I consider it a great injustice of this holiday season that nobody has yet sent this masterpiece to me for review.
Wow, "fascism" in every chapter's title. He doesn't want for finesse.
shorter JG: I know you are, but what am I ?
Better a fascist than a Jonah Goldberg, he commented, blind to the antisemitic nuance until the latter half of the comment.
His editors were declared fascists when they suggested cuts.
4, 5: I thought so too, but then I noticed "Chapter 2 -- Adolf Hitler, Man of the Left." They couldn't quite sustain the theme throughout, alas.
Many fascist parents were nice to their children! Liberals are nice to their children! Liberals are fascists!
Fascists believed that government should sponsor scientific research! Liberals believe that government should sponsor scientific research! Liberals are fascists!
13: Yes, you and CA need to use this when you teach formal logic.
It's full of stars. I mean, it really looks like it might be as bad as its title suggests. Did you catch the bit about people with education degrees from Swarthmore?
Fascist tanks & aircraft obeyed the basic physical laws of the universe! Liberals obey the basic physical laws of the universe! Liberals are fascist tanks and aircraft!
15: It has gotten good reviews. Publishers Weekly called it hilarious and thought-provoking! What does this mean?! Because this just seems risible.
The thing is that this will be a big hit with the 25-30 percent of the population who are wingers. Successful propaganda. Being leftists, you don't understand that being *right* is not necessary, one just needs to sound vaguely plausible to someone who doesn't know the topic.
This may indeed break Edroso's rule about any piece of Goldberg's writing: "the stupidest thing ever written, until he writes again." This might just be unbeatable.
Publishers Weekly called it hilarious and thought-provoking!
"Damn, this is funny. I think Goldberg *may actually be* retarded."
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a female with an education degree from Brown or Swarthmore teaching grade school -- for ever.
Actually, the Swarthmore education / storm trooper comparison is pretty good. That's ridiculous enough that not even a winger could take it seriously.
How many of his sales will be to liberals looking for mockery material? We ought to put a squad together and pull all the funniest quotes.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a female with an education degree from Brown or Swarthmore teaching grade school -- for ever.
And it's never snack time.
Many fascists were bipedal! Liberals are bipedal! Liberals are fascists!
No, I'm not going to stop any time soon.
That Aristotle was a fucking fascist. Down with syllogisms!
All fascists are fascists! All liberals are liberals! Liberals are fascists!
No, I'm not going to stop any time soon until I get picked up by Sullivan.
Helpy-chalk's name starts with an H! Reknowned fascist Hitler's name starts with an H! Helpy-chalk is a reknowned fascist!
That's "renowned", orthography fascist.
The inside flap is really mindblowing. Is he actually that stupid?
Saiselgy's comment thread is great too:
http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/12/quintessential_fascism.php#comments
I'm way too pompous and serious to keep pace with the Goldberg phenomenon. Retract 19 for excessive earnestness.
Rob Hitler Chalk is killing me.
Weiner notes that the claim "Irving Berlin praised Mussolini in song" is based on lyrics for "You're the top" which was really by Cole Porter. Oops! Also the Mussolini reference was edited out. But other than that this is a careful and serious argument that has never been made with such care.
Oops again! the Mussolini line was from a Wodehouse rewrite! Wodehouse: objectively pro-headkick!
In Germany, facism appeared as genocidal racist nationalism. In America, facism appeared as a Sean Penn press conference. In your house, facism may appear in the form of a meat-replacing soy product.
FACISM IS EVERYWHERE! WHERE WILL IT STRIKE NEXT?
In Nogales once, the face of Fascism appeared in a taco.
So did the entire Hegel and Whole Foods thing get dumped? Or is it under "New Age"?
Is he actually that stupid?
Enough with the rhetorical questions, Wolfson.
The conservative ethos of Noel Coward was no match for the effete elite cosmopolitexualism of Irving Berlin and Sammy Cohn.
He's doing a book promotion thing at the L Street Borders in DC in a couple weeks. Moderately tempting, if only to see if he really can maintain a straight face.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a female with an education degree from Brown or Swarthmore teaching grade school -- for ever.
And it's never snack time.
There is no nap for you today.
Wodehouse actually made propaganda broadcasts for the Nazis, no? In a kind of bumblingly innocent way, of course, but that puts him in the unsurprisingly pro-fascist, and not all that liberal, category.
