Roman citizen would. You were putting yourself at the mercy of a female?what could be worse? Women who participated in this disgusting activity were said to have "dirty mouths" and were not to be kissed (kissing being a standard form of greeting among the Romans).
Andrew Byler's response to the article ("The Mail," 11/1) shows the sort of disgust a Roman man would feel at fellatio's new position as a cornerstone of sexual interaction. I don't think it's that bad. But still, it's worth looking into: did Roman women start giving more head as the empire crumbled?
Ned Vizzini, Brooklyn, NY
Taki for Secretary of State
Melik Kaylan: Baseball patently does not spring from the loins of cricket ("Taki's Top Drawer," 11/1). Having played and watched cricket for years, as have you, I maintain that evolution would take at least 5000 more years of refulgency. (Oo-la-la, quel mot.)
Baseball comes from an English school game called rounders, which looks suspiciously like softball.
Taki: As soon as Dr. Kissinger recovers ("Top Drawer," 11/1) I will accept binding mediation in this dispute. Too bad this godlike creature was not available to keep us out of Kosovo and curb Bubba's Drive-By Diplomacy. I am praying he'll be available to the next president.
F.J.P. Francomano, Marysville, OH
It Isn't Cricket
Melik Kaylan: I've never considered the Eurocentric view of our national pastime; after wading through your article, I'm not likely to consider it in the future. Maybe George Will just fucking likes baseball. You can talk and act like a rich wimp and still you're allowed to cheer. This does differ from cricket and polo, perhaps, where talking and acting like a rich wimp is a prerequisite.
Another thing: I'm too young to have seen Mickey Mantle play, but I've never heard the words "gentlemanly code" associated with his name. Consider that the greatest hitter ever, a member of that golden baseball generation, Ted Williams, had a hostile relationship with reporters, and often spat on spectators.
The reason baseball is so very American is the fact that it shares America's lack of "medieval memory." Here, we've always enjoyed freedom from that kind of baggage?which is not to say we don't have plenty of our own. Gene Hackman has a line in Mississippi Burning concerning what he likes about baseball: "It's the only time a black man can wave a stick at a white man and not start a riot."
There is ample cultural and historical memory in baseball.
Peter J. Browne, Manhattan
Bullet Head
Speaking of "not let[ting] the facts get in the way of a good story," Norman Kelley takes a back seat to no one in that regard in his glowing review of Michael Bellesiles' polemic against guns ("Books," 10/25).
Arming America has been thoroughly discredited since its ballyhooed publication, but in the interest of preserving space, let's just focus on one undeniable fact: an unarmed citizenry is at the total mercy of its rulers. A monopoly on firepower equates to unbridled rule for the monopolizer. The certainty of this was established long before the invention of gunpowder. In old Athens, the citizen-soldier, the hoplite, was a force to be reckoned with both by enemies of the city-state and by those holding political power within it. The hoplites were prosperous enough to afford fine armor, weapons and training. To piss them off was disastrous. They, therefore, were listened to when they complained, and they were never servile slaves of the state. They fought against those who would destroy Athens, but they did so of their own free will.
One other point: Norman ought to familiarize himself with what the British are suffering since the Blairites have totally disarmed the ordinary citizen. Authorities estimate that at least three million weapons are in the hands of criminals, gun violence is skyrocketing, gun trafficking is a booming business, the bobbies have had to start strapping on the iron and a lot of Brits are reduced to trying to protect themselves by buying bulletproof vests and hoping the bad guys don't shoot them in the head. If the gun-haters here have their way, we won't even enjoy the last option, since possession of armored vests is illegal for potential victims.
Ask a violent criminal about gun control. He'll be all for it. It's only bad for the people who obey laws. It vastly expands the victim class. It costs lives. Gun control sucks, just like Norman Kelley's mewling little book review.
Ron Smith, Shrewsbury, PA
Norman Kelley replies: Mr. Smith writes, "Arming America has been thoroughly discredited since its ballyhooed publication, but in the interest of preserving space..." Yet he cites no sources for its alleged discreditation. Has he even read the book? I don't think so. This is a standard propaganda technique?to say something has been done, yet cite no evidence of such. I at least read the book. If Mr. Smith wants to have an honest discussion, he should read the book. But his response is true to all totalitarian mentalities, left or right. And he proved my point. He would much rather dis me than deal with a real problem in America.
Under Your Skin, Terry?
