This was really off the wall: a piece in the Huffington Post calling me a closet case -- yeah, like that. The writer is Chris Kelly, who works for Bill Maher. Kelly cited as evidence of my closetedness my "teabagger" piece; a knowingly hyperbolic statement I once made about Reagan; and my appreciation of Bill Buckley, upon his death. I don't know whether Kelly is interested in me or what, but I've got news for him: If I were gaily ("gayly"?) inclined, I would not be closeted -- I'm not the type.
This is awkward.
The other day this man named Jay Nordlinger at the National Review wrote this column about how "teabagger" was like the n-word, or should be like the n-word, or could be like the n-word, or something. I'd have to go back and look it up, and who has the time. And by "has the time" I mean "gives a shit." The universal conservative fixation with the injustice of not being allowed to say the n-word -- even though black people can! -- is one of those things that gets less and less fascinating the further you get from the high school cafeteria.
Nordlinger suggested that anti-Obama obsessives either embrace "teabagger," even though gutter-minded liberals find it amusing, or change the name of their movement from "teabaggers" to "tea partiers."
Now if we can just find some common ground on this Trekkie/Trekker thing.
I wrote a post here at Huffington (and by the way, I'm still waiting for my check) pointing out that the teabaggers might want to look into the roots of "tea partying" before they spend a lot of money on new letterhead, since it means "gay group sex in public lavatories."
My intention was not to suggest anything about Jay Nordlinger's sex life or bathroom habits. I've never even met the guy. My intention was to suggest that Jay Nordlinger is a boob.
And taking his advice on words is like taking driving instructions from the cat.
Nordlinger is reading too much into me reading too much into the embarrassing things he's written about his bosses. My point had nothing to do with his sexuality. My point was that he can't write.
His reaction proves that he can't read either.