Look Up The Word Douchebag in the Dictionary and Piers Morgan’s Photo Will Be Next to it

This post really should have been up yesterday, but I was spending the day without a computer, unfortunately.

Wednesday night I was at work, minding my own business when a friend posted THIS on her facebook timeline.

I had to do a double take and go hunting through twitchy to see if it was real, since it was no longer on Piers’ twitter feed. No doubt deleted when he realized that he looked like a massive tool and not even his CNN time slot could disguise that fact after a tweet like that went public.

Of course Piers has consistently underestimated the power of the new media and his tweet had already been screen captured by John Nolte, over at Breitbart, and saved for posterity. Yet another reminder that, especially if you are a left-wing moron, once you put something on the internet it’s there for good. (You would think after the Anthony Weiner scandal that liberals might be watching what they post a little more, no such luck.)

Anyway, Morgan took personal offense at having his douchebaggery saved for future generations apparently.

And this exchange took place.

And Nolte updated his original post on Breitbart to include this note.

Piers Morgan responded to this article on Twitter, personally accusing me of smearing him and twisting his “obvious sarcasm.” I responded by asking how straight-forward reporting and quoting what he said constitutes twisting or smearing, and will update this post if there’s an answer.

For some reason Piers has yet to address how it is “smearing” to directly quote something someone said. My guess is the answer would be something along the lines of “but Jooooohn it’s not FAIR!” whined in a voice that could make even ME hate a British accent.

I almost feel sorry for Piers, since Nolte loves to expose him for the d-bag he is, through Morgan’s own words. Then again, he sort of deserves it for making light of a tragedy, whether he meant it in a sarcastic manner or not.

Here’s a good rule of thumb, if you don’t mean it, and it’s going to make you look like an asshole if people cannot obviously discern that you are being sarcastic, then don’t press send.

There should be an app for twitter that will read your messages back to you before you send them. If that existed, Piers might have hesitated. Maybe not — maybe he is an asshole with a chip on his shoulder and an agenda to promote, no matter who has to die to promote it.

He’s certainly been on a tear about gun control on twitter lately, judging from the tweets that twitchy is archiving.

Twitchy seems to think that he was obviously being sarcastic.

Morgan was being sarcastic, of course. But his ghoulish sense of humor and his tasteless timing failed to amuse.

- Twitchy

I don’t think there was anything obvious about it, no matter what he said in follow-up tweets.

Morgan was incredibly offended at Nolte, piling on accusations and outright lies. One in which he stated, essentially, that Breitbart would be ashamed of Nolte’s posting a photo of his tweet for the world to see (check in the dictionary next to “Hah! Not likely” for my reaction that one) and that he “admired” Breitbart.

That’s a tall tale from someone who said (and I quote, which Morgan hates apparently):

Morgan: “Andrew let me go to you, as I said before the break, you are notoriously evil about almost everybody so what do you think of the new politics where everyone just whacks everybody else.”

Breaitbart: “Well I don’t think you know me Piers Morgan. I think we maybe spent eight seconds together.”

Morgan: “It was a long eight seconds.”

- Townhall

Oh well, it’s not like Morgan doesn’t have a penchant for ignoring the facts, or his own past words, when it suits him.

Maybe, as Nolte supposes in this article, it’s time for CNN to understand that Piers is just one of the many reasons their ratings are tanking.

>Scientists discussing geoengineering techniques make me giggle.

>I know that it’s wrong to pick at only one line of an article and make fun of it, because usually that means it has been taken out of context or something of that nature, but I had to make fun a particular line in this article about ways to stop global warming. It is from The Huffington Post, so I try not to take it too seriously, but…

In the interest of not taking this out of context, I will quote the paragraph the sentence appears in and simply bold the sentence in question.

“There’s the `slippery slope’ view that as soon as you start to do this research, you say it’s OK to think about things you shouldn’t be thinking about,” said Steve Rayner, co-director of Oxford University’s geoengineering program. Many geoengineering techniques they have thought about look either impractical or ineffective.

Painting rooftops white to reflect the sun’s heat is a feeble gesture. Blanketing deserts with a reflective material is logistically challenging and a likely environmental threat. Launching giant mirrors into space orbit is exorbitantly expensive.

This is why scientists both rule and are sometimes considered ridiculous. They have actually considered and discussed launching giant mirrors into space in order to combat global warming. And the only reason listed for not going ahead with this plan was that it was too expensive. I’m betting their list of reasons for why they should do it including “Because it’s fucking bad-ass man.” and “It’s totally what they would do in some ecological disaster movie like Day After Tomorrow or 2012.”

I have to point out that some of the other ideas listed after that were quite good and you should read the rest of the article, but I am no scientist so I don’t feel qualified to really commentate on the rest of the ideas. All I can say is that I knew I had to write this blog because when I read that one sentence I started laughing so hard that I nearly choked to death on my Starbuck’s coffee.

>And I don’t know where I’d be Without you here with me Life with you makes perfect sense You’re my best friend

>Okay, so I’m not the biggest fan of Tim McGraw, but the lyrics from his song “My Best Friend” are appropriate for this post.