MUGGER: "Marching orders from the likes of Bill Clinton and James Carville" ("The Mail," 11/1)? Does nothing go on in that tiny head of yours? Is that humor? I don't get it. Your lumbering, flop-sweaty prose, engined by pure resentment and petty hatred, is chock-full of name-calling of the most juvenile kind, yet, unlike an asshole with a real brain (like, say, Rush Limbaugh), your skin is as thin as George W. Bush's comprehension of calculus.
Learn to take the abuse you so much like to dish out, Russ! Revel in it! It will make you seem like a far less appalling dumbshit-with-his-own-paper.
Terry Benoit, Manhattan
Edgar Cayce Speaks
MUGGER: Al Gore will win the popular vote by six or seven points, and he will win the Electoral College by a landslide.
Will Smith, New Haven, CT
Send Him A Button
MUGGER: I'm not a Bush supporter, and I disagree with some of your nastier cracks about lefty journalists (sanctimonious righty whiners like Peggy Noonan and Ann Coulter provide company on the All-Irritating List). However, I think you absolutely nailed your main argument (11/1): there is simply no objective evidence that this is as close a race as the national media suggests. I, too, have been scratching my head about this. Though I don't like admitting this (I am a journalist too), I have to accept your explanation that it is bias, though there is probably also the need to manufacture "horse race" drama.
Although polls are fallible, Bush has had a consistent lead in almost all of them, some outside the margin of error, since the third debate. The test I use for myself is, "How would the media be reporting this if the roles were reversed?" Certainly, the Bush campaign would be portrayed as devastated and desperate?there is a whiff of this about Gore among more responsible media members, but generally not.
I too smell a blowout. Perhaps you and I will wake up after Election Day (or more likely be groggily or drunkenly awake Election Night), and be surprised, but I think not.
David Brauer, Minneapolis
Baseball, MUGGER...
MUGGER: I just read your column for the first time, finding it on a link from Matt Drudge's site. Really good stuff on politics and on the World Series. I'm going to follow this regularly in the future.
Herb Melcher, Edina, MN
Will Do!
Keep it up, Alexander Cockburn! Good work.
Iakovos Vasiliou, Atlanta
The Enemy Within
I was just reading Alexander Cockburn's article ("Wild Justice," 11/1). He talks about the desperation of Martin Peretz in grabbing at anything to smear Ralph Nader. He recounts Peretz's attack on Nader for publishing an article in a long-defunct, supposedly anti-Semitic magazine (The American Mercury). What follows is a quoted piece of text, anti-Semitic, that from the structure of the piece appears to be attributed to Nader himself. I couldn't believe this, because I know Nader to be very cautious and judicious with his statements. I went to the New Republic website to read Peretz's article myself. Of course Nader didn't make this anti-Semitic statement. It was made in some other article in the magazine.
Point is, someone reading Cockburn's article may believe that Nader himself made the statement. Either discipline your word processors or find out who the mole is. You laugh? George Bush has Gore moles on his staff.
Other observations on the World Series ("MUGGER," 11/1): I am glad MUGGER unearthed that little fact about Brooklyn Dodger attendance in 1955 (14,000 per game). The problem is that even though there were probably only about 15,000 real Dodger fans, they just won't shut the fuck up.
Another point: Pete Hamill takes a lot of liberties by implying that the Mets are the Dodgers' inheritors in the hearts and minds of New Yorkers. I always thought that it was New York Giants fans who transferred their allegiance to the Mets. Mets fans are simple, enthusiastic, uncomplicated. They don't care about this Brooklyn Dodger bullshit. Never met a Met fan who had been a Brooklyn Dodger fan.
Name Withheld, via Internet
Two Votes for Pat
I remember when I used to read the Village Voice. Then I actually moved to New York and was delighted to find that New York Press was in circulation. Never mind the superior ink (which doesn't send one to the washroom), your stable of writers kicks the Voice into the dust for diversity of opinion and, frankly, good writing (aside from Toby Young's mindless jottings).
MUGGER, for all your repugnant shilling for an inferior candidate, you have the wisdom to have Taki and all the rest to provide us with a voice of reason. Thank you, Taki, for your column "Pat's the One" ("Top Drawer," 10/25). I almost choked on my hamburger reading your sentence, "But before I go on about Pat..."
When I pull the lever for Patrick J. Buchanan (and Rick Lazio) on Nov. 7, I'll go to sleep knowing I am fighting the good fight against shameless and unprincipled Clintonistas, and will sleep like a baby.
Marc Safman, Queens
Little Turkish Boy
In the past I have enjoyed reading Taki for his straightforward style and politically incorrect point of view. One had to forgive him his schoolgirl adulation of celebrities and aristocrats, which I attributed to his being either short, of recent peasant ancestry or both. I also surmised, from his name, that he was Greek.
