Gene Weingarten
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 4, 2006; 12:00 PM
* Formerly known as "Funny? You Should Ask."
DAILY UPDATES: 4.05.06 | 4.06.06 | 4.07.06
Gene Weingarten's controversial humor column, Below the Beltway, appears every Sunday in The Washington Post Magazine. He aspires to someday become a National Treasure, but is currently more of a National Gag Novelty Item, like rubber dog poo.
He is online, at any rate, each Tuesday, to take your questions and abuse.
He'll chat about anything...
Take This Week's Poll ( Please choose the appropriate one ):
Weingarten is the author of "The Hypochondriac's Guide to Life. And Death" and co-author of "I'm with Stupid," with feminist scholar Gina Barreca. "Below the Beltway" is now syndicated nationally by The Washington Post Writers Group.
New to Chatological Humor? Read the FAQ.
The transcript follows.
____________________
Gene Weingarten: Good afternoon.
One of my favorite pastimes these days is watching The Lou Dobbs show on CNN while eating dinner. It is so funny it is essentially a choking hazard. If you haven't seen it, you must. Lou was once a credible journalist, but he apparently discovered, roughly a year ago, that when he ranted and frothed about illegal immigration, his ratings soared. So that's all he does now, in as wackoid a "news" show as is out there, anywhere. Lou only interviews xenophobes, and these interviews are great
Lou: Would you say illegal immigration is the most important issue facing this country?
Wild-eyed xenophobe: It's the most important issue this country has EVER faced!
Lou: Would you say it is more important than World War II?
Wild-eyed xenophobe: World War II was a jaywalking infraction compared to this!
Lou: I know! Hitler would have been in favor of letting illegal immigrants into the United States!
Wild-eyed xenophobe: I know! Let's kill the illegals!
Lou: Killing is too good for them!
Wild-eyed xenophobe: I know! Let's ...
Those of you who complain that this chat's polls tend to be a little complex or chewy would probably like Lou's viewer polls. They all read like this (Those of you who never watch Lou Dobbs will probably think this is a substantial exaggeration):
Question: Do you think that the United States should better police its borders so swarthy-skinned individuals with poor dental hygiene don't keep taking the jobs of decent American workers and raping our women?
-- Yes, it is time we did something about this terrible problem.
-- No, I am in favor of Americans losing their jobs, and I think rape is good.
Most of these polls show near ONE HUNDRED PERCENT agreement!
Last night on CNN proved a special bonus, since Lou Dobbs was followed by Wolf Blitzer's interview with Cynthia McKinney, the Georgia congresswomen who has been accused of assaulting a Capitol cop with her cellphone because he dared to stop her from entering the Capitol without passing through the metal detector. Ms. McKinney did not have her ID badge, and had completely changed her hairstyle (from something short and sedate to something that looks like she has just been incompletely electrocuted.) Cynthia is just outraged that the cop didn't know who she was.
Cynthia played the race card ("This is about racial profiling!") and then immediately denied she had played the race card, challenging Wolfie to replay the tape. Which he did. ("This is about racial profiling!") The best parts came when Wolf kept asking her whether she actually hit the guy. He asked at least five times, and each time Cynthia embarked on a startlingly different tangent. These ranged from something about Harry Belafonte, to union activity in the Capitol hill police department, to an incident that occurred in some statehouse somewhere some long time ago. (Apparently, Ms. McKinney has a basic problem here: There is apparently tape of the incident.)
As the interview went on, Ms. McKinney was getting more and more agitated, and her eyes seemed to get larger and larger in her head, almost as though they were pneumatic devices, and my son and I - convulsed in laughter, both of us - were waiting for Cynthia to hit Wolf with a cellphone.
If you didn't see this, it's a shame.
Thanks to Megan from Arlington for pointing out something I missed from Sunday's FBOFW . It may be the first risque thing Lynn Johnston has ever put in this strip. I bet she thought no one would notice.
Please take TODAY'S POLL. I will explain my answers, which are the correct answers, midway through. The results so far are unexpected, to me. The conserves seem more willing to cut this guy a break, despite the fact that he is 1) the media and 2) Bush-bashing. I'm impressed, for reasons that will become obvious.
Today's Poll ( Please choose the appropriate one ):I Lean Conservative | I Lean Liberal
Weak comics week. The Comic Pick of the Week is today's Frazz . Runners Up are Sunday's Doonesbury and Sunday's Pearls.
Okay, let's go.
_______________________
Baltimore, Md.: The Post's new Ombudsman gave the following tips this weekend concerning Live Online:
"Here is commonsensical advice for reporters who go on television or radio or do live chats.
-Don't say anything live you would not write in the paper. Don't speculate without a sound basis in fact.
-Don't try to be ironic or sarcastic; it's always misinterpreted. Humor only works if it's light and at no one's expense but your own.
-A relaxed manner is good for chats, but watch you don't come off as unprofessional.
-You're a reporter for a top-notch outfit. Act like it."
Okay. I realize what the role of an ombudsman is, but I can't imagine this chat without Gene's righteousness, on polls, politics, comics, vpl, and baseball. Nor could I imagine a chat with Kurtz without the sarcastic remarks anytime anyone accused him of being liberal and/or conservative. And, I just couldn't take a chat where Fisher pretended to like puppies.
To paraphrase John Riggins, "Lighten up, Deborah, baby!"
washingtonpost.com: Three Venues and One Responsibility (Post, April 2)
Gene Weingarten: Yeah, so here it comes. The chat answer to end all chats. Maybe literally!
Deborah Howell is a friend of mine. She is very smart and usually right. But she is essentially wrong on this one, as have been some other Washington Post editors who have made similar points. They're PARTIALLY right, but they are largely wrong.
This chat is one of the most popular on the website precisely because it is COMPLETELY different from the printed Post. That is the actual strength of the Web. I can pretend -- we all can pretend -- that this is one product, with identical rules, and an identical feel. But if that were so, the Washington Post would not have the best newspaper website, bar none, in the country. Which it does.
