for 24 August 1999. Updated every WEEKDAY.

I can't tell how much of that
article is real. All of it,
none of it, or some of both.

Well, actually, I know some
of it is true. Does that mean
the rest is?

Karen Eliot
<maui@post.net>

Yes, some of it is true —
and that means that all of it
is. This same logic will help
you parse celebrity first
lady interviews, presidential
grand jury testimony, and The
Blair Witch Project.

The truth is out there,

Holly M.

Love the presidential
childhood shtick, but if
you're going to imitate
18th-century writing, get it
right!

"The idle fool if whipt at
fchool"

It should be "is whipt at
fchool." See
http://www.straightdope.com/
classics/a1_110.html for more
info.

Hope this helps!

Art Cohen
<art@stumpworld.com>

Actually, near as I can tell,
the passage should have been
entirely f-less, since
18th-century writers only
used the "long s" (i.e., the
f) in the middle of words,
not the beginning or end. As
in: "My curfed editor at Suck
foifted the damnable paffage
on my piece in the firft
place, and now it is me who
is made to refemble a
philiftine." Thankfully,
everything else in the piece
is 100 percent accurate.

Holly M.

The unanswered question in
the interview with Hillary
was, "If Bill is so fixated
on pleasing women, why did he
do things to hurt you?" I
doubt we'll ever hear that
one in a press conference.

"The idle fool if whipt at
fchool." This sentence never
would have been written this
way by a colonial writer. F
replaces s only in the middle
of a word, never at the
beginning or end.

Have a day, your choice,

David
<Utter-David@GALLS.com>

Well, that was certainly one
good unanswered question.
Another would have been: "How
could an ostensible feminist
icon like yourself stoop to
blame two women — both of
whom are now dead and unable
to defend themselves —
for your husband's
cigar-brandishing
objectification of women his
daughter's age?"

And yes, other
correfpondents have
thoughtfully corrected my
thoughtless appropriation of
colonial ufage.

Holly M.

I have unsubscribed because
you are giving William
Jefferson shit beyond that
which he deserves. He catches
enough shit from the assholes
out there like the Reverend
Falwell, Delay, Trent Lott,
and Gary Bauer without you
assholes piling on.

You suck,

Dave Sullivan
(a Republican who thinks, "Enough is
f*cking enough!")

<davesull@mediaone.net>

Thank you. I have long prided
myself on my quenchless
desire to go to any length
whatsoever to irritate a
Republican. And your eloquent
bons mots at my expense leave
me altogether speechless.

Bravo,

Holly M.

Nice try, but you need to
tighten it up a little, back-
beat-wise. Nietzsche was the
perfect choice, but you
needed a third act (i.e.,
reference). Further, dumb has
to be demonstrated, not just
stated.

<Herasi@aol.com>

If you're so smart, why don't
you have a suggestion for a
third act (i.e., reference)?
Criticisms should be
demonstrated, not just
stated.

Anyway, we just demonstrated
that you're dumb. Now we'll
state it.

You're dumb.

Sucksters

Feel Our Pain!

Dearest Sucksters,

Can I ask you one question?
Where do these caustic
replies of yours get anybody?
It seems that no matter what
your readers say in their
letters, you always string
them up using the flaws in
their writing abilities or
ridicule them for having
different views than your
disillusioned, "nouveau-
media" mantra.

As a faithful reader, I wish
that you would give us a
little more respect. We're
not all pathetic members of
the uncultured masses,
content to lap up your
droning proclamations and to
remain silent. We reply to
your work because we have a
stake in it. We are the most
important link in the whole
picture: We're the "eyeballs"
that keep your jobs (and your
egos) intact. Go forth and
criticize — just leave us
out of it, unless you want us
to set up camp elsewhere.

Partially yours,

Philip
<mac_abre@yahoo.com>

Oh, but we really do respect
you! As Ana would say, we
really appreciate the work
you're doing for us. Thank
you soooo much for making
Suck popular for all these
long years! Without you, the
reader, where would we be?
Huh? Nowhere, that's where!

Not all of you are pathetic
members of the uncultured
masses!

Not all of you are whining
pussies, either!

Sucksters

Monday: Cranky Mail Day from
Now On!

Subject: Why you guys SUCK!

Hip, egotistical, destined
for failure ... that's Suck.

Two things, please:

1. Put a little number next
to your links and have all
the links at the bottom. Your
shit is way too convoluted to
read in small doses.

2. Discussion, feedback,
interaction: HELLO! This is
the Web. Clicking on links
does not interaction make;
let me talk back, mo-fo. A
simple discussion board
newsgroup, irc style, is
called for. Get with the
program or get eaten (oh
yeah, that already happened).
Hey, it's free content.

BTW: That was the best
article in a while today;
circulate this as needed.

Wah
<rtaylor4@uswest.net>

Circulate this as needed?!
You really think we care what
you pathetic, uncultured
whining pussies think? And if
we did, wouldn't we have a
discussion board already?

Thank you for the laugh!

You are the boy!

Failing like never before,

Sucksters

The Shit

"Gary's Trajectory," A Wanderer in the Perfect City, Lawrence Weschler, Hungry Mind Press, 1998 The Parallax View, Alan J. Pakula, Paramount Pictures DVD, 1974 Rogues to Riches: The Trouble with Wall Street, Murray Teigh Bloom, Putnam,1971 Actual Air, David Berman, Open City Books, 1999 Tibor Kalman: Perverse Optimist, Peter Hall and Michael Bierut, editors, Princeton Architectural Press, 1998 Canary-wing parrots, Dolores Street, San Francisco Super Shitty to the Max, Hellacopters, Man's Ruin Records, 1998 Request magazine (any issue after June 1999) On the Road to Vietnam, Bob Hope, Cadet 4046 vinyl, 1964 The Flying Ballerina, Drums and Tuba, TEC Tones, 1998 Dino, Nick Tosches, Delta Alpha Publishing, 1999 The Soft Bulletin, The Flaming Lips, WEA/Warner Brothers, 1999 Big Red soda