After reading his fawning, nearly drooling hagiographic portrait of Henry Kissinger ("Top Drawer," 11/1), one of the most sinister war criminals in history, a man who was instrumental in screwing Greece in the 70s (he and the CIA are directly responsible for current Greek anti-Americanism and the growth of the November 17 terrorist group) and, in particular, in betraying Greek Cypriots by handing over nearly 40 percent of Cyprus to invading marauding Turks (whose troops continue to illegally occupy it today), I can only conclude that Taki is in fact the spawn of one of the subhuman Turkish criminals who occupied Greece for 400 years and raped indiscriminately amongst all classes of women.
Anyone who has studied the world history of the past 40 years knows that Kissinger, by all rights, should be rotting in some fetid, solitary cell in one of the Third World countries he helped to destroy. And Taki, after penning such pig-ignorant drivel, should for all time know that in Athens and in Nicosia, his name is shit.
Matthew J. Stowell, Copiague, NY
K-Hole
All those years of swilling gin in swell nightspots have evidently turned ol' Taki's brain to feta cheese. His rap on the good Dr. Kissinger borders on the insane.
First, Taki seems to think the murderers who bombed the USS Cole are brave warriors, and not crazed religious terrorist cowards. To confer upon them the dignity of fallen soldiers, which Taki seems to believe will mollify the mullahs, is vile, despicable and repulsive, and fitting for the chickenshit, parasitic son-of-a-blip on the face of the Mediterranean that has spent the past few millennia squandering its vast cultural heritage, and whose aggregate contribution to the current culture seems to be the gyro sandwich and nifty blue paper coffee cups. (I just said that to piss him off.) But then, what can we expect from a guy whose writing career seems to have largely been an attempt to get some sheik to spring for his next jeroboam at Regine's?
As to the wisdom and tolerance of Islam, Taki is obviously right?the loving teachings of Islam call for the extension of Dar-al-Islam to the entire world and the generous, kindly offer to all infidels the opportunity to live as slavish dhimmi, convert to Islam or be summarily put to death. Tolerant indeed!
To this latest bigoted, revisionist screed, I say that Taki's invoking Henry Kissinger as a fellow traveler in his murky and anti-Semitic waters is almost funny, and, rest assured, the Secretary would certainly disavow any knowledge of his actions, Taki's flatulent flattery notwithstanding.
Name Withheld, Manhattan
They Were Provoked
I have thoroughly enjoyed New York Press for the sting and clash (Patton's phrase) of its diverse, unfettered opinion, often elegantly expressed. Some observations are brilliant. Some are tosh, and some both, sometimes from the same writers. Daily obligations and distractions have thwarted my impulses to respond to the latter. Until now. Regrettably, I find myself obliged to take issue with a man with whom my thinking is generally synchronous: Le Maître.
In his "Top Drawer" column of 10/11, Taki is withering in his condemnation of Israel's response to Arab violence. Note the word, "response." Not a single Arab, man or youth, would have been hurt had they refrained from initiating and persisting in unprovoked violence. Taki says, "The Palestinians did not start this. Ariel Sharon did..." With all respect: bullfeathers.
First, Sharon has an unqualified right, as a Jew, to visit Judaism's holiest shrine. Nevertheless, he gave prior notice to the Moslem clerics and Jibril Rajoub, Arafat's security chief. Shlomo Ben Ami, the dovish minister, who was present, says the only stipulation was that Sharon not enter the mosque. He did not. Trouble had begun prior to the visit with killings of Israeli soldiers at Gaza and Kalkilya. It was followed by rioters raining rocks the size of softballs down on Jewish worshippers at the Western Wall.
It is said Arafat does not control the rioters. Some facts: when the troubles began, the schools declared a holiday. (Does Arafat have a problem controlling his school board?) Television ran footage of the Intifada and blared martial music. (Does he have a problem with the people who run his tv?) And it is reported Barak was advised by his intelligence, months before, that Arafat was planning his own October Surprise.
So Sharon's visit served as a neat pretext, a red herring that blame-Israel-first diplomats and pundits have no trouble swallowing hook, line and sinker.
Now no decent person, in a sane state of mind, takes pleasure in the sight of young people dead and dying (the butchers who murdered the soldiers at Ramallah, now that's another story). The death of the father and son caught in the crossfire is particularly tragic. The images are haunting and inflammatory?as the persons who mastermind this scenario are quite aware.