Week after week, I say things here in this chat -- and publish things submitted by you -- that would never make it into The Washington Post. Sometimes, it is because they are just a little bit rude and freewheeling (I don't think you are going to see The Washington Post have a lively discussion in its pages about how women wipe themselves on the toilet.) Sometimes, it is just because these things are completely off the cuff and personal and trivial and inexpert. You will not see me expounding on the meaning of Dylan lyrics in the Washington Post. We have people to do that who actually know what they are talking about.
If the rules of the Post were strictly applied to this (and other) chats, these chats would not exist, and that is because the expectations and rhythms of the Web are entirely different. We can be more rude here, and less "important" here. And we should be.
In fact, because this is an anonymous chat, you will see me treat posters incredibly rudely. It's part of a big, anonymous joke, and everyone knows it. No harm is done. The Washington Post would never treats its letter-writers, for example, with such open ridicule or contempt.
Where Deborah is right is that there are lines that we do not cross here. I will not libel anyone. I will not print words that the Post deems unprintable. I will not be patently unfair to someone, unless it is obviously a joke, and that person is in on the joke.
But sarcasm? Humor? Irony? Speculation? All staples of this medium, and they must remain so. The Post editors would agree, if they thought about it. They will.
New medium. New rules. The Post brass is still coming to terms with this, but they are slowly figuring it out, because they are very smart people.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: Any thoughts on the ombudsmans guidance for online discussions? It appears that she does not appreciate any humor or sarcasm creeping into post.com discussions.
Is this going to impact the way that you respond to our queries?
Gene Weingarten: Yes, because I live in fear of the ombudsman, and worship her judgment, and find all of her pronouncements to have the imprimatur of God, I have decided to eliminate all sarcasm from my chats.
_______________________
Hypochondr, IA: My husband got me your book for my birthday, as I am greatly in need of it. I've been getting to sit by myself on the bus a lot lately, because no one wants to sit next to the loony laughing maniac, so that's definitely a plus. I just read your footnote on page 69 (-snerk-) describing a couple who came into the emergency room, he with injuries in his groinal region and she with stab wounds in her head. She was under the table in a restaurant being, ah, friendly, when she had a seizure, causing her to clamp down. He had instinctively stabbed her with his fork.
I just wanted to let you know that they played this scenario on Grey's Anatomy a couple weeks ago. Natalie Cole guest-starred as the stabbee (she had a fork stuck in her neck, which had to be removed). You can read the recap of the episode here .
Gene Weingarten: Oooh, I should demand royalties or something. Or file a Da Vinci Code type of lawsuit.
_______________________
Great Names: This is probably not the best name for an elementary school principal:
Gene Weingarten: Fabulous!
_______________________
Springfield, Va.: I noticed that The Washington Post ran a "alternate" Dilbert in Monday's editions instead of the Dilbert that appeared in The Examiner and on the Dilbert Web site .
Is The Washington Post chicken? Or does it just have something against Uranus?
Gene Weingarten: Well, I tend to disagree with The Post most of the time that they choose to protect you all from a strip. This time I feel less strongly about it, for the simple reason that this one isn't very funny. I believe humor is the only defense -- but a good defense -- in a debate over the printability of a strip. Of course, this particular strip also isn't particularly offensive or vulgar. So it's an insipid debate: The strip is sort of slightly vulgar, but also only slightly funny, and kind of illogical. Who cares?
_______________________
Party animals: Thought I'd pass this along. A bunch of animals get drunk off of fermenting fruit. Reminds me of undergrad.
Gene Weingarten: This is great. I hope it is real.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: Gene, I've just got to say that Dylan is not a "baby boomer" sort of thing. I'm 33, and, to this day still believe that the best lyrics ever written come from Dylan's It Ain't Me, Babe. I have yet to see any song that can top this lyric:
Go melt back into the night, babe,
Everything inside is made of stone.
There's nothing in here moving
An' anyway I'm not alone.
Gene Weingarten: Pretty good. Dylan writes brilliantly about women who hurt him. He must be a VERY difficult date.
Try this one, which I think is an even better lyric than the one you cite. It's from "She Belongs to Me."
She's got everything she needs,
She's an artist, she don't look back.
She's got everything she needs,
She's an artist, she don't look back.
She can take the dark out of the nighttime
And paint the daytime black.
You will start out standing
Proud to steal her anything she sees.
You will start out standing
Proud to steal her anything she sees.
But you will wind up peeking through her keyhole
Down upon your knees.
---
How about it, ladies? Date Bob Dylan, or just shoot yourself in the head because it is easier, in the long run?
Gene Weingarten: By the way, this is said to be about Joan Baez, with whom Bob had a typically Bob tempestuous relationship.
_______________________
Flags: Gene, I can't top your nominations for ugliest (Maryland) or stupidest (Arkansas) flags, but this has to be the best flag ever.
Gene Weingarten: This is an example of a flag born of pride and ferocity and emotion and dauntlessness. This idea would never fly today, as it were. Too "negative" and "hostile" and "defiant." Focus groups would kill this snake in a heartbeat.
Actually, wait a minute. "Taxation Without Representation" on our license plates. Similar.
Anyone know who the genius behind that was? I love those license plates.
_______________________
La Baule, France: So, Gene, is there any way we could actually hear your mosquito-whine of a voice?
Gene Weingarten: Sadly, yes. Even if you can't hear it well from the c-span thing, there is a link online to my interview a few years ago with Rodney Dangerfield, for the Style Invitational "imitate Rodney Dangerfield" contest. Katie/Francine, can we link to it?
Gene Weingarten: Which reminds me, either Katie or Francine is hosting today. They rufused to tell me which one.
It also reminds me, there sadly exists a link to the Arena Stage production that I wrote about on Sunday. I will link to it in tomorrow's chat update.
_______________________
washingtonpost.com: Scoffing at Dangerfield ( Post, Oct. 31, 2004) )
Gene Weingarten: Here you go.
_______________________
Bad movie, but...: Holy crap (so to speak), check out which two actors both appeared in "Major League II"
Gene Weingarten: Nice. It sounds like a joke, though.
_______________________
For Better or for Worse: There is a "Double D Homeburgers & Pizza" located in Mount Albert, Ontario, so this seems likely to be more of a local tribute than a risque joke.