48: Yeah he was in Nice or someplace south like that during the invasion and was presumably kept there under house arrest. The broadcasts were pretty What-Ho-Make-the-Best-of-It which is pretty skin-crawly.
He did however create Roderick Spode and his Black Shorts (the shirts were taken, you see).
"Footer bags, you mean? How perfectly foul."
I will beat you to a jelly, Elbie, to a jelly!
I bow to none in my capacity to produce irritatingly apposite quotations from Wodehouse.
I swear to you, oudemia, she was merely taking a fly out of my eye. This is all a silly misunderstanding.
Wait, did Golberg really manage to spin an obscure rewrite of a Cole Porter song made by P.G. Wodehouse while under house arrest by the Nazis into "Irving Berlin singing Mussolini in song"?
That's just unreal. He has to have some other justification for that remark.
oop my ride is here.
The muster of the vultures. Ha!
Doing our bit.
Sweet.
I've got a 10% suspicion that this is a setup and can't be the real book, but 10% just might be what's left of my faith in humanity.
I've got a 10% suspicion that this is a setup and can't be the real book, but 10% just might be what's left of my faith in humanity.
The jacket copy in the photos matches that on Amazon.
Yeah, I have to admit to wondering if it's a joke. Hilarious, if so.
1, 2: Fascists.
Easy, Tex. I'm just a pacist.
If it's a joke, it's a pretty professionally typeset one.
60: The courtesy copies have really been sent out already. And such things come directly from the publisher, don't you know.
Would a professional typeset a book in Times? I ask you.
Other hoaxes have been set in Times. Therefore…
Huh, it's not a joke, unless the publisher is also in on it.
Gonerill has been eliminated. Unfogged thanks him for his contributions.
What, you expected Liberal Fascism to be less ridiculous? I don't get the skepticism. Other bloggers have mentioned receiving their courtesy copies in the last few days.
And Sadly No has more excerpts! With photo evidence! Betcha didn't know that both FDR and Hitler are the epigonoi (no, Jonah doesn't use that word) of the first fascist movement -- the French Revolution! Oh noes!
If you people had an ounce of decency, you'd admit that Pantloads has given you more joy and laughter than the vast majority of major lib bloggers.
Coming soon in the Corner: Jonah whines that he can't be held responsible for the jacket copy.
"Dachau hosted the world's largest alternative and organic medicine research lab and produced its own organic honey." p19.
Homeopathy is liberal? Funny, I thought it was for people without health care.
I wonder if he was trying to work in the conservative genre of get a rise from the libs, but way overshot the mark and landed in life-affirming comedy.
The Los Angeles Times must be so proud of their columnist.
"Dachau hosted the world's largest alternative and organic medicine research lab and produced its own organic honey."
Sweet Jesus.
"Bees: objectively pro-fascist."
78b: Jonah wouldn't write something that wasn't well researched!
Troll alert!!
I obviously will not pay any attention to Jonah Goldberg, but Arthur Silber has for instance has posted on how the Fed and the New Deal entrenched and preserved corporate power, and my anarchist/socialist ideologies give me a different perspective on the relations between liberalism & fascism.
There is also, in America, total corporate/Capitalist dominance & 60 years of the military-industrial complex/National Security state, and the whole shebang, from an economic perpective looks a lot like fascism to me.
And projection as disarming pre-emption is one of the favorite tools of Republicans.
But what the fuck. Make your jokes.
Seriously, is the entire book a riff on the same logical fallacy?
78b: Jonah wouldn't write something that wasn't well researched!
That thread is only 5 comments long right now and already has three doozies.
Troll feeding alert!
One of the most interesting classroom days I had in college considered the degree to which the Progressive movement's spawning of institutions resulted in the creation of the "business community" that has comprehensive reach over American politics -- that the individual robber barons who rode herd on the previous century had not until then cohered into a programmatic ideology.
This has very, very little to do with Jonah's book. It's not as trollish as you'd like, Bob; it's just a different conversation.
Seriously, is the entire book a riff on the same logical fallacy?
And a depressingly common one at that.
But what the fuck. Make your jokes.
People that make a serious case get serious consideration. You think Jonah deserves serious consideration based on his record or this book, go ahead and waste your time.
84: Liberals are responsible for slavery and Jim Crow!