But stones can maim, blind, even kill. A stone propelled from a slingshot felled Goliath. Stoning was the biblical death penalty of choice for activities like adultery. So what do you do if you are a young soldier charged with protecting civilians and holy sites, one of a relative handful, while scores or even hundreds are hurling projectiles at you, while howling for your blood? Pick up the rocks and throw them back? And it's not just rocks, but burning molotov cocktails?interspersed with live fire from Palestinian Authority "peacekeepers" using Israeli-supplied weapons.
Lou Klein, Manhattan
He Dared to Criticize
As a fond Anglophile, it pains me, during the current Middle East crisis, to see people like Charles Glass ("Top Drawer," 11/1) proffering stale but toxic British anti-Semitism, like some bodega merchant hawking Camel cigarettes. The land Israel "occupies" was acquired not in some imperialist war of aggression, but in a war of defense against the attack of several Arab countries. (Perhaps Glass thinks the Israelis brought the attack on themselves, the way that rape victims "ask for it.") To neutralize the need for Israeli helicopters and bullets, you would have to confiscate not only Palestinian "stones" but also molotov cocktails, various other explosives and AK-47s.
Perhaps Mr. Glass would see British actions differently if the United Kingdom were surrounded by hostile Arab countries that incessantly advertised, to their own people in their own language, their continuing desire to wipe the UK off the face of the Earth. However holy Amnesty International's judgments are to bigoted journalists, that organization has shown its political prejudices with its ridiculous attacks on the penal system of the United States?a system considerably fairer than that of any Arab country, including Arafat's Palestinian state.
Michael Ladenson, Philadelphia
But It's Harder to Say
MUGGER: Shouldn't we start saying, finally, that we are taxing those with high yearly incomes, rather than the "wealthy"? This seems so obvious that I won't even give examples. Would you lead the way?
Ben Sands, Vienna, VA
So Much for Liberal Education
MUGGER: I must simply say that I have grown to greatly appreciate your columns, both for content and for literary aplomb. We are home-schooling our kids and I have my son read your column, along with Peggy Noonan, David Horowitz, Thomas Sowell and Ann Coulter on a daily basis (F-bombs redacted, of course). This allows him to see several different styles and puts you in great company, I think. I especially appreciate the fact that your sharp wit completely overwhelms and deflates your crosstown rivals and their intellectually bankrupt ideas and vapid arguments. Please keep up the good work.
T.J. John, Galveston, TX
He Rides a Pale Horse
MUGGER: Who are you, man? Love your stuff! You write like I talk. Keep going and I'll keep reading!
Chris Malone, Morrisville, NC
Psych-Out
MUGGER: As always, I enjoyed your column, especially the parts railing against Salon and other liberal-media outposts. But I definitely disagree with your take on the Roger Clemens/Mike Piazza bat-throwing incident (11/1). In my mind, it was a move that intimidated the Mets, who ended up with two hits and no runs in eight innings against Clemens. Granted, had the bat hit Piazza, Clemens should have been tossed. It didn't, and wasn't really that close. Clemens got into the Mets' minds and, standing up there against a guy with a 99-mph fastball and a reputation for craziness, they wilted. (By the way, I'm a fan of the Chicago Cubs and would love to see some similar intensity on that squad, a World Series winner last in 1908.)
David Sweet, Manhattan
He'll Charm You All
MUGGER: Thanks for providing, up here in Canada, an alternative if outrageous view of your land. You skewer the complacent and ridicule anyone whose views are not in line with your own. I assume that there is a small element of posturing going on here (no one can contain that much bile, can they?). Anyhow, I know you are anti-Gore, but I can't find a single passage that truly reflects that you are pro-Bush. Could it be that you will hold your nose as you vote Republican this year?
Please consider the state of the world's affairs today. We can't afford an intellectual featherweight in the highest office in the world. The Bush campaign has proved formidable and effective. We both know that his regime (if elected) will suck the reeking buns of angels. He will be viewed as a joke by the world's leaders.
In French we have an expression that translates into, "Seeing his face makes you want to slug him." To outsiders he seems like a cross between a lazy ol' bear and a weasel. How can an expectant world warm up to that?
André Ranger, via Internet
Russ Smith replies: In English we have an expression, too: In the 21st century, liars aren't tolerated in the White House.
Us Too
MUGGER: Your 11/1 column was long, but very enlightening and encouraging. What I found most comforting was your conclusion that Bush has his presidency tied up, because, as I read the Oct. 31 Jewish Journal, Palm Beach edition, wherein they endorse Gore and Lieberman and a number of other Democrats, I felt a tug at my heart from the thought that Florida may in the end be lost for Bush. I want a change in administrations so badly I can taste it, because the present one is so despicable. Can you imagine anyone else but Clinton, whose arrogance knows no bounds, posing for that Esquire photo and letting it all hang out? Outrageous, and this is what the people respect and like and prefer?
