HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
July 26, 2005 I’ve decided to start recognizing some of our less illustrious contributors with a nice award. "Windbag of the Week" has a nice ring to it, so I’ve chosen that title, however I’m not committing to that schedule. However, since I have no doubt that this site’s bellowers can meet that schedule handily, I expect the competition will be fierce to win this coveted prize. As I gaze out at all the eager contestants among you nervously eyeing each other to gauge your chances, I will allay your fears by forbidding your most ruthless competitor from the beauty contest. Yes, I withdraw my name from the competition - as sole judge, the conflict of interest is obvious. Next, I must clarify that today’s winner is by no means this site’s biggest Windbag. This is a weekly award and I’ve limited my review to the last several days. However, lest you Lesser but Determined Windbags sense an "always the bridesmaid, never the bride" moment coming on, you can achieve victory in tortoise-like fashion with repetitive and consistent bloviation of good quality – don’t give up if you are not selected quickly!! "Maestro! Drum roll, please." Today’s winner of the Windbag of the Week award is none other than…….Neil Levine!!! Yes, Mr. Levine has worked hard for this award and very quickly, I would add! Having only arrived on the site in March, he has blistered our ears with incessant braggadocio over 35 droning articles. How about this quote from one of his first posts, "Why I Write." His writing "is an act of self-importance," he states, "Admittedly, I have a big, big ego. Really big. More than supersized. Mas grande in Espanol. Ochen khoroshow in Russian." Those of you who’ve read any of my posts know I hate pompous asses. In an effort to restrain myself, I’ve left Mr. Levine alone – publicly. I did communicate my feelings about his bloated ego privately, after wiping the spittle from his post, "Who Needs or Wants Dirty Words, Not I," off my monitor. (My word, Levine, do you type with your nose? I’m sure your hands are busy congratulating yourself). Here is the condensed version of those emails: Me: "Mr. Levine, don’t your think you should tone back the ego a bit?" Levine: "I thought my article was great! Did you like the way I ….blah, blah, blah" Me: "Yeah, whatever, my point was your ego. It’s hugely irritating, can’t you back off a little?" Levine: "Huh? Are you saying you didn’t like my great article, don’t I write great, my points were…blah, blah, blah" Me: "HEELLLOOO! Is anyone in there? I’m saying your ego is gross and totally undeserved, can’t you read?" Levine: "I don’t get you, you’re strange, go away. But do tell your friends about my great writing…..blah, blah, blah" It was really nauseating; I wanted to sterilize my keyboard. But, back to the award. Mr. Levine wins for this week’s column, "The Manhattan District Attorney Race." Honestly, it’s not as obviously self-centered as most of his work, but more the reason for me to point it out so you don’t mistake it for truth. The entire article is essentially a vile attack on a New York politician for obvious political purposes. While it’s attempted manipulations are juvenile in character, and his blatant bias immediately off-setting to any but the most fervent Kool-Aid Kid on his block, I celebrate Mr. Levine as Windbag of the Week for the article’s underhanded self-adulation. Here’s what I mean: Mr. Levine very prominently begins his article with this statement: "My interest stems from the fact that my experience with the incumbent has not been favorable." OK, that would seem reasonable justification for the following insults of this politician. But where are the details of that unfavorable "experience?" - he provides none! In the Heavenly Kingdom of Neil Levine, his word is Gospel. If he says he had a bad experience, who are we to ask what it was! Just kneel at the Altar of Neil and believe in the fire and brimstone of his World Vision. Lest you quickly surmise that his justification is undocumented, Mr. Levine knits his brow in Almighty Contemplation and coughs up some intellectual nuggets to put us off the scent. "He (this pol he assaults) is 85, meaning he is an old man." Grab a chisel and help me etch some stone tablets, folks. We are talking Wisdom for the Ages here. So, Mr. Levine believes this man is unfit for office because of his age. He wants him to take a physical because………….."it will be very, very revealing." Oh, don’t tease us, Mr. Levine. We are only the humble doggerel begging to lap the drool of your musings. Please tell us what will be "revealed." Mr. Levine poses the astute question, "what keeps him in a tough demanding job and why is he bucking the easy life (by running for a ninth term at his age)?" But he provides an idiotic, blatantly biased answer – essentially that the pol "believes he is entitled to Office for