Gene Weingarten: Interesting, but I refuse to believe she didn't understand the entendre. The art is simply too suggestive.
_______________________
Just not that into you: Hi Gene, could you or Pthep please explain when "in to" should become "into"? I always thought "into" should be reserved for something being physically inside something else (put that into the box). But it seems that every time the two words are together, people condense them. From the article on Mon about boys liking Axe body spray: "they discovered teenage boys were also into fragrance." Really? Please tell me this can't be right! Didn't you even do a column on this once? About a guy outside yelling "into" his wife for a beer?
Gene Weingarten: I didn't write about the guy yelling into his wife, but I am laughing about it right now. It might have been Dave Barry, as Mr. Language Person.
And yes, it would be correct -- if incredibly dweeby -- to say that some is "into" fragrance.
Patricia, are you out there, with some rule or something?
_______________________
Pat the Perfect, ME: Okay, time for the Pthep Talk on parts of speech:
Gene is right -- yet again! he's on a roll! -- about "into something"; that's a correctly spelled, in-the-dictionary informal expression meaning "interested in something, involved with something." So yes, you can go ahead and be into Gene -- you won't have to arrange to, um...
Also, Upset Chatter is way too restrictive to limit the preposition "into" only to physical placement inside some object. Think of "What a mess I've gotten into" or "He plans to go into engineering."
What IS wrong is to use "into" instead of the adverb "in" (as part of a verb phrase) followed by the preposition "to."
See, "into" is always a preposition, something partnered with a noun. ("He put it INTO THE BOX.") "In," on the other hand, is sometimes a preposition ("it is IN THE BOX"), but it can also be an adverb, as part of a verb phrase ("TURN IN your paper, not "Turn IN YOUR PAPER");
So if you mistakenly use "into" instead of the combination of the adverb "in" plus the preposition "to," you can end up with great stuff like "He turned his paper into the teacher."
In a slightly related matter: The usual capitalization style for headlines is to lowercase certain short words, including prepositions, but not certain other short words, including adverbs. For example, you'd capitalize "by" in "Stop By After the Show" (because it's an adverb), but not "by" in "Man Ordered to Stop by Police Officer" (because it's a preposition).
So now that you know that distinction, you would NEVER misread the unfortunately apocryphal Washington Post headline "You Can Put Pickles Up Yourself" -- because, see, if it meant that nasty thing, "up" would have been lowercase.
Gene Weingarten: I believe this is the final word on the subject.
_______________________
Ohio: Hi. New reader, sort of. I've just read your column and online chats for the last few weeks.
What I don't get, based on the last couple of weeks I've read the chat, is, is this a humor chat or a vegan anger management room?
Gene Weingarten: Both of those things. SEE?
_______________________
Re: Rep. McKinney: I'm confused. One of her attorneys said that it was inexcusable that the guard did not recognize her. Another said the incident was about her "race, gender and politics."
If he didn't know who she was, how was it about her politics?
Gene Weingarten: Well, race is politics. But she is simply trapped. She is trapped and desperate. If it weren't so funny, it would be ugly. Or if it weren't so ugly, it would be funny. Depending.
_______________________
Ombudsman, MD: "Don't speculate without a sound basis in fact. "
Boy if you followed that rule, that would end not only your chat but half your columns too.
Gene Weingarten: Correct.
_______________________
Herndon, Va.: I must admit, sophisticate that I am, I enjoy "For Better or For Worse." Maybe just because it makes you believe there's an actual family of decent people out there in the real world, too. And, yes, when the dog, Farley, died, I cried, so you can laugh at me.
Gene Weingarten: I like it, too. This is not a bad strip. I suspect its readership is 70 percent female, though.
_______________________
A Lucky Guy: Monday's Arlo and Janis was objectively superb. Arlo and Janis, (April 3, 2006)
Gene Weingarten: It was. I like that strip. So does Stuever. We are trying to get the post to uppick it.
_______________________
Wilbon...: you are a wise and in-demand man, yet you always manage to show up here for our little trysts on time. Wilboin has never in his life showed up for a chat on time. My question: can you loan him your watch, please?
Gene Weingarten: Mike is more important than I am.
_______________________
Athens, Ga.: On 75 south going to Sarasota and I needed to stop at the first rest area in Florida. Stenciled above the urinals " No Hands Zone." I hesitated, confused and desparate, thinking maybe there was an attendant or something to, you know, until I figured it out. Couldn't they just put autoflush instead?
Gene Weingarten: Hahahaha.
_______________________
Liber, AL: About the poll, I'm so liberal that I'm left of Howard Dean, but my poll responses closely track the knuckle-dragging sister-marrying theocratic nation-building conservatives. I don't think that Bill of Rights is multiple choice. Is that a conservative value?
Gene Weingarten: I am impressed by the small, hardy, refuse-to-be-pigeonholed band of conservatives on this one.
_______________________
Gaithersburg, Md.: Hey Gene! I LOVE your chats! I just wondered, since you are against the whole idea of marriage and engagement, weddings, etc, how did you and your wife (rib) decide to get married in the first place? Did you propose to her? she to you? Was it more of a pragmatic business arrangement?
Gene Weingarten: We'd been living together for two years and decided to have a baby. We were married on Aug. 28, 1980 and Molly was born on June 7, 1981. Do the math.
_______________________
Alexandria, Va.: I need your opinion - my thesis advisor just helped me a lot with getting my thesis in on time and I think it would be a good idea to get him something. A gift basket seems lame but something like Omaha steaks might be too much and what if he doesn't eat meat? Sorry, this isn't funny but you're the only one I could ask.
Gene Weingarten: Dom Perignon.
_______________________
Fairfax City, Va.: Now, get out there and exercise; being middle-aged is no excuse
Gene Weingarten: Very nice.
_______________________
Alexandria, Va.: I heard you pimping your car or Warren Brown's radio show over the wekend.
At first, I thought I couldn't hear the caller over a squealing fan belt, then I realized it was just you preaching your fanboy 323 love.