That should be a very important tool for progressive analysis:"Whatever Republicans accuse you of is what Republicans are already doing of have planned or want to make impossible."
Y'all aren't going to be able to cry "Fascism" any more than we were able to impeach Bush after the Clinton impeachment.
They're just smarter than us. We laugh too easily.
"You think Jonah deserves serious consideration"
Yes I do. If I were a progressive blogger, I would look at the book and wonder what was being taken off the table rather than what was being put on the table. I would meta and Strauss the damn thing. He had a purpose. he is getting paid.
So maybe after UHC is passed the next five right wing steps (National Surveillance State?) become possible because whatever America is, it is simply absurd to call us fascist. Gedoudahere.
If I were a progressive blogger,
Don't let us stop you, bob.
I am crazy, but that is part of the way I look at things.
When Ann Coulter said:"Bomb their cities, kill their leaders, and convert their children" all of a sudden many actions short of those became a little more possible, a little more reasonable. She moved the Overton Window.
They are not clowns & idiots.
It's all very salutary and appropriate that Goldberg is being met with giggles here and elsewhere, but things ain't gonna change until guys like him are met with street protests outside the offices of, say, the LA Times or Random House.
As long as those publications understand that they can promote nonsense like this with no fallout, they'll keep promoting nonsense.
life-affirming comedy.
Gawd, that's perfect. I wish there were some way to get that on the book as a blurb.
You could put it in an Amazon review.
I don't know if I agree with bob here. By making fun of the book rather than getting angry we are not taking it seriously. If the media does the same, it does not affect the Overton window.
Books like this get written about Republicans and the media completely ignores them. Hopefully this will do the same. Ann Coulter manages to get taken seriously to the extent that she makes people angry, though.
the whole shebang, from an economic perpective looks a lot like fascism to me.
I'd draw a distinction betweem increasing state power and facism. Facism has a particular ideology -- reactionary, extreme aggressive militarism (military strength is central purpose of the state), highly nationalist, rule of law subordinated to collective will as instantantiated in party or leader, nostalgic emphasis on purity of the community as opposed to foreign contamination, etc.
And projection as disarming pre-emption is one of the favorite tools of Republicans.
very true, I'm not at all sure that this book won't be effective propaganda.
I expect Goldberg will bleg several times to have readers look up things in his own book.
"look a lot like fascism" only if one ignores the definition of "fascism" or replaces it with "whatever I don't like."
Dachau had buildings! *The New York Times* is housed in a building! *The New York Times* is fascist!
Didn't Random House used to be reputable?
Allow me to relate to you my current favorite bit of book-related jargon, "belly band".
Some presidential candidates are incredibly handsome and have beautiful full heads of hair. Why, it's as if the Aryan ideal has at last been enacted, in the US of all places! Hitler himself could only dream of such perfect fascist leadership.
CHAPTER XILV: THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST NANNY STATE
Do you know who had really effective and state-of-the-art vaccination and cancer-screening programs? The Nazis, the Soviet Union, AND Castro's Cuba!
106: The communo-fascist conspiracy gains more power with each passing day.
99:I don't like Goldman Sachs & the US Treasury Department being essentially one entity. Sue me. I have already said that as an anarcho-socialist, my definition of fascism will be broader than that of supporters of the capitalist welfare state.
Does this thread want me to go thru Dave Neiwert's checklist point by point?
:I don't like Goldman Sachs & the US Treasury Department being essentially one entity. Sue me.
I'm pretty sure that battle was lost over a hundred years ago. JP Morgan's bailout during the Panic of...1907, was it?
As an anarchist, McManus, your definition of Facism will be the modern state. Facism does not equal statism, it's what happens when one particular ideology captures the state.
A strong state is necessary, but not sufficient, for facism.
110:As an anarchist, McManus, your definition of Facism will be the modern state
Not quite. I am not a fan of state socialism, as in the USSR, either. Monarchism and other dictatorships are not attractive. There are a lot of political systems that are unattractive to anarchists.
