"At least now I can pick you out of a line-up, should the need arise!"

She had to sit down on the stage of Joey's victory party last night because of those totally awesome stiletto heels -- three inches if a mile. It made our own booful one-inch metallic silver heels look like child's play. Check out that glorious hair, the silky black jumpsuit, the perfect makeup. This girl Pamela of Atlas Shrugs, who bills herself as a "New York Jewess," is wicked fun to hang out with. Blogging is her passion, and she's on a first-name basis with John Bolton, the man whose mustache repels bullets. Way cool to meet her in person. Above she raises her video cam beside the golden door to capture the magic of Joey Lieberman's triumph last night.

"Nice to meet you & your husband in Hartford," emails the adorable and awesome Evan Coyne Maloney of Brain Terminal, whom we met face to face -- there still are such things, the blogosphere notwithstanding -- just yesterday, thanks to Roger L. Simon's decision to invite us to scout out Joey Lieberman's victory party down Hartford as a member of the Pajamas Media team. We've been filing stories here as our psychological and technical resources allow. Do you know what it's like to be a young, sexy woman in an old woman's body? While you're pondering that, here's our take on meeting folks like Evan and force-of-nature Pamela of Atlas Shrugs yesterday, in the T. S. Eliot sense (We already knew the brilliant and sensitive and soulful Sol of Solomonia, whose presence helped make us feel at home, from the minute we ran into each other):

In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo.
In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo.

"It was such a crazy, busy time that I'm sorry we didn't really get any time to chat. But at least now I can pick you out of a line-up, should the need arise!" adds Evan, who grabbed the scoop of the day with his Ron Silver interview. Absolutely, darling:

When you're a blogger, you're a blogger all the way, from your first cigarette to your last dying day.

Swoon. From the point of view of a brain in a jar, this latest sojourn into "real life" has been most enjoyable, and thanks to his being the ideal husband, Tuck had a great time too.

Comments

[goomp]

Better a young woman's brain and spirit rather than a comatose brain in a young body. As for me, better an active brain in a decrepit body than visa-versa.

[Richard Davis]

Any friend of Pamela's is a friend of mine.

Thanks for all you do to make America BETTER!

[Teresa]

Um... wow! You, Sol, Pamela, and Evan exalted company to be sure. Tremendous bloggers all. I'm jealous. ;-)

Yeah, just WOW! is the big thing that comes to mind.

[x_dhimmi]

Here from Pamela's site. I echo Richard Davis. Crank up the volume! Best to you. --Deb

[LanceThruster]

I have no respect for Pam of Atlas Shrugs because she bans commenters who disagree with her and uses shills to praise her in her comments section (a supposedly non-shill "poster" addressed points I made to her in a "personal" email). Nothing like preaching to the choir. Joe Lieberman embodies the worst characteristics of a politician and will continue to be an embarassment in the Senate.

[Sissy Willis]

LanceT: The Lord God omnipotens reigneth. I recommend you get with the program or start your own blog. Pamela rocks. She needs no apologists.

[LanceThruster]

"If there is a god, he is a malign thug" ~ Mark Twain

Pam is symptomatic of the echo chamber. No dissenting voices, just sycophants parroting what the emperor wants to hear. Not to worry though; it's pretty common as the chimperor suffers from the same malady.

If she needs no shills, then why does she use them? Why would this warrior queen be against a level playing field in the arena of ideas?

[Sissy Willis]

LanceT: A pretty girl is like a melody. Time to lie back and enjoy the scenery.

[Teresa]

Sissy, I think Lance isn't feeling the luv poor boy.

But I'm confused as to why he has to come here to voice his annoyance that Pamela won't pay attention to him. Perhaps we're supposed to commiserate?

Lance - do start your own blog. You can then vent about all the people you hate to the entire world. Put out the word at the DU - I'm sure you'll have flocks of readers telling you how smart you are.

[LanceThruster]

I followed the link from the Atlas site. I saw a few items worth commenting on and I did. I think Pam is pretty too but that's not the point. I merely wished to add my $.02 for those still inside the bubble. I am too technically inept at the moment to start a serious blog, and can certainly admire Pam and Sisu for that. However, this does not preclude me from voicing an opinion at sites allowing for it.