Life." How stupid, and yet he throws it at us like manna from Heaven – "Just Beeelievee!" you can almost hear him preach. This will shock Mr. Levine, but it is obviously the VOTERS that believe this pol is entitled to the job for life. One can almost picture the framed glossy of John Kerry stapled to the ceiling above Mr. Levine’s lonely bed. I’m sure he believes President Bush is only in office because he thinks himself entitled as well. Next, Mr. Levine’s booming voice rolls across the sky with pronouncements against this pol because his financial disclosure shows little investments in "business or property." Somehow, with logic only discernible to our Heavenly Father, Neil Levine, this means the man does not have as much "insight", "understanding", and "competence" in the businesses of his Wall Street constituents as he should. That Mr. Levine, Doofus from Nowhere, presumes to judge anyone’s knowledge of business is laughable. Listening to him egotistically judging an attorney of almost certainly +50 year’s tenure, who’s been DA of Manhattan for 30 years, is insulting. Mr. Levine is a blithering idiot with used toilet paper for credentials. It goes on and my award winner deserves this complete listing of his achievements. He next, blubbers about fundraising/endorsements and makes this bold statement: "Familiarity with the backgrounds of the endorsers helps clarify a lot of issues involved." OK, so make us "familiar," Mr. Levine. But like his other undocumented histrionics, he provides no explanation. He just teases us with the old "that’s for me to know and you to find out" attitude. Watch out, Mr. Levine, your adversaries might try to steal your candy. This guy couldn’t out debate our kid’s babysitter. Finally, Mr. Levine begins to hint at substance in his mutterings. Turns out his hero, the opposing pol, makes an accusation – we don’t have to take only Lord Neil’s Word as the Truth. The charge? The evil Pol supposedly puts "too much effort on prosecuting rich people instead of doing enough to fight violence against women." As you surely expect by now, Mr. Levine doesn’t bother including the facts supporting the charge, but let’s assume, for debate, that the charge is true. On the one hand, Mr. Levine slanders this man as unknowledgeable about what Mr. Levine feels should be the primary focus of his activity – Wall Street criminals – and on the other, he’s ranting that he spends too much time prosecuting those same criminals. Without providing any evidence that any of it is true! I can just hear the clap of thunder as He damns me to Hell for doubting Him. He accuses the DA of having "no time for" the charitable work his opponent performs so magnanimously More pearls of wisdom, he states: "The fact that Judge Crocker Snyder has been able to raise large sums of money for her campaign would to me indicate a certain unhappiness with DA Morgenthau amongst members of the local bar, not a good sign for him." Or not. This is called basing a conclusion – "not a good sign for him" – on supposition – the local bar’s supposed "unhappiness." I can just as easily surmise that Snyder’s funds are coming from outsiders trying to influence a race out of their district – think about it, the guy’s won the last 8 elections, you gotta figure he has a pretty strong base of supporters. Weak, weak effort at propaganda, Mr. Levine. Here, take these cookies and milk and go play with your toys like a good little boy. Just when I thought I could wretch no more, as I tucked the last few inches of my small intestine back down my throat, Mr. Levine finishes his article in fine style. "Mr. Greenspan is promising to keep interest rates rising, another phenomenon I find very, very interesting indeed." "STOP THE PRESSES!!, Mr. Levine finds something interesting!" But what is it that’s so interesting? We’ll never know, he doesn’t say. But, because he begins that sentence with, "On the other hand," and because it immediately follows his reluctant admissions of signs of progress during the Bush tenure, we quickly peel away the thin layers of his onion of manipulation. He makes that undocumented, intentionally vague reference in an attempt to discredit the Bush administration. It is just so pitiful; like watching a quadriplegic swim. There you have, the first Windbag of the Week. Very deserving of this honor, you must admit. Now that the bar has been set sooooo low, I expect the next winner very shortly. Good Luck! ------------ About the author: Ron Lewis is a software salesman extraordinaire, albeit habitually unemployed, with no significant accomplishments at age 47 other than two wonderfully talented children who take after their mother. All his friends note his keen insight, bad eyesight, doggedly jaded disposition, and rugged bad looks. A third person seems to recall that he talks too much. Email: grnacres@direcway.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