Gene Weingarten: It WAS me. I don't think old Warren knew. He also cut me off by mistake.
But I think he is terrific on the radio.
Hey, how do we think washpost radio is doing?
_______________________
ScottishLassie in Va.: Gene, did you know that on Wednesday of next week, at two minutes and three seconds after 1:00 a.m.
The time will be: ... 01:02:03 04/05/06
Gene Weingarten: Wow. Of course, I am easily impressed by such things. While on the Beltway, I once stopped the car and got off on the shoulder so I could photograph the odometer of Molly's 1992 Civic when it reached 123456.7
_______________________
Yellowknife, Northwest Territories: Re: Battling Jugglers...
I'll start by admitting that the second guy's routine is clearly much more difficult, on the face of it. Five balls instead of three balls -- no contest, it's harder. However, he doesn't seem to have understood the point of the first guy's routine.
He's not just juggling three balls while music plays. He has developed a really nice, artistic way of blending music with a (normally) pretty silly physical gag. The balls jump in time to the music, and as the music changes, so does the way the balls move. I can't help but like it more, even though I can understand why professional jugglers would be scornful (only three balls! what a loser!).
Gene Weingarten: Exactly, though I must say the second guy wasn't exactly ignoring the music. I thought he was artistic, too. But he didn't have it nailed quite the same way. Understandably. I loved em both.
_______________________
Boondocks: What is going on with the Boondocks comic strip now? Are they playing old ones for a reason, or is this some kind of comic flashback?
Gene Weingarten: Hahahahaha. This is the funniest reaction so far.
That's not early Boondox, dude. That is a promising new strip, called Watch Your Head, that is being tested out during the Boondocks 6-month sabbatical.
Speaking of which, check out today's. Would this not have been a problem if drawn by a white cartoonist? Is it a problem anyway? (Can we link to today's WYH?)
Gene Weingarten: (Watch your Head is a strip chronicling the adventures of a nerd and his friends, students at a historically black college.)
_______________________
washingtonpost.com: Watch Your Head ( April 4 )
Gene Weingarten: Here it is.
_______________________
Medford, Mass.: Gene, your thoughts on the new comic in the testing spot for Boondocks?
And I am the only one who is thrown off by having literally a monkey as a character in a strip based at a Historically Black College (or University)?
Is this playing into racial stereotypes...or mocking them? I'm utterly confused.
Gene Weingarten: Ah, this preceded my previous answer.
The cartoonist is a young black man who, I am reliably informed, never even HEARD of that racist comparison. Which is good. Apparently old fogeys like you and are are the only ones worrying about this. Which is also good.
I think this strip might prove to be quite good. Leave us give it a chance.
_______________________
Great Na, ME: Although it's not an aptonym, the Chicago Cubs' rookie outfielder has a great name: Angel Pagan.
(Seriously. Check the boxscore from Monday's game -- he did quite well.)
Gene Weingarten: You would think this man would be paralyzed by moral indecision every day of his life.
_______________________
Anonymous: Barbecue meats linked with prostate cancer , ( April 3, 2006 )
After forwarding this to her, my dearest darling, best friend replied:
"Maybe that's why men have higher instances of prostate cancer, because they eat so much meat."
After I fell out of my chair laughing I explained... thankfully she may be clueless, but she's got a great sense of humor.
Gene Weingarten: That is funny. It also reminds me of one of the weirder lines ever appearing in the Washington Post. I couldn't find it just now, but it was a quote from a doctor discussing the sexual functions of a transsexual. This is a paraphrase, but it read something like: "She can experience orgasm during intercourse because her vagina is proximate to her prostate gland."
_______________________
Baseball Season!: Gene, would you care to predict how many games behind the Red Sox your Yankees will finish this year?
Gene Weingarten: Negative six.
_______________________
AWOL Moderator: Gene, Is Lizzie AWOL? Or is her fab new blog pulling her away from you?
Gene Weingarten: She is vacationing for a week.
_______________________
The poll: This guy is certainly entitled to his own opinion, but expressing it on BUSINESS email (presumably--the article isn't clear) was by itself clearly stupid and worthy of sanction. Folks, if you didn't already know it: your boss has the capability to read every email you send and receive at work, "private" or no. Had he expressed these sentiments over cocktails with one of his snooty, elite, limousine-liberal chums, there would be no problem.
Gene Weingarten: This is true. But, you know, there is something else at work here. As it were.
Did he have a reasonable expectation of internal privacy in this email? ie, I have written many intemperate emails to friends at work that I would not be horrified if Len Downie saw. Len knows people have strong opinions, opinions that they express to colleagues. It is all part of intellectual ferment. I know Len is allowed to look at my emails, if he wanted to, which I think he would not. I have never expressed odious, indefensible thoughts to colleagues in emails that I think could get me fired or reprimanded for the simple reason (I hope) that I don't have odious, indefensible thoughts.
So, we're back to: Did this guy have a reasonable expectation of privacy in his internal ABC emails? That is the nub of this question, and the central point in figuring out what he did wrong, if anything.
_______________________
Gene Weingarten:
Okay, the poll.
This one, to me, is very easy. This guy did nothing wrong. Nothing. The punishment was excessive. The reaction illustrates that the media is running scared. Both people should have been apologized to.
This may seem self-contradictory. Why an apology if nothing was wrong?
Here's my thinking: Like other people (only probably even more so), journalists have robust opinions, and express them to each other all the time. There is nothing wrong with that. These were opinions expressed by Mr. Green in private correspondences with colleague he assumed he could trust. I have done the same. Thousands of times. If you saw my emails to Pat the Perfect, or Von Drehle, or Achenbach, you would see a wealth of opinions - some supportable, some wild rants, some attempts to be funny - that would seem eye-popping. There is no qualitative difference between these communications and comments I'd make around a water cooler. They are privileged.
The point is, Mr. Green had an expectation of privacy. It was violated. This is embarrassing for ABC, and for him, but no one really did anything wrong except the leakers. Still, no one intended for these things to get out, they are expressing an opinion neither Mr. Green nor ABC would have publicized on their own, thus they are unfairly publicly critical of two people, and those people are owed an apology.
