It is so spectacularly wonderful, and so legally beautiful, that the Park Slope Food Coop might actually be right when they say they have grounds to make the case against fancy-pants fashion purveyor spinoff Barneys Co-op’s usage of the phrase “coop” and/or “co-op.” Because? “The term ‘cooperative,’ ‘cooperation’ or any abbreviation, variation or similitude thereof, shall not be used as or in a name except by a corporation defined in this chapter.” This is hilarious! These two things could not be more unalike, except that both are extreme reactions to capitalism. I would totally work a shift at Barneys though for some pants. (via)

Last night I caught a very strange commercial for Playtex’s 18-Hour Bra — “strange” because it didn’t focus on the lifting and separating ability of the undergarment (i.e. its most important assets) (at least to this potential bra-buyer), but its cooling properties. A parade of brassiered ladies stood in front of a white background and recounted stories about excessive breast-borne heat, with one woman going so far as to try and stick her chest into a freezer. (I don’t know about the other members of the bra-buying demographic in the Awl audience, but I have never had this problem, at least not outside of the context of normally sweaty days! Perhaps this is some overly conceptualized way to combat the still-existent idea of “bra-burners”?) In an effort to find this commercial, I made my way over to the Playtex site, which seems to be the result of some brainstorming session during which the phrase “a more self-aware Cathy” probably cropped up. Ack!

Perhaps the most disturbing/troubling/whaaaa-inducing of the videos within (of which there are many) is a small one embedded at the bottom of the site’s homepage. It seems to be called “you gotta work it…” and it starts off with a woman dispensing the wisdom that it is probably a bad idea for one to put on a bra when one happens to be super-drunk. Edgy! And maybe true for those people whose motor coordination completely disintegrates after they’ve belted back a few. But then it devolves into…

“You also don’t want to put on a bra in front of a man. Because you really want to get those suckers in there, you know what I mean? And when you put it on in front of a man, you have to go, ‘Oh my God, look how cute and perky I am!’ “

Now I would think that if one is in a position to put a bra on in front of a man, the whole illusion of cute perkiness has been kind of stripped bare? No? Before that question can be answered, another woman chimes in:

“Never do anything in front of a man that you don’t have to. That is my rule for life.”

Somehow she does not go on to talk about shoes! The spot then devolves into a discussion of being able to conceal items like contact-lens cases and cell phones inside these bras, which I would think is a deterrent? Like, I don’t know about you, but I don’t want a bra with enough sag to fit my phone and keys and wallet and contact-lens gear (hello, solution??) without there being some sort of noticeable bulge. Who does? The pocketbook-averse? People who are hoping to charm potential partners by youthfully applying their lipstick like Molly Ringwald’s Breakfast Club character?

A quick note about happy news: We have somehow conned the amazing Maura Johnston into spending the next few weeks here with us. You know Maura from Idolator when it was good, her recaps of “American Idol”, and the terrific contributions she has made on this site previously. Maura will be tasked with writing all the lady stuff that Messrs. Sicha, Bry and I are too masculine to address. KIDDING! She’s going to write whatever she wants. Anyway, we’re thrilled to have her and we hope you will be as well. One small warning: She’ll have access to our general e-mail line (to which you send so many helpful links and stories that we are so very grateful for), so those of you who use that address to offer graphic details of your Choire Sicha sexual fantasies might wish to find another forum in which to share those. Thanks! This should be fun.

I jumped the gun a little bit on August 27, when I very nearly believed for real that Citigroup stock would hit $5. And on April 14, when I hoped it would maybe happen that quarter. BUT GUESS WHAT! After announcing they’d sell off their hedge fund biz

, the stock is hopping around at $4.94 to $4.99 this morning. Who’s too big to fail? Whoooo is? Who let the banks out! Who? Who who who? AND THEN, at about 10:05 a.m., it hit $5! And then went down to $4.99. And then it hit $5.05, after a spike in volume! WHERE IT IS SORT OF HOLDING STEADY? COME ON PEOPLE LET’S DO/BUY/RESCUE THIS THING.

The Times does a bang-up job on answering the question of who makes up the “Tea Party.” There’s a ton of information to parse, but your short answer is wealthy older conservatives who hate the idea that poor people might ever enjoy any of the benefits of the state. Also, they are not fans of Barack Obama. Let us first get this out of the way. It is the opinion of a 67-year-old retiree.

I just feel he’s getting away from what America is. He’s a socialist. And to tell you the truth, I think he’s a Muslim and trying to head us in that direction, I don’t care what he says. He’s been in office over a year and can’t find a church to go to. That doesn’t say much for him.

Okay, fine, you’ve got a certain element of craziness in every movement, and cherry-picking the more outrageous quotes is probably too easy. Still, it does seem indicative of a large part of the Tea Party’s animosity and resentment. This is always a subject that evokes angry dissent, but it is hard not to concede that there is more than a small element of the movement that can be traced back to the difficult subject of race.

