Late Night Shots Members Take on Sexual Assault

I realized it's been a while since I had checked the Late Night Shots forums. Ever since Wonkette started giving them a hard time, the "shockingly offensive" statements kind of dropped off. Luckily I was bored this morning and I caught a discussion on "Take Back the Night" festivities.

(If you don't know, Take Back the Night is when a bunch of women march on campuses with candles chanting anti-sexual assault slogans. It's meant to raise sexual assault awareness. I think it's a little silly and would rather see people focus their efforts on rape prevention and victim counseling, but it's a good cause with good intentions.)

Apparently, some dudes at Late Night Shots are not keen on the idea of women marching on campus to protest sexual assault. Here are some choice quotations from the forum*:

~Did anyone else have a bunch of girls with candles hold one these outdoor parties in their honor during college? I'm pretty sure they wanted to take back the night I blacked out and took them down in my frat love den. Grrrr.

~A better solution would be to promote going to AA - then these silly take back the night vigils wouldn't occur and inconvenience everyone

~I'm a woman, and I certainly don't think sexual violence and rape is funny. But the feminazis holding the candles are just jokes.

I personally like the idea of any woman protesting rape being called a feminazi. Way to heighten the discourse, LNS.

~...Not that I condone sexual assault, but what a man or woman does in a drunken haze then "regrets" the next morning is NOT sexual assault.

Sexual assault is the forcible or unwanted sexual contact with another without their consent.

I hardly see how holding candles and making false allegations to nameless faces will address the true problem.

Not to sound harsh, but may be some of these "supposed" victims should wear more clothing or avoid "high action" areas.

I feel it detracts from the real victims who actual need help.

The emphasis is mine. I especially like this statement because it's not an attempt at (unfunny) shock humor. This guy is serious. And he is woefully misguided. What an asshole.

~Aren't the girls who get "taken advantage of" just the less than hot chicks that dudes dont respect?

~Take Back the Night is when all the PCU-like hippies, emos, and other dregs of society come out of the woodwork.

The worst part is seeing those sanctimonious guys who think they're going to finally touch a vag because they're actively and passionately involved in the event (passing out ribbons, giving speeches, "raising awareness") - they are akin to my recent post about girls' friends that are Benedict Arnolds/Silent Assassins and should be held in the same contempt.

I guess I am a Benedict Arnold for being anti-rape. Fuck. Did I just lose my man card?

~Again, these take back the nighters need to go to AA and not this rally. The problem is that it is pretty much asking for it if you stumble into a frat-bash after party at 3am and jump into bed with some guy who you thought was your boyfriend in Sigma Chi but you somehow ended up at SAE instead - and no, that's not Johnny Wonderful lying next to you the morning after.

According to some people active in LNS, alcohol = consent. Cleavage = consent. Parties = consent. These guys need to be kicked in the balls. Hard.

~Nevertheless, the fact remains that several false accusations deter the credibility of actual assaults. I think what a girl wears is demonstrative of her intent. I do not think any rationale person can say that if a girl is my fraternity house at 3AM that she has any intent to do anything but something that is sexual in nature. However, she does reserve the right to say no at all times. However, if her friends are pulling her away and she insist on staying that could be grounds for espousing how she wants to end the night. Absent a contract, which is not enforceable in a court of law, consensual intercourse is a sticky subject.

A college girl, or otherwise, leaves her unwilling victim at the mercy of her regretability. When proof is scant, as it often is, circumstantial evidence and the intent of both parties is necessary to prove whether the sexual contact was consensual.

It is foreseeable to say that if a girl wears almost nothing she is not per se "asking for it" but reasonable minds could differ on her willingness. Moreover, what stops a girl from say "yes" in the morning and then realizing that her sorority sisters saw her with guy #5 and she is thus labeled a slut.

Now, she could remedy that situation by saying that guy #5 assaulted her. What is fundamental about this discussion is that a girl's sexual promiscuity, her attire, and demeanor (before and after) the event is tantamount to deciding whether she in fact did or did not consent. I believe the Kobe Bryant example is a case in chief. The Duke case speaks volumes as well.

Ahhh! Oh my God! I didn't think people still thought like this! This is crazy. Mind-blowingly crazy.

I met some of the founding members of LNS when I went to their Election Night Party. They were very nice and they said they wanted to clean up the forums so they can look more respectable. That obviously didn't work out. There are active members in this organization who disrespect women and women's sexuality. I hate to be this crude (especially knowing that my parents will read this), but the guys leaving these comments clearly see college women as little more than cumbuckets. A warm place to put their dicks. And if they're wearing a low cut shirt at a frat party, it's not like they're going to mind, right?

I understand that being falsely accused of sexual assault or date rape is very, very, very scary for men. But lots of women are assaulted. I'm willing to bet that almost all of my readers have had (or currently have) a friend that has been sexually assaulted. I don't think candlelight vigils are the best way to bring attention to this, but I also don't think that mocking these women is in any way acceptable. Late Night Shots should be ashamed of itself.

*That forum is only open to members. Want to be a member and join in the fun? E-mail me and ask for an invite.


Why Aren't People Making a Bigger Deal of This?

So, four people were murdered in the District on Saturday night. Four! That's absurd. Two of the deaths were east of the Anacostia. The other two victims were found in Northwest Washington. The murders were unrelated and appear to be connected to robberies and/or gang violence. I also should note that two more people were murdered in Prince George's County on the same night.

So, where's the crime emergency now? Are we still on crime emergency? Do we have to declare another? I'm assuming that since this story is in the Metro section and not on the front page that the victims here were very much non-white. Is that what we have to wait for? A white guy in Ward 3 to get bludgeoned with a baseball bat? If that were to happen there would be a shit-storm of news coverage. There would be press conferences. There would be emergency legislation from the Council. There would be indignation. There would be outrage.

Let's not forget that the Metro area lost six people on Saturday night. The city lost four. If this isn't front page, above-the-fold news in a local paper, what is? According to the Post, that sort of space is reserved for pictures of rich people housing and water. The Chesapeake Bay's pollution will be around for a while. These six victims won't be.


Congratulations to Me/Navel Gazing

So, today is the one-year anniversary of my first post at Why I Hate DC. I'd say the last year has gone pretty well for me. Can't say the same about the city. Granted, crime is down. There is always that. But the stadium financing remains a disaster, "crime