Journalists do not pretend not to have opinions. We have opinions. When we are covering something in an objective fashion, however, it is our job to sublimate our opinions.
And we are successful most of the time. Any journalist with a strong political opinion will tell you that the biggest risk in covering something objectively is not that his politics will skew his coverage toward the side he thinks is right - it's just the opposite. The bigger risk is that in trying to be fair, you give the OTHER side more weight.
There is absolutely no suggestion that Mr. Green's professional decisions were biased by his feelings.
He got unlucky. Plain and simple. I think ABC overreacted.
Just my opinion. This does not necessarily reflect the views of management
_______________________
Radio Free Post: I like Post radio, but with only one complaint: Mike Moss just ain't right in the morning. He's a pro, and he's trying, but he just does not sound serious enough for The Post. Y'all should hire Ray Suarez away from the Newshour, or someone with a similar radio voice.
Gene Weingarten: Mike seems about right to me. I think Post radio is doing well, considering it is in its infancy.
_______________________
Card-carrying conservative: Since you are so impressed with my responses (I'm sure you were talking about mine), I'll explain:
This guy wrote some personal emails that got distributed. It was dumb of him to write it down, but the comments themselves were not that horrible. He made a criticism of the President and a criticism of the former SecState, both of whom are public figures. This was clearly an individual's personal beliefs relayed in a personal setting.
- Caveat: I am not a fire-breathing anti-media type, obviously, since I am a regular reader of your Tuesday chats.
Gene Weingarten: Yeah, honestly, when I read Howie's story I was just stunned and appalled. He Did Nothing Wrong.
_______________________
Gaithersburg, Md.: OK, that juggler was prettttty cool. But I'm consistently amazed by this .
Gene Weingarten: Very interesting.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: On FBOW -- I thought your "risque" comment was directed not at the name of the restaurant, but at where the guy's right hand appears to be in the panel with the popcorn. . .
Gene Weingarten: Huh?
_______________________
Worki, NG: Where Rejected Greeting Cards Go to Die , ( CNN.com, March 28 )
Is it just me, or are the rejects better than what you'd find in stores? "Hi! Welcome back from your coma!" -- I'd buy that in a second!
Gene Weingarten: I like the one about the Afghan.
_______________________
Double D: The visual (pizzas on sign) is a dead giveaway.
Gene Weingarten: Yeah, though it might be journalism. Possibly the actual Double D pizza in Canada uses the same motif. Still, Lynn J. must know.
_______________________
Not-yet-skin, NY: I've read your plea for women not to tie sweaters around their butts with great interest. I love that you want to see our behinds.
However, I have to admit to a certain sense of pride this past weekend, when I was able to tie my sweater around my butt. You see, I've been dieting for two years, to get to the point that the arms of my sweater are long enough to cross my belly and tie.
And I had inches to spare.
Am I sad, for being so happy?
Gene Weingarten: My God, what an awful situation. A woman diets to the point where her butt becomes an object of desire and envy, and then she is able to cover it up?
I ... I just don't know what to say.
_______________________
Silver Spring, Md.: Hey Gene I'm a 23 year old left leaninf dude and a daily Lou watcher. Half it is admitedly for laughs, the poll kills me everyday. The other half though is I think it's an excellent barometer of the level of political discourse among your average voter (older white folks) and helps me understand where middle America is coming from on these issues. If you think Lou's frothing isn't representative of a large swath of our society your wrong, the problem is the shows disscussions have absolutely no nuance, zero, zilch. While I disagree that Lou only has like-minded people on the show the brief length of the interviews and Lou's own overbearing style prevent a real debate form taking place. At minimum the show is great because it never misses an opportunity to trash our government, constructively or not. The more outraged people get the better I say, maybe they'll actually want to pay attention and have a real debate next election and not vote on superficialities.
Gene Weingarten: I don't disagree with you at all.
_______________________
My problem: with the DC plates is they leave off the main point: "Taxation without representation is tyranny!" D.C. plates are a statement of the obvious, while the actual phrase is a call to arms.
I noticed the FBOW thing too. It made me giggle. (I'm a girl, obviously.)
Gene Weingarten: It's actually MORE effective. Because it puts the word "tyrranny" into everyone's brain. It makes you a party to it. That's the main skill of good writing. It really is brilliant.
_______________________
West Palm Beach, Fla.: "You will not see me expounding on the meaning of Dylan lyrics in The Washington Post."
I don't want to see you expound on Dylan lyrics in here either. You're not exactly open-minded on the subject. Yikes.
Gene Weingarten: Understood.
_______________________
Poll: I think most people are answering the same because the guy was an apolitical basher - yes, he bashed Bush but he also bashed Madeleine Albright, a Democrat. So you can't be mad about one and not about the other, whether you agree with his views about either of them.
Gene Weingarten: What he said about Bush was fair game. What he said about Madeleine was really hurtful, and her reaction was classy. I am sure he is really embarrassed, which he should be. It was awkward as hell.
_______________________
Email privacy: Well, no. Green should realize that there is no internal email privacy for a business email address. I don't like it, but it's true. It's just so easy to forget and send emails that maybe we shouldn't. I have a coworker who won't speak to me because after his underling quit, he somehow got access to her emails and saw some negative comments I made about him. It's annoying, but I know that I am the one who was in the wrong. I have a friend who got fired for writing that the boss was an a--hole in an email (this was in the very early days of the technology and we were all shocked). I think the Green incident is too bad for him, but he shouldn't be surprised by the reaction. It stinks though, because I am sure that everyone who is raising a stink about it is guilty of the same thing in some way.
Gene Weingarten: EVERYONE does this.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: I can't agree that leaking the e-mails was bad. No reporter would hesitate to publish embarrassing leaked e-mail from an executive in any other profession, and justify it as the public's right to know. You're only cringing at this leak because this instance hits another journalist.
Gene Weingarten: You are misunderstanding this, though. He sent it to someone he considered a friend. He was betrayed. This was not an email he sent out to sixteen people. This would be like Pthep getting mad at me and sending an email from me to Washingtonian. A betrayal.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: Re: "Taxation without representation is tyranny"
I have a feeling most people don't know the "is tyranny" part. I was unaware of it, and consider myself to be fairly knowledgeable on lots of stuff.