And "the modern state" is in most instances, a state contingent on modern capitalism. In the particular instance of the US, the militarism pretty obviously pushes it more toward the fascist side than say, the welfare capitalism of Sweden.
with many excuses,
i am glad that you all are not fascists, may be just a little whicists at heart
the author is one of you, no?
who is striving for success, fame, money and by all means
he is an anti-fascist, good thing, his writings could be along the lines about that naked king or no fog without fire thing :) and freedom of speech
about being whicists, i'm ok with that, it's like a survival mechanism, no? we have our own version of it called anti-chineseist, a very healthy sentiment
chinese themselves have a nastier version of it called han expansionist, i'm sure there are many radical mexicanists etc
i'm ok with that as long as nobody kills tibetans or jewish or palestinians
unfogged is truly a political blog i see now
unfogged is truly a political blog i see now
Yes it is, unfortunately.
In the particular instance of the US, the militarism pretty obviously pushes it more toward the fascist side than say, the welfare capitalism of Sweden.
true enough.
sorry, if it angers you
i just don't like when all are against one
however wrong that one is
i just don't like when all are against one however wrong that one is
That's a really weird position, read. I mean, sure, one generally likes to root for the underdog, but sometimes people are just wrong.
if he was a majority i'll stand by you
not for your ideas, for example
just because you are an individual to be heard, not beaten
the author is one of you, no?
You've found me out, when I was hoping to remain invisible. Yes, I'm the ghostwriter. I think you'll find that the book has been carefully researched to the highest possible scholarly standards, though written, of course, with a general audience in mind.
if he was a majority
Does controlling every branch of government count?
read, I think this is a situation where the guy writing the book doesn't actually believe what he's saying and is hoping for sales to the stupidest members of the political movement that he is greedily taking advantage of. So he's deserving of scorn even from those who agree with him.
Does controlling every branch of government count?
With movement conservatives, no, it does not. They're too strongly committed to seeing themselves as an aggrieved and powerless minority.
do not agree with him
so i said 'striving for fame and money'
i thought it's like an essence of the american culture, a pretty detached observation
sorry, i am a rude guest
sure, i should not imply that you are him or he is one of you, he is by himself
i can just read and keep my opinion to myself if you prefer
I, at least, appreciate hearing your opinions, read. It's up to you whether you want to participate in the conversations here or not, but you should realize that the commenters here are outspoken in general, so when they disagree with you, even in harsh terms, it's nothing personal. It does take some getting used to.
I'm actually kind of depressed and scared that this thing got published. People like us will sit around and laugh, but you guys know full well that a *lot* of people will find claims of that nature shocking! and believable!
Hopefully no one will read the damn thing.
Read, could you and OPINIONATED GRANDMA kind of meet in the middle on that shift key issue?
'striving for fame and money'
Honestly, read, anyone who is serious about 'striving for fame and money' should be spending a lot less time at this blog.
I also am glad that you share your comments, read. I don't think it's really that surprising that people might not agree that they are essentially the same as someone they plainly despise, though.
It is certainly true that fame and money are things that Americans famously strive for. But, of course, different people value them to very different degrees, and have very different standards for what they would be willing to do in exchange for them. The kind of fame (if any) a given person might desire is of course different, too. From the inside, these distinctions feel pretty important.
Plus the folks at *this* particular blog tend to put a pretty high premium on intellectual honesty.
Either Goldberg doesn't, and he's just shilling, or he does, and he's just stupid.
But in the small chance that he's actually as stupid as his book, we should rather pity him than mock him.
No, we should be afraid of the effect of his idiocy on the public at large. I don't care what the hell Goldberg believes; I care about his publishing this kind of crap and undermining the body politic even more than it already is.
I don't think 132 and 133 are in opposition. We can pity the idiot, and deplore the publisher.
There's no obligation to pity malicious idiots.
132: Scorn not his simplicity?
Just as his book is both A). a deeply stupid politico-cultural product, which emerges from forces that are bigger than the all of us; and B). an extended exercise in deliberate intellectual dishonesty, for which its author should be held to account; so is Goldberg both A). dumb as a post; and B). an actively malicious person who stands to make too much money from this dreck.
I propose we relentlessly mock him 6 days a week, while setting aside one day a week for a moment of pity.
Pitying Goldberg in this context is like (and I mean exactly like) pitying Ann Coulter. Regardless of their internal lives, they have chosen antisocial careers and should be feared and despised by decent people.
Their publishers and promoters should be picketed and protested. (I get alliterative when annoyed about asshats.)
I think 135 gets it exactly right. What's up with all you bleeding-heart liberals?