Unfortunately for political discourse, those wishing to express views not in lockstep with the site hosts usually get shut out, smeared, or ridiculed. This is especially frustrating as I feel the topic of the Israel/Palestinian conflict is avoided unless it is in keeping with the official narrative of Israel being the white hats and the Arabs/Muslims/Palestinians being the black hats. Because of this, scores of them (Arabs/Muslims/Palestinians) are being slaughtered with barely a peep from the MSM or the world. I applaud you for putting up with my intrusion. I'll not overstay my welcome. I just wanted to offer another viewpoint. Thank you for providing me with a forum.

[Teresa]

Lance I recommend blogger.com - it's easy, it's free and some big bloggers who don't want to bother with extra stuff use it - including many who consider themselves to be totally non-techy. You don't need glitz to get your opinion out there.

As for stating your opinion - it helps get your point across if you stick to facts and quit calling people names. When it turns into a play yard taunting session there is no more conversation it's just slinging mud with no purpose - for instance "chimperor" how very cutesy, but where does that get you in the conversation?

Learning how to argue your point intelligently is the best way to keep yourself from being banned almost anywhere. If have been banned from other sites, they are sending you a message - they've heard what you have to say and don't like it. Guess what, they are free to leave you out of the conversation. Believe it or not that is not a violation of your First Amendment rights. Especially since you can get on the net and roll your own, so to speak.

[LanceThruster]

I usually match the snarkiness of the material I am rebutting. I neither apologize for nor regret any characterizations of the reThuglicans as they have set new lows for political chicanery and ugliness. While it is true that to be banned from a blog is not a First Amendment violation, it's different when it's for something other than being a troll, spamming, or a host of other legitimate infractions. What I've found generally is that all the vitriol is reserved for fellow traveller's use only but comments not even approaching their level are claimed as being over the top. I got here from a link at Atlas Shrugs. Have you ever checked out the vindictiveness in her posts (whether her site or not)? And her absolute delusions of righteousness as those who fail to meet her standards of fanaticism are relegated to her #1 enemies list (like Condi). This goes double for any site/poster that does not say 'good' things about Israel as they will also smear you from that moment on as an anti-Semite. Thank you for the blog references. It would at least serve to leave a trail of breadcrumbs for the sites that I have commented at. I like your approach on the whole if not your particular worldview and anyone who loves cats can't be all bad (have you ever seen Debbie Schlussel's GOP people like dogs and Libs like cats? - it's pretty idiotic). TTFN!

[Teresa]

Then I have to ask you Lance - why are you reading sites that you feel are so very slanted that they use invective rather than rational conversation? What's the point? There are many many many other bloggers out there with vastly differing ways of expressing their views. You'd even be surprised to learn that people can and do express opinions without calling other people names. You should try it some time. It's much more difficult, because you have to actually think about what you are saying not just stick a label on something under the belief that everyone will know what that means.

I don't hit up the far left radical sites and try make them think logically. I read what I can, which is limited by the amount of time I have available (not nearly as much as I'd like). I stick to people who have rational ways of expressing themselves. I don't always agree with them, but we don't have name calling contests either and I don't waste my time.

There are sites I read that I know are very slanted (these I read because the writers are witty and their opinions - while over the top - don't annoy the hell out of me). If you want to read that type of thing, I'm sure there are more than sufficient number of them on the left as there are on the right. Stick with invective you agree with in those cases and you will have far fewer problems.

There are radical people on both ends of the spectrum. Most of them tend to "label" things liberal and conservative. Sissy just had a post not too long ago about the habits of libs vs conservatives - by all rights I should be an ultra liberal - I love Starbucks and go daily, I shop at Target as opposed to Walmart, and my husband enjoys a great martini (I don't like much in the way of alcohol so that one doesn't apply to me). So, labels although ridiculous are fun to play with.

[Josef K]

Pamela old?

Please.

She's one of my heroes and my heavily biased opinion sweetness n' light. I just want to pick her roses galore, if I may say so.

[hannah]

Hello!

I am contacting you because I am working with the authors of a book about blogs, and I'd like to request permission to use a photograph of yours in this book. Please contact me at [email protected], and I'd be happy to give you more information about the project. Please paste a link to your blog in the subject field. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Hannah
[email protected]