Gene Weingarten: It was a major underpinning of the Revolutionary War, said by ... uh... hm. James Otis?
Who DID say that?
_______________________
Skin, NY: I am a slender woman. 5'6", 115 lbs. The other day I went shopping hoping to find some cute pants for not a lot of money. Went to Target. They don't make pants small enough! I later got in a conversation with my best friend (male) about how the "fattening of America" has made it difficult for a slender woman to find professional clothes at a reasonable price. He looked at me like I had two heads. Is my issue reasonable or do I come off sounding like a moron? I really do hate having to spend an arm and leg for professional pants just because what is now a Banana Republic size 0 isn't small enough.
Gene Weingarten: I am closely acquainted with a small woman who has trouble finding clothing, yes.
_______________________
Columbia, Md.: But you are not a journalist, you write columns. There is an expectation of bias, opinion masquerading as fact, sarcasm, wit (however rare) when someone turns to your column. When I read a purported article, I expect no opinion of the journalist. I do expect a slant from the post vs say, the WSJ, which is why I read multiple news sources a day.
Furthermore, there is NO expectation of privacy when voicing anything via email. It is ignorant to expect it. The analogy is if you wouldn't shout it across a crowded room to the recipient, do not email it. I cannot imagine anyone thinking otherwise. In fact, I expect IT here at work to be fully aware of this submission, even the fact that I am writing it. To be surprised later when they print out my internet journeying during the work day, my emails sent via workplace routers etc, and claim my privacy has been violated is ridiculous.
A staunch liberatarian, I maintain he did nothing wrong. It was unprofessional to utter what he did, and it revealed his stupidity.
Gene Weingarten: It doesn't matter. I have written objective articles. I have opinions.
You think people who objectively cover politics for The Post have no opinions? They just ignore their opinions. It's second nature to them.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: Gene, as a journalist I have to take exception to your remarks. You have robust opinions, you're an opinion columnist, and that's great. Love your chat, really love your long-form feature writing.
But not every journalist is the same as you. I look at guys on the Web site, like Chris Cilizza or Howard Kurtz or your editor, Downie, guys that aren't just "sublimating" their opinions, but who have dedicated their lives to being impartial arbiters.
Like these journalists, I don't vote, and I don't have robust opinions. I truly believe that both sides have their points, and that I can best help society by presenting sides, not taking them.
But you seem to deny that journalists like myself exist. We do. And it's extremely frustrating to be constantly undermined. Your opinions are great and welcome, but they don't speak for me.
Gene Weingarten: Hm. This sounds like a Washpost person.
Any others out there who think I am fulla crap? I confess this is the first time I have heard a journalist say he has no opinions. Am I wrong?
_______________________
Plates and politics: On the D.C. plates... I seem to recall Mark Plotkin being the driving force behind making that happen.
On Madeline Albright: She was probably secretly thrilled to be insulted and thus receive a complimentary chance to plug not just the GMA appearance, but the book.
Gene Weingarten: Not to be insulted THAT way. That was a tough insult.
_______________________
The Fed, D.C.: So how's this for a real live aptonym, which I picked up during a visit Monday to the august, and heavily guarded, Federal Reserve Board HQ in D.C. The name of the friendly security guard running the metal detector at the most important economic institution in town: Adam Smith. I swear. If I set the machine off, I was wondering whether he'd have to frisk me with his invisible hand.
Gene Weingarten: Very, very nice.
_______________________
Cheating?: Gene,
Although I loathe your team of choice (Go Red Sox), I admire your passion for and knowledge of baseball. How do you feel about the way the sport not only condones but almost encourages dishonesty (or cheating depending on your point of view) by its players? For instance, in yesterday's Nationals game catcher Paul LoDuca dropped the ball while trying to tag Alfonso Soriano at the plate. He did not admit this to the umpire, to the contrary he acted as if he had made the tag. Do you think the individual has any responsibility to be honest in that situation? I'm not sure, I think the umpires are responsible for calling the game, but it does seem odd that someone would be proud of lying and getting a crucial call. I also think of the silly protestation of A-Rod after his slap of the ball in the 2004 ALCS (sorry, I had to add that one in). Your thoughts?
Gene Weingarten: I think LoDuca is going to regret being honest (in talking to the press, and frankly confessing that he deked the umpire) after being dishonest in the field. The umps are going to get back at him. He really showed them up.
Honestly, though, the real stupidity was in sending Soriano home from third in a one-run game -- a wildly risky gambit with no outs. A very poor decision by the third-base coach. It lost the game for the Nats.
_______________________
NW Conn.: Hiya Gene -
Submitted for your approval: Dr. Richard Hanwacker .
Gene Weingarten: Approved.
_______________________
Chantilly, Va.: This is actually very cute -- stars when they were very young . . .
Gene Weingarten: Yes, my favorites are Demi Moore and Marilyn Manson.
_______________________
Raleigh, N.C.: Tell the thin woman to please never gripe to her female friends about how a size 0 isn't small enough. Maybe she should follow a 13 year old into a store sometime, it doesn't seem to me that they are exactly wearing tents...
Gene Weingarten: Yeah, but do you want to be a 50-year-old woman shopping in the teens department? Or whatever it is called?
_______________________
Betray, Ala.: Gene--I'm picking up a theme in many of your responses, whether it be politics, e-mails, or relations with your spouse: it appears that for you betrayal is one of the most heinous things one person can do to another. This is where you really trips your moral triggers. Would you agree with my interpretation of your attitude? (and I'm not disagreeing with it, by the way.)
Gene Weingarten: Yes. That is pretty astute of you. Yes.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: Jon Stewart on the Daily Show last week showed a clip of one of Dobbs' rants (in which he said let's do away with St. Patrick's Day, and the only flag anyone should be showing anywhere is the American flag, etc.), and then he got Dobbs on the phone to talk about it. It sounds like Dobbs doesn't fully believe everything he says, but that he likes the response he gets.
