for 2 January 2001. Updated every WEEKDAY.
Aren't you "guys" a dot-com? Just correct me if I'm wrong. I still have a "dot-com" job and will be busy for quite a while. I don't think it's real cool to knock all the people that got laid off...even if they themselves or their company was useless. A large portion of them are probably your readership. I guess I just wanted to say grow up assholes 'cause what comes around goes around. I'll still read Filler but Terry is on my shit-list for having a hand in that.
First of all, Jarret, we're not all "guys." Secondly, we don't think it's cool to knock all the people that got laid off either, which is why we never did. Thirdly, we're not sure it's fair to imply that the people who got laid off by dot.coms are useless, as you did in your letter. We think it's important to point out that the world is filled with useful people who are largely unemployed (like Dennis Rodman, for instance) and useless people who are gainfully employed (like you, for instance). Remaining employed has much more to do with one's propensity to lick ass, behave politically, and use one's connections at all costs. For a telling example of this phenomenon, look no further than the refrigerator monkey who's about to take over our country's highest office.
Fourthly, we're proud of the fact that scores of useful unemployed people read our publication.
Anyway, best of luck keeping busy. We'd get Terry to answer for himself, but he's been a complete bundle of nerves ever since he heard he was on your shit list.
One of the best ever...
Ah, me public. While so many of the little people spend the holidays with their self-basting heads in the oven, I just bask in the marinade that is soothing, though patently false and misguided, accolades.
Subj That darned economy
Dear Mr. Mx,
I fully expect the unexpectedly sharp jolt to the economy to deepen as the xmas sales numbers are tallied. Reporting on the deepening recession and the inevitable bickering of talking heads casting blame this way and that (i.e., "Bush "talked" us into this recession!") will take the place of the recent news that election results are a bit less accurate than pre-election polling. Shoddy media analysis to the contrary, these little election snafus could easily be prevented with authenticated voting online. I'm expecting to wake up with the mark of the beast on my forehead any day now.
Still looking to the television for vapid and vacuous experiences,
Expecting TV to deliver your V&VE quotient is *so* 20th century I can barely stand to answer. But I will: the problem isn't with authenticated voting but with voting in general. Never having "voted" for a winning candidate I can assure that these things are every bit as much decided in advance as NFL games or the Golden Globes.
Color me new year's blue,