NYT Threatens: Now You'll All Have To Come Up With New Excuses To Ignore Our Soporific, Sophomoric Columnists

The New York Time$ $elect wall is coming down.

It was so nice to not even have to pretend to give a wet shit about what any of these imbeciles had to say. Now I guess I have to come up with a whole new bunch of reasons for not reading them.

Here's what I have so far:

-- Thomas Friedman looks like an uncle who had "busy hands" when I was a child. Had that porno-mustache too. I just can't bear to look at him. It's all too painful, albeit in a very boring, very musty conventional-wisdom way.

-- Maureen Dowd reminds me of a used up haggard old Warrant groupie. More painful associations. Death, mortality, the loss of youth... Warrant... it's not good. Can't read her.

-- Paul Krugman sneaks out at night wearing nothing but a jockstrap and Vaseline and strangles neighborhood pets. I'm actually not making this one up -- I'm pretty sure he really does this. I get that vibe from his writing.

And, uh, who are the rest? Is that stupid fuck Brent Staples still there? Is he even still alive? Not sure it really matters; every one of his columns says the same thing; they could just be reprinting the same column from 1966 every week.

As far as any of us know, he was an unpublicized casualty in the Tate-LaBionco murders.

Eh. The amusing thing is the New York Times believes that taking down the subscription-wall will give their decrepit, demented columnists a whole new relevance.

Prepare for disappointment, New York Times. Prepare for crushing disappointment.

posted by Ace at 06:05 PM

| Access Comments