As for Hillary?and I no longer live in New York?I want to see her fall flat on her evil face. So you have given me some hope.
Helen Goodman, Delray Beach, FL
Packed with Fiber
MUGGER: Loved your 11/1 column on Bush/Gore. I thought, in picking up New York Press, that it would just be another rag to be used to mindlessly twiddle the time away on the commute home?just slightly better material than letting the shrill announcements blaring delay news get on my nerves. Good show!
John Vivenzio, Setauket, NY
Dead Letters Dept.
MUGGER: My father and brother both worked for a small hometown newspaper in Massachusetts. They would roll over in their graves to read The New York Times and Boston Globe and to listen to Andy Rooney on Imus last week. What a bunch of elite jerks. Love your columns. As a Red Sox fan and Yankee hater, we must be kin.
Bush in a landslide.
Bob Callahan, Durham, NC
And Speaking for the Proletariat...
MUGGER: It's scant consolation, but at least we can always turn to how closely you have tied yourself to the addle-pated, pastor-licking son, brother and husband of undeserved privilege who will probably be in the White House soon.
He is every child of wealth who never had a serious thought that he wasn't spoon-fed, whose way was made for him, for whom everything was greased until he shone from it. He is every mediocre fuck-up who, having wasted his life, found salvation in a savior and system that presupposes the inability of human beings to really change anything of significance. It was easy for him to believe himself to be a member of the pre-elected recipients of an entirely undeserved grace. It was the story of his life, but rewritten so as not to seem as monstrously dishonorable as it is to accept this without feeling obligated toward those not so privileged.
He is every frat president who was never explicitly anti-Semitic because he had power-sucking brothers to keep the "wrong" sort of pledges away from his limited awareness. Similarly, no one ever told him that other people don't cover for you, soothe you and make sure you make money in the end unless you're born as he was. It might start him thinking, and that hurts, and also might make you question the need for, or morality of, the presence of the royal-tending ants who have been there around him from the first.
Of course, this might be entirely realistic. Rich and powerful men of limited imagination and scruple will always attract the attention of the morally and spiritually limited venalities who are ready to cosset, to defend and to praise, as you have well shown and will.
M. Turyn, Watertown, MA
And Pitchforks?
MUGGER: Does Jann Wenner, the multimillionaire publisher whose fifth home is inside Al Gore's butt (11/1), own a "business"? Did you catch Wenner's cameo in Almost Famous? That could be the title of Al Gore's book, after he loses this election and goes running off with his tail between his legs, along with Hillary and the rest of the hillbilly devils. They all really do have tails, you know.
Maybe the haters in the Jackass party will all spend eternity batting against Roger Clemens wearing Piazza masks, but his aim might be off with that busted bat shoved up his ass.
Skip Press, Burbank, CA
Likes Status Quo Just Fine
MUGGER: So Barbara Ehrenreich thinks a vote for Ralph Nader is a statement of "affirmation and hope" (11/1). Um, what exactly is she hoping for? Truth be told, the Nader bubble is all about the Politics of Narcissism?the notion that your vote is not cast for the candidate who is in the best position to better the country (according to one's political interests), but rather that your vote is cast in order to show how smart and noble you are (or to show that you are Tim Robbins). These are the last gaseous exhalations of a dead movement?the Infantile Left?and if this self-immolation is the best they can muster, I say good riddance.
Harley Peyton, Santa Monica
Okay!
MUGGER: I look forward to your commentary each week, and I, too, have disdain for Chris Lehane.
Ned McAuliffe, Chicago
He's Unreal
MUGGER: You were wrong about the last election and you are wrong this time around! Bush may just squeak by, but there won't be a landslide. Bush is lazy and stupid. The only thing that I like about him is that he is a decent runner?7.5-minute miles.
You have no objectivity. If Gore does win, I'll be laughing at you! California and New Jersey will go for Gore bigtime, so you can go pound sand. You are the kind of Republican that real Republicans hate.
Steve Craig, Jersey City
Russ Smith replies: Steverino, that wasn't a compassionate, or conservative, letter at all.
And Then a Nobel
MUGGER: Congrats on being quoted in The Washington Post last week?next stop should be a Pulitzer for political reporting.
My fingers are crossed so hard until Tuesday there will be no blood circulating by then. I hope to have a fine time watching returns with friends, but may I say Damn You, Florida! I'm just a worrywort at heart, but do believe in the end the best instincts of our country will prevail. To top it off (the cherry on the top, if you will), I want to see Hillary's concession speech as I light a fine Cuban victory cigar.