The Chronic Curmudgeon

I know a lot of girls that look like skeletor.

I'm so done with Aniston. You get GQ's man of the year for handling divorce well? By handling it well do they mean selling your sob story to every wrinkly old journalistic bag? Divorce is a fact of flippin life and people with 3 kids and a shitty job move on. Wah wah Jennifer, bite my butthole. Yes, give it to her. Definitely don't give it to Peter Jennings. Or like, don't give it to any of MK Olsen's boyfriends who can't have that juicy burger until she leaves the room.

Peter Jennings never looked like that without his shirt on.

Mary Kate might, but my even thinking that sets off all sorts of dsigust-o-meter alarms in my head... 18 is too young even for me.

Shut up, Doc and Tim.

actually, mary kate is 19

In that case, full speed ahead! ;-)

The Vanity Fair cover is much more intriguing than the GQ one in my estimation, but then I like a little mystery.

http://www.jossip.com/gossip/vanity-fair/media-blitz-jennifer-aniston-makes-graydon-carter-tingle-20050826.php

Anal-Rod winning the MVP is a saddening affair. All the rest of this post sucks to be honest.
Should anyone who doesnt read "People" on regular basis even care about Britney or Jen and their relationships? I mean sure, they are lucsious women, Ms. Anniston is in my top 3, however the drama that surrounds thier lives and careers is of little substance.

You claim little time to post, so naturally you choose Hollywood flair as your topic. BLAH BLAH BLAH.

I thought for sure you would have something to say about this straw grasping effort by Bush to continue to justify his war mongering.

Um, did you blog this week? (Well, other than on ideas that you stole from me?)

Get snarky if you want, but be able to back it up. A guy who's done all of six posts since August 14 (three of which were his takes on my ideas or my posts) probably shouldn't be bitching about my choice of subjects or lack of meaty posts. ;-)

As for your People/gossip rant... did you get the sense that, other than her cover photo, I was interested in the GQ/Aniston story? Or that I cared about anything beyond that upcoming glorious day when Britney bares all? Perspective, cous... perspective.

Do I have the college stamped piece of paper that says Im a writer? No.
Do I have a job where it is my job to write? No.

Do I really have anyone that reads my blog? Not really. Maybe you, and maybe the occasional points flipper on "blog explosion." I have even less time than you. I also KNOW when theres nothing worth blogging, and don't bother with Britney, or Jen/Brad, or the death of Princess Di or J.Lo, or whatever.

As for perspective, it would appear that you do care if you took the time to document these things.
Your constant "curmugdeonism," is deserving of some heckling from time to time, even you can admit that. I laugh pretty hard when I read your responses.
I hold the chair seat in the peanut gallery.

Well, rather than get into a spitting match over who has less time... I'll just point out that

a) yes, my job is that I write for a living -- so sometimes after writing for 10 or 11 hours a day, coming home and writing some more is a little challenging; even a creative genius such as meself can occasionally run out of creativity ("genius" used with self-mocking intent, for those playing along at home);

b) In your answer you gave the key as to why I feel the need to put something up even when it's fluffy. While you acknowledged that you have few if any readers, there are people crazy enough to actually come to this little blog of mine every day. I don't say that in the nyaah nyaah sense, but rather just to point out this:

If you go a few days without posting, no harm done; but I feel almost a little obligated, like if people are going to do me the favor of actually dropping by to read my skewed little rants, the least I can do is actually write something new as often as possible, even if it's a little foofy piece about hot celebrities (again, the impetus for the Aniston piece was her GQ cover, and the Spears mention was to basically make the joke about her impending Playboy pictorial (if Tiffany AND Debbie Gibson posed, it's a lead pipe cinch that Britney will pose too, eventually).

When I don't have or can't make time for any extensive or creative posts, I take the easiest material I can find and put something, anything up -- just because people actually come here to read, and I feel like I should repay that as often as possible. Sorry if you have issue with my subject choice when doing so (actually, I'm not really that sorry).

And one last point: when there's nothing worth blogging, a creative writer will *make* something worth blogging. Not having time to write is one thing, but that's different from not having anything worth blogging about.

None of this is intended to discourage the peanut gallery, btw -- by all means, fire it up. Just 'splainin' meself here.

Damn Aniston looked very malnutritioned in that photo.

She looks malnourished in every photo. Because she is. I really wish she'd gain a little weight. It makes all the bones in her face stick out and she looks really weird.

Be interesting to see the original of that photo, before the retoucher did their job.