Gene Weingarten: I missed that! Dobbs shows no self-awareness on his show, that is for sure.
_______________________
Los Angeles, Calif.: Gene, Recently, you evaluated the New York Times vs. Washington Post. I was curious as to how you evaluated these two papers? In terms of writing quality, reader-friendlyness, newsworthy, what?
Enlightenmentpleasethanks.
Gene Weingarten: I believe The Times is more "professional," ie, its stories are seldom if ever risk-taking, so they seldom or ever fail. The Post is much better written, so fails from time to time. The Times is probably better designed, especially in terms of its Sunday sections. The Post is more inventive in coverage, and the types of things it identifies as stories. The Times could use a Style section, but never will have one.
The Post has a better sports section, which didn't usta be true.
The Times would never hire me.
_______________________
Maryland flag: It's not ugly - it's the coat of arms of Lord Baltimore's family
Gene Weingarten: Kindly explain how the first part of your statement relates to the second part.
_______________________
Alexandria, Va.: I don't know if you ever get out to Alexandria, where campaign signs are blooming all over, but Mr. Peter Smeallie is running for school board. I have to admire his dedication; with a name like that, the last thing I'd want to do is work with children.
Meet the Candidates for School Board
Gene Weingarten: With a name like Smeallie, he's got to be good. It's like growing up Joey Buttafuoco. He had to be tough.
_______________________
Bowie: "Gene Weingarten: Yeah, but do you want to be a 50-year-old woman shopping in the teens department? Or whatever it is called?"
Isn't it usually called "misses" and it's where teens and petite women shop? The "women's" deptartment is where the sizes up to -my wife's- are.
Gene Weingarten: See, now we are into a very very subtle area. I believe Misses are women, and Women are large women. It's all very very secret and we are not allowed to know. I have the above information from secret sources.
_______________________
ANFC: Gene,
Can you or anyone else explain Monday's Get Fuzzy? I have absolutely no effing clue.
Gene Weingarten: He continued it today. I didn't refer to it because something is going on that we are not yet privy to, I think. I believe Booger is the equivalent of "booga booga booga." Or something. A generalized taunt that scares Satchel to death. I suspect we will find out.
_______________________
Reston, Va.: Re Cynthia McKinney, you wrote, "Race is politics."
That's racist.
Gene Weingarten: It is? Why?
You telling me that racial issues are not part of the political world?
_______________________
USA: Gene, Are you going to invite your son back for another chat sometime? To judge from the last one he did, he's a funny young man. (Of course, I imagine that he has to be, to survive in your house....)
Gene Weingarten: Maybe. Possibly when we launch out comic strip.
Okay, thank you all. Interesting as always. I will be updating as usual. Next week, same time, same place.
_______________________
UPDATED 4.05.06
Gene Weingarten: As I promised, here is the link to my dreadful performance in "The Pundit Whodunit" at arena stage. That is what I wrote about on Sunday.
A Dramatic Turn for the Worse (Post Magazine, April 2)
washingtonpost.com: To view the C-Span video, click here, then click on the link under "Recent Programs" titled "American Perspectives: Theater, Communications, & U.S. Treasurer (03/25/2006)"
_______________________
No opinio, NS: "I truly believe that both sides have their points, and that I can best help society by presenting sides, not taking them."
This is an enormous problem. HUGE. The pervasivenss of this attitude is one of the reasons I didn't pursue a career in journalism.
Sometimes one side is ACTUALLY RIGHT. Tobacco companies were LYING when they said their product wasn't addictive and didn't cause cancer - a journalist's obligation is to report the TRUTH, not "both sides."
You could fill in dozens of other examples above - global warming most closely approximates the outrageous obviousness of tobacco, today - and I think that journalists like the one who wrote in are an enormous part of why we aren't honestly addressing those problems.
Apologies for the ALL CAPS. I feel extraordinarily strongly about this.
Gene Weingarten: Yeah. When I give talks about journalism, to journalists, I usually say this: The place for objectivity in journalism is in the reporting -- the gathering of facts. You must do this completely fairly, hearing all sides, not leaping to conclusions, not marshaling only specific facts to support a preconceived notion.
But then I say that there is no room for objectivity in writing: In other words, your objective research will generally present you with an objective truth, and in writing that story, your job is to tell the truth as best you understand it.
Few things bother me more than writers who try to "cover" themselves with long, equivocal, incomprehensible stories filled with disparate views given equal weight -- even when reporters KNOW they are not deserving equal weight. That is cowardly journalism.
Gene Weingarten: I call this the "on the other hand, Mr. Hitler contends ... " school of journalism.
_______________________
Sizing for women: Juniors are generally for teens and have odd sizes (3,5,7,etc.) They are generally cut slim through the hips and thighs.
Misses are the "standard" adult females sizes and are even numbers (4,6,8 thru 16 or 18).
Women's sizes are for larger adult women and have additional room in the hips, buttocks, and thighs. I believe sizes start at 16W and go up from there. A size 16 in Misses is not the same as a 16W. The 16W will have a couple of extra inches in the hips, etc.
That being said every manufacturer has different sizes and almost all of them have "vanity" sizing now. If 10 years ago you wore a size 10, you probably still wear a size 10 even if you are 20 lbs heavier.
I would love for women's clothing to be sold like men's. They wouldn't just be able to use waist and inseam, but waist/inseam/hips would make a lot of sense.
Gene Weingarten: There you have it. A woman fearlessly disclosing the secrets of women's sizes. See how simple it is, guys?
(With guys, sizes basically work this way: The bigger your body, the larger your size. Isn't that ridiculous?)
_______________________
Juniors Department: Are for teenagers. My problem isn't size, it's style. I don't usually like Cathy, but her fashion week was on target this time. I'm 25 and try not to dress like a prostitute, hippie or granny for work. These seem to be the only options.
Gene Weingarten: You know, I have now heard from more than a dozen women explaining the insanity, and hating it. Couldn't some store make a fortune by addressing this problem?
_______________________
Gene Weingarten: Thanks to Andrew Hoenig for this timely link.