The overwhelming majority of supporters say Mr. Obama does not share the values most Americans live by and that he does not understand the problems of people like themselves. More than half say the policies of the administration favor the poor, and 25 percent think that the administration favors blacks over whites — compared with 11 percent of the general public.

They are more likely than the general public, and Republicans, to say that too much has been made of the problems facing black people.

This would, of course, come as news to blacks, whom the President has gone out of his way to seem not to be helping. If we were somehow able to dispense with the racial component to all of this-which is impossible, but let’s give it a shot-we might generously say that it’s purely a coincidence that the massive deficits racked up by this country over the last eight years, many of which went to pay for wars and bailouts of the financial system, only became a concern once an African-American entered the Oval Office. It was just serendipitous timing, really. Even so, there seems to be a fundamental disconnect between what these people think the government is doing for the poor and what it does for everyone else. Gail Collins, who has been on an amazing streak for so long now that one routinely expects excellence when turning to her column, captures a small bit of this in her piece today.

Discussing a recent study showing that only 47% of American households pay federal income tax last year, a number which has been trumpeted all over the place as an example of how we are forcing our hardworking rich people to subsidize the poor, Collins notes of the figure that:

Even the Tax Policy Center, which came up with it, doesn’t seem all that thrilled with the attention it’s getting.

“That viral number,” sighed Bob Williams, a senior fellow at the center. He is worried that the country is getting the impression that the bottom 47 percent is not paying anything for government services. But there are, of course, a lot of other taxes, particularly the big whoppers that are taken out of paychecks to pay for Social Security and Medicare, the programs everybody seems to like.

“This is looking only at income tax,” Williams said. “If we toss in payroll tax, only 13 percent are exempt from both — almost all low-income elderly.”

Social Security and Medicare are indeed the programs the Tea Party people favor, a contradiction discussed in the first article. “Maybe I don’t want smaller government. I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security,” a member of the movement tells the paper. “I didn’t look at it from the perspective of losing things I need. I think I’ve changed my mind.”

Another fact worth keeping in mind, from Collins: “The after-tax income of the top 1 percent more than tripled since 1979, while the bottom-dwellers barely moved an inch.” And there’s the crux of it. We have spent the last thirty years enriching the very highest caste in this country at the expense of everyone else, even the relatively wealthy who are now so upset that some money may wind up in the hands of poor black people. We’ve been fed a steady diet of vitriol and fear regarding the terrible manipulation of labor unions, which are ostensibly running this country into the ground with their all-powerful grip on the government when, really, they cannot even organize their own offices. We always hear about the pension obligations that are draining our budgets, but there are rarely any discussions of the various subsidies and tax breaks given to major corporations which find ways to effectively avoid contributing altogether. But, yes, by all means, let’s let a bunch of angry older folks with good incomes and decent educations set the tone of the debate. It’s probably the last chance they have to raise their voices in protest before we’re living in a socialist Islamic dictatorship.

Yesterday’s explosion of the Eyjafjallajökull volcano in southern Iceland has resulted in a giant cloud of ash making its way across northern Europe’s higher altitudes and closing down the airspace over the UK until tomorrow morning at the earliest; Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, Norway, and Sweden have followed suit. Hoity-toity economists across the pond are idly wondering if this disruption is actually some sort of cosmic revenge for the UK’s trade embargo against the financially strapped nation! Which conveniently ignores the ruinous floods that can occur as a result of the volcano melting glacial ice.

The Guardian is live-blogging the situation as it unfolds, and is taking the time to explain exactly why volcanic ash is even worse for planes than errant birds. (The combination of its fine grain and the high altitudes at which it floats across the sky is not only hell on engines, it “creates an extra problem [around airports] because takeoffs and landings will throw it into the air again”.) Meanwhile, the Hooters-loving strandees at one Scottish airport are taking this opportunity to engage in a little nation-baiting of their own:

As all the stranded passengers get drunker, these on the scene reports should become even more entertaining. Perhaps we’ll all learn how to say “Baba Booey” in other countries by the time this is all done!

[Via / Video via / Pic via]

Mets fans finally have something to cheer about regarding the team’s worst start since the bad old days of 1992: The team’s trainwreck performance will probably keep any of the early-oughts’ lights of post-grunge from following in the footsteps of Creed singer Scott Stapp, who, fresh off shredding the national anthem at the Florida Marlins’ Opening Day festivities, has penned a song in honor of the teal-suited team. It’s called “Marlins Will Soar” and it has the same vague references to faith and being lifted up that his work with Creed did, only this time he manages to rhyme “triple play” with “playoff race.” Artistic growth! [Via / Related]

The Eliot Spitzer rehabilitation tour continues apace, with the Post this morning reprinting a passage from Peter Elkind’s new book about the former governor, Rough Justice: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer, in which Spitzer’s prowess and virility are amply demonstrated.

On one occasion, George Fox [Spitzer’s hooker-ordering alias] had booked an appointment in the late morning at the Mark Hotel, on the Upper East Side, just five minutes’ walk from the Metropolitan Museum of Art. As usual, he paid the girl in cash — about $1,200 an hour. Not long after it was over, he called (the booker) back, wanting to see a second escort. ‘Who else is around?’ he asked. (the booker) made the arrangements.

