In earnest, beyond the fact that this apartment appears to be located two miles below the earth: how is this a legal rental?
@grendan The Citi thing is honestly better/funnier/meaner than anything I could've made up.
Majestic. Also I will still forget to move my clocks forward, probably. (Sorry if it sounds like bragging that I have multiple clocks in my home.)
@Elpico72@twitter Should've known that. That would also explain why people are in my Twitter feed like YO CANTICLE FOR LEIBOWITZ.
@stuffisthings It's not totally the wrong word for it; the sensibility's a little darker and different, but there's a Pynchonian sense to how weird it is, and how antic. But it's a different kind of wildness, and is just fundamentally set in a less gentle and distant world. I'm not the biggest Pynchon fan in the world, or on this byline, though.
@Matt Cornell Oh, he certainly wouldn't. I don't think Lynch is interested in that, or in people, or in anything but a very specific type of narrativity. I still like his movies, but I wouldn't watch his film on cults any more than I'd listen to his dance music.
@brilliantmistake He's great, and barely used. It actually made me really mad. Also he really does look kind of like P.S. Hoffman's kid.
There's something obviously gross but also kind of queasily predictable about the authoritarian temptation among alpha TED Talkin' public intellectual types like Khanna. This is the dude that's going to move to techno-authoritarian Singapore because of how "efficient" it is, right?
@deepomega I think Ailes is less of a boogeyman than Soros, in the sense that he really is actively fucking with the discourse, but the rest of what you wrote is 100% correct to me.
I generally love the Baffler and fully love that it exists, but there were a few pieces in this issue that had this problem: super-strict standards enforced from the sidelines, without any of the context or perspective that could take the pieces beyond EPIC TAKEDOWN status. They should be better than that, and this.
@PoisonIvy Agree with this the most. The rally seemed like bullshit to me, and emblematic of all the things that Almond lambastes and re-lambastes throughout, but that was two years ago. I think there's an overdetermined and generally off sense to a piece tagging Jon Stewart for not standing up strongly against militarism on September 12, 2001, but ignoring the Super-PAC thing, which is the sharpest (and funniest) running political joke I can think of, is weaker still. One's uncharitable, but the other's an oversight that punches a hole in the whole piece.