Tonight I was watching Van Helsing with my dad and during a commercial break we somehow came onto the topic of friendship somehow. My dad informed me of an article in the New York Times that had several psychologists and “child rearing experts” stating that having best friends was something that should be discouraged among children.*

“I don’t think it’s particularly healthy for a child to rely on one friend,” said Jay Jacobs, the camp’s director. “If something goes awry, it can be devastating. It also limits a child’s ability to explore other options in the world.”

Of course other, saner, psychologists object to this. Saying that a lack of best friends and close relationships will lead to a life of superficial friendships and an inability to create real friends and connections later in life.

Anecdotes from others in the story, like Robin Shreeves, spoke of the life long bond between best friends. Robin and her child hood best friend, Penny, are still friends and in fact their oldest sons are best friends.

I’m certainly not the one to talk to about lifelong bonds between best friends, but I can most definitely speak to the life changing impact a best friend can have on a person, even if that best friend is only with you for a few short years.

I met my first best friend in Kindergarten at a Christian private school in Fort Smith, Arkansas. Her name was Victoria and she sat across from me in class. We shared crayons, took naps side by side, ate lunch together and monopolized the swing sets at lunch.
I don’t recall many of the other people from Kindergarten, though I’m sure I was in classes with most of them for several of the years I went to that school, but Victoria and I were inseparable. Hers was the first phone number I memorized, my first sleep over (at age 7) was at her house and when I was homeschooled in 4th grade we never lost touch.

I think I probably spent as much time at her house as I did at my own! Of course we had other friends. In 2nd grade we met a girl named Rachel and she joined our group. We often played with other people as well, but we were great together. School was great and we had each other. I was in the same class as Victoria every year in elementary school. Kindergarten through 3rd grade and we sat together in nearly every year when we had the chance. 4th grade, as I said, I was homeschool, but we stayed in touch and I still spent time at her house.

5th grade I came back to school and it seemed everything went wrong that year. Victoria and I were put in separate classes, I had to have surgery on my wrist, my teacher was a grade-A asshole, I messed up the cartilage in my foot and I had 3 girls in my class that hated me for no apparent reason. They treated me terribly and I was horribly depressed. The one thing that got me through was my friendship with Victoria. We met up at lunch and on the playground. I went to her house after school when my parents had to work late. Our friendship was wonderful for a long time, probably up until the summer before 10th grade when she started exhibiting some strange behaviors and her psychosis became too much for me to handle on top of my wavering sexuality, depression and my failing faith. I left her behind to protect myself, still it hurt me to do it. Luckily I had new friends, but I don’t think I truly had another BEST friend for a long time. Don’t get me wrong I had many really really good friends, but they just weren’t same as Victoria. I had known her too long for just any person to fill that spot.

The point is, that one person got me through some of the hardest points in my child hood and I don’t think I would be the same person now if I had only treated her like all my other casual friends in school.

A best friend is something every child should have.

Now, as for the arguments of these so called “child rearing experts” that say that Best Friends lead to cliques and bullying.
I remember bullying. Ashley, Brittany and Charisma in 5th grade put me through my fair share of it. Victoria was there to pick up the pieces. In 9th grade when I was teased for having a girlfriend, Victoria helped me through it. She never judged me.
We never bullied anyone that I can remember.

Cliques, from my memory, have very little to do with friendship. They are based on clothing, social status, Jocks, Preps, cheerleaders, and mutual hatred of the people outside the clique. Friendship breaks up cliques. I had friends from every group in 1oth grade. I ate lunch with the drama kids, cut class (once okay) with the goths, spent the morning before school with the nerds and traded fashion tips with the emo kids. Friendship, real true friendship, has a way of inviting you into every clique except for the ones that you really can’t stand. In high school (for me) that was the jocks, the cheerleaders, the religious nuts and the bullies. I knew a few people from every group though.

Now the one thing I found the most amusing about this article, was the fact that the one and only example that had that was Pro for the “no best friend” idea was a set of fraternal twins. How they think this applies to anyone other than twins I do not know.

I’ve know a couple of sets of twins. They don’t need best friends at school, because they have grown up with their best friend from day one. Sure they sometimes fight, but what best friends don’t? Twins have a completely different social growth from anyone who is born by themselves. If I had a twin I probably wouldn’t have needed and wanted Victoria around so much.

Hey NYTimes, give me a call when you can twist your theory to suit your facts instead of your facts to suit your theories. Holmes would have bitch slapped you for that one.

You can call me an alarmist, call me a right wing nutjob, call me a moron for all I care, but I have a theory about what this idea is being pushed by so many “experts”.

If you grow up with only superficial friendships, spend all your time forced into large groups in order to “better socialize” with others then you will never have someone that you completely trust to talk to. If you can’t trust the people you have discussions with, how will you ever discuss subversive topics? I don’t tell superficial acquaintances (in real life anyway) my opinion on the government and the ridiculous congress and president we currently have. Nor do I know anyone else who does. Except for, perhaps, writers and Glen Beck and other T.V. personalities.

If you only learn to “group think”, like these psychologists seem to want, then you will never learn to think original thoughts and that…that is the one thing most dangerous to a corrupt government. When it’s people start to THINK and discuss and REALIZE what’s wrong with society and their government, that is when revolutions start.

*The End Of The Best Friend – NYTimes June 16th, 2010