Then, late that afternoon, (Spitzer) called again.

‘You’re going to think I’m crazy,’ he began. ‘But can you send somebody else right now?’

He wanted a third girl? The booker chuckled: “You must be Superman! The man of steel!” (The booker) found him another girl. It wasn’t even dark yet.

Well, you know, a couple of things: Clearly, this is an indication that Eliot Spitzer is a man of remarkable energy and passion. The guy fucked three hookers before David Paterson had probably even gotten up. Also, three hookers? I’m hard pressed to think of anything I can muster up the energy to do more than twice in a day, and that includes changing the channel or brushing my teeth. Obviously we need a man with these talents back in Albany during this crisis. Last but not least, I think we’ve finally figured out where the “fucking steamroller” nickname came from. Because, come on: The guy was a FUCKING STEAMROLLER. Thrice!

Science has yet to determine the long-term effects memeification can have on a person. Rick Astley’s tenure as automated punchline has spanned three years, max, and the man’s been more than a good sport about it. Yet who knows what manner of existential abyss has begun to open inside him? Conan O’Brien, as far as we can tell, has been reduced to the color orange. Neil Armstrong refuses to talk about the moon landing and wanted to sue a barber for selling his hair. And 88-year-old Betty White, by popular demand, will be hosting Saturday Night Live on May 8, 2010.

Slightly desperate-sounding Facebook group “Betty White to Host SNL (please?)!” is a testament to the diversity of the comedienne’s standing army. A handful of its half-million members are eager to see a Golden Girls sketch, while others just love how “nice” she is. One fan notes: “Betty White is an ardent animal lover and campaigner for humane rights. SNL could easily have some fun that in a skit [sic].” It is unclear exactly how many thousands are familiar with Ms. White solely through her cameos on pretty much every TV show produced in the last five decades.

The secret heart of the movement-what unites millennials who have never seen The Mary Tyler Moore Show with those who remember Ms. White as … I don’t know, a dotty crocodile sympathizer in disposable horror flick Lake Placid?-is a communal fantasy. It’s made evident in every goofy talk show appearance, in the “I missed you!” upon being introduced by Craig Ferguson and in her stock answer for the stock question “What haven’t you done in your career?” (Robert Redford). What everyone wants, these moments suggest, is for Betty White to be the country’s democratically-elected adorable/dirty/cool grandma. Seriously, let people text their votes to something called “America’s Next Top Grandma” and it would look like excessive election fraud.

Mary Tyler Moore was the first to turn Ms. White’s saccharine image on its head, casting her as two-faced Martha Stewart prototype Sue-Ann Nivens after deciding the part called for someone “sickeningly sweet.” This double-edged persona has kept her coming back to sitcoms, where more often than not she appears as herself. In a typical appearance on The Simpsons in 2000, she implores PBS’ audience for donations and then ruthlessly hunts down Homer for calling in a fraudulent contribution. She returned in 2007 to pull off the opposite gag: despite Homer’s considerable and deliberate obnoxiousness toward her, she remains pathologically polite. For the past ten years, it’s felt similarly miraculous that Ms. White has stuck around for another career phase, and each of her guest spots is more giddily anticipated than the last. When it was announced that she and Jeff Dunham would be featured on 30 Rock, you almost had to pity Dunham for the slew of devastating comparisons that followed.

The Saturday Night Live gig, though, has given Ms. White a rare opportunity to fall short of expectations. TMZ says she’s got a case of the butterflies, and judging by her demeanor it seems plausible she’s only going ahead with it as a duty to her adoring public. Hosting the show is, if fun, still a technical hassle and not something we expect most octogenarian entertainers to do. Is this the true price of persona memeification-that you are not allowed to retire until your viral momentum is spent? You wonder how many encores we could (or should) demand.

Ms. White, it must be said, is a total pro and always gets the laugh. She’s still having a blast in front of the camera, which is yet another reason to love her. But the impulse to reward her for obvious greatness-”a way to honor her,” is how the SNL Facebook group description describes its idea-confirms the movement’s sad foundation: our general dissatisfaction with old folks. Why can’t they be sharper, funnier and more gleefully crass? Why can’t they mix a genuine kindness with killer comedic timing? Why, in other words, can’t they be like the old folks on TV? Admit it: Betty White gets to be the most beloved elderly woman on your screen because she’s been playing the part for years.

RATINGS (characteristics rated on a negative to positive scale of -10 to 10):
Flexibility: -7.1

Insight: 4.2

Aesthetic: 9.8

Redundancy Potential: -5.0

Confusing To Outsiders: 8.3

Final Meme Score: 10.1

Previously: #DeleteYourTwitterIf

Miles Klee is thinking about being your Facebook friend.

Now, this? This small-town, ducks-in-the-big-city, people banding together on the streets to rescue ducklings story? This, I would say you give this a Pulitzer. I don’t usually go in for that Monica Hesse at that Washington Post, but for serious now. This is about rescuing ducklings.