Okay, "all you" is an overstatement. I mean Ned, basically.
136: Sister Mary Invisible of the Adjunct Order, SJ? A day of rest?
No, we should be afraid of the effect of his idiocy on the public at large.
True enough, though I have the impression that members of the public receptive to this foolery don't really need any help along the road.
Watch the bestseller lists, really, to see how the book does with the public at large. Overall, the thing reeks so plainly of shrill and hysterical that I have trouble seeing it having much of an impact on, say, voter behavior. Then again, I have no idea how Coulter's book did. There's a publishing niche for this crap, obviously.
I don't even mean voter behavior; I mean further engraining the idiocy of the crazy 26%. "Look, *he's* an academic!" I can just imagine the discussions I'm going to have with my right-wing uncle over this shit. There's always going to be crazy people who believe stupid-ass shit, but it's unconscionable for people who surely ought to know better to feed the maw.
Didn't Random House used to be reputable?
I imagine Bennett Cerf betting Goldberg that he couldn't write a book using "fascist" in every sentence.
(Cerf is supposed to have frequently bet Theodore Geisel that he couldn't write a book to a specific word count.)
we should rather pity him than mock him.
Sorry, I'm too busy pitying the rest of the country.
Yes, it's unconscionable. It's slightly interesting, therefore, to know whether Goldberg actually believes it.
What'd be morbidly fascinating would be to see point-by-point rebuttals of the book or its chapters. I'd prefer, of course, not to grace such an idiotic thing with attention at all; engage it at all and you've allowed it to shift the terms of the discussion (liberals find themselves denying that they're fascists). I'm not sure whether I think the mere publication of the book succeeds in shifting the terms perceptibly in the absence of an ensuing hullaballoo.
What'd be morbidly fascinating would be to see point-by-point rebuttals of the book or its chapters.
I'd like to see Stephen Colbert invite Goldberg to appear on The Colbert Report along with some sweet, perky second-grade teacher with a degree from Swarthmore.
140: It's a teaching order, of sorts. My students know me as Sister Mary Catholic.
Colbert makes me cringe half the time.
I wouldn't mind seeing Jon Stewart do his I-am-respecting-you-really!-you-jackass routine on him, though.
Colbert's schtick does get a bit old, but having Goldberg on video accusing some harmless second-grade teacher of being a fascist or worse than Hitler or whatever would almost be worth more than a point-by-point rebuttal of every word in his book. I once watched Colbert elicit an admission from Dinesh D'Souza that he believed FDR was as bad as Hitler (or some such absurd confession) and it was a beautiful thing. Beautiful because at that moment D'Souza revealed himself, to the majority of people who still don't believe that FDR was as bad as Hitler (or who don't believe second-grade teachers are fascists, say), to be a complete nutter.
Colbert is often a great, great interviewer because he's willing to engage interview subjects on their own terms. I loved his interview with Tom Delay. At the same time, Delay's own fans probably liked it, too.
(or some such absurd confession)
Ok--it was D'Souza's assertion that FDR was indirectly responsible for the September 11th attacks.
Goldberg eventually had to write this book, though, right? A soon-to-be-published Serious Book was probably in his contract for the L.A. Times, and of course he'll never get off Blogging Heads and onto real paying TV until he's got a book to lend him gravitas. It's basically his field's version of a tenure book.
I would have more pity for his having locked himself into the title and thesis back in, what, 2004?, if the whole project hadn't been predicated on liberals' being cowed and marginalised. It's always been a bullies' book, conceived in a bullying time. So sad that he made the writing of it so public! Maybe he would otherwise have been better able to revise it as the zeitgeist moved.
but you guys know full well that a *lot* of people will find claims of that nature shocking! and believable!
Bitch is right, alas -- general ignorance of history is so prevalent in this country, that college graduates will read this book and go, "huh, so the Nazis WERE liberals." I bet there are footnotes to prove it, even!
Still, D'Souza's new book is almost surely worse.
(For "prevalent' in 154, I had "widespread and deep," and then I thought, shit, what am I doing? this is Unfogged!)
2 fascist 2 furious
/i got nothin
Jesus Christ, it actually gets stupider.
college graduates will read this book and go, "huh, so the Nazis WERE liberals."
And before they graduate, college students will quote this book in their term papers.
re: 158
And hopefully their tutors will fail them.