_______________________
Silver Spring, Md.: Gene, Liz takes umbrage with Chris Farley's survivors selling his image for an anti-drug-themed billboard. I take greater offense at the use of well-known substance-abuser Marvin Gaye's image to sell Hennesey cognac.
As a one-time substance abuser who (nearly) paid the price for it, what is your take?
washingtonpost.com: Celebritology: In Death, the Joke's on Farley
Gene Weingarten: You know, this goes back to the issue of betrayal, an issue that I feel strongly about.
I'm with Lizzie. If a loved one of mine died from drug abuse, or tobacco use, or something else stigmatizing, I think it would be a complete betrayal to use their death to flog the evils of what took them -- unless I knew that was their express wish.
It's no different from doing it in their eulogy.
Gene Weingarten: This issue of betrayal -- with a different conclusion -- was explored brilliantly by Cynthia Gorney in this story I edited from 1993. Cynthia is a gifted writer; my recollection is that my "editing" consisted of printing it.
washingtonpost.com:
Essay; The Deadly Message In a Bottle; Alcohol Poisoned My Mother, Body and Soul
(Post, April 26, 1993)
_______________________
Dylanesque: Your opinion, please, on "A simple Desultory Phillippic" by Simon & Garfunkel?
Gene Weingarten: I think it's a lot of words. It reminds me of Zippy the Pinhead, sometimes. Seems to be saying something about popular culture, but I don't particularly want to spend the time to find out what.
_______________________
Oh no...: my birthday is becoming too crowded...now I have to share it with you and the rib...it was bad enough that my Grandmother died on that date too...
Gene Weingarten: You are referring to my Aug 28 anniversary date, yes? Well, check out my response to your following post:
_______________________
Oh No...again...: And Molly is born on my youngest son's birthdate...if Dan was born on Oct 2nd, this is getting too weird! Are Feb 15 and/or Jun 15 significant dates in your family?
Gene Weingarten: Okay, are you ready? Here goes: My birthday is October 2.
_______________________
No opinions?: Gene,
Isn't there a Washington Post managing editor that famously refuses to vote in elections because that would prove that he had a partisan opinion? I think there is not consistency of views on this.
Gene Weingarten: It's Len Downie, the executive editor.
Len's reasoning is interesting: He feels that he doesn't want to be put in a postion of having to decide, when he steps into the voter's booth, who he prefers over whom. He never wants to ask himself that question. I think Len finds it a huge responsibility to be the absolute final word on how the Post covers everything and everyone.
I think this would add a degree of guilt he doesn't want. I sort of understand.
_______________________
UPDATED 4.07.06
Re: Poll: I think there's a distinction you haven't addressed that needs some illumination -- the racist/anti-semetic slant on the Albright comments. Indefensible, even if honestly held. Imagine if he had called former Rep. Watts an "Uncle Tom", or something similar about being a self-hating black man.
Different offense, and arguable worthy of some level of censure.
Gene Weingarten: Well, I think it was hostile, but I'm not sure it is indefensible. The Madeleine Albright case was extremely unusual, giving rise to much debate and speculation.
Madeleine Albright claimed to have been shocked -- shocked! -- to learn relatively recently that she was Jewish. Many people have speculated that she knew much earlier, but that this was nothing she wished to acknowledge. This is something that many Jews found disturbing.
A better comparison here might be Michael Jackson -- and speculation that he was lightening his skin because he didn't want to be black.
I don't know the truth in either case, but I am not sure I would accuse anyone speculating about it of holding racist or anti-semitic biases.
_______________________
Iowa: Gene--Joel Achenbach's blog quoted you as saying, "Doing the chat in real time is a little dangerous and a little terrifying. There's no editing, no lawyering, no time for contemplation. . ." Given that state of mind, how do you mentally prepare yourself before you start these chats?
Gene Weingarten: Well, I don't get drunk.
_______________________
Re: Non-voting journalists: The guy who wrote to you says that, as a journalist, he doesn't vote, and he mentioned other people who don't either. I think that's just silly, and I, too, am a journalist. The rule, as I've always understood it, is not to let your opinions influence your reporting, and to disclose any conflict that can't be avoided. I don't see how refusing to vote accomplishes either. Just because you don't vote in an election doesn't mean you won't be affected by the outcome, so pretending not to have a stake in it is disingenuous. Besides, why should a journalist, who suffers other depravations such as low salaries, ridiculous work schedules, and widespread loathing from the public, also have to give up an important right of citizenship to do his job?
Frankly, I don't trust a journalist who says he has no opinions. He's either lying to us or deceiving himself, and if he can't, or won't, identify his biases, he's not going to do a very good job of counterbalancing them.
Gene Weingarten: This is also a good point. On the issue of "giving up an important right of citizenship," I would say that in the aforementioned case of Len Downie, he feels he already wields enormous power by virtue of his job. Greater power than any single voter does. Len also probably does not lament the terrible deprivation of a low salary. Though I'm just guessing, there.
_______________________
Pthep: Whoa just totally blew my mind. How can one drudge that out of one's mind in mere seconds? I think I have a pretty good handle on grammar (not stellar), but whoa, the actual grammar rules and everything is muy impressivo! PTHEP IS MY NEW FAVORITE GRAMMAR NINJA!
Gene Weingarten: She's been MY grammar ninja for 15 years.
But, to be fair, she had a heads-up on this one. It was an early question, and I forwarded it to her about a half hour before the show.
_______________________
Baby, ME: So you were wanting to have kids, and marriage and 1st baby came conveniently 9 mos. apart. I'm an oops. Was it right to tell me that when I turned 18 (30 odd years ago)? My kids, by the way, were planned, so no oops discussion for them. I always wondered about my family dyanmics, though.
Gene Weingarten: I think we have an obligation to tell our kids the truth about where they came from, at the age when it won't hurt em. In your case, 18 seems about right.
_______________________
Fairfax, Va.: Near Cao Dung beauty salon in Falls Church, mentioned in your update last week, is this restaurant:
Hung Long Restaurant
6795 Wilson Blvd
Falls Church, Va.
(703) 536-6440
Gene Weingarten: Noted.
_______________________
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.