And hopefully their tutors will fail them.
Keeping David Horowitz gainfully employed until his dementia begins to express itself in activities of daily living.
college graduates will read this book and go, "huh, so the Nazis WERE liberals
what was confusing that he's anti-fascist
if fascist i wouldn't bother to defend him, but still would prefer just ignore
of course his accusation of liberals in fascism is nonsense
and actually his book could be seen as an attempt to rehabilitate nazis and that's evil, i agree
what was confusing that he's anti-fascist
If you're confused, it's only because Goldberg has no goddamned idea what fascism means.
But he knows it when he sees it!
The part where he says Dachau concentration camp was liberal because of its "alternative medical experiments" should really win some sort of lifetime chutzpah award. Organic mass sterilization -- it's every liberal's dream! Now if only we could perfect cruelty-free vivisection....
Editorial: Lifetime? Don't know what I was thinking.
46: Please, please tell me that appearance is happening on Saturday 29 December.
Damn it! His booker is fascist!
Hey Sifu, what's ever happened to the poor man anyway?
Jonah, you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Fascists oppressed the homosexuals.
Republicans are homosexuals.
Liberals are fascists.
what's ever happened to the poor man anyway?
Stomach cancer.
This book really is outrageous, malicious, and stupid. Let's see if we can't improve American public life by making clear to all, across party lines, what a piece of crap this is. I don't want to live in a country where a lot of people take this thing seriously.
I don't want to live in a country where a lot of people take this thing seriously.
I hear Canada's lovely.
See??? It took this outrageous book to reduce PerfectlyGoddamn to a state of earnest, uh, outrage. Contempt. Digust. That is.
(Babe, just watch the bestseller lists to see whether it gets any play, before becoming agitated. You know?)
Sweet jesus -- Sadly No has another quotation up:
Liberal fascism differs from classical fascism in many ways. I don't deny this. Indeed, it is central to my point.
I'm still betting it gets a rave in the Times. Or rather, they will give it one rave in the Sunday Book Review and one pan in just the weekly paper.
Or rather, they will give it one rave in the Sunday Book Review and one pan in just the weekly paper.
Excellent prediction. (Also, I sure do hate how often the NYT spends its daily-paper review space on books that also get reviewed in the Book Review. I also hate Michiko Kakutani.)
Who do you think they'll choose to review it? I'm thinking Scooter Libby.
Fascism now comes in a range of delightful flavors! There's Classical Fascism [tm], Liberal Fascism [tm], Spicy Fascism [tm], Islamofascism [tm], and many more!
I'm just tickled pink that I can walk out my office building's door and gaze on the HQ of American fascism. I never would have guessed.
Delightful Fascist Flavors for Every Budget!
I'm not having any part of it until I get my own homofascism in a rainbow print. Breedofascism is making me feel excluded here.
181: Does anyone know Tom Wolfe?
"Liberal Fascism" is a book of intellectual history you won't be able to put down---in either sense of the term.
This is like when I was an undergrad and the prof. was explaining that his mother was from Lesbos "and that always prompts two questions." Another student raised his hand and asked, "What's the other one?"
Can someone ask him what the other sense of the term is?
Meaning 1: Stop reading.
Meaning 2: Denigrate.
I think he means the sense of the term that involves the book biting your fingers and holding on for dear life, like the Necronomicon in Army of Darkness.
Can someone ask him what the other sense of the term is?
I think he means that it can not be criticized. I do not know what the other lebian question might be. "Does she play softball, or LPGA?"
184: The 2 meanings of "put down" :
1. stop reading in the middle of...
2. insult
until I get my own homofascism
HOMOSEXODUS!
Revealed: 'Gay' plans to target 2-year-olds
Can someone ask him what the other sense of the term is?
You won't be able to put it down like you did your blind, fifteen-year-old German shepherd that shit itself every time you slammed a door.
I imagine it's "Where's Lesbos?"
185: Oh, Teo, of course you are right! (Right as to what Wolfe meant. But Wolfe of course is wrong in that I can easily put it down, in both senses.)
But I like Burke's answer better.
You all (and I too but in a different, more pathetic, way) are pwned by Teo.
It's a pretty clever line, actually. Wrong, of course, but clever.
I didn't think 157 was possible, but sonofagun, it's true. I should have known better than to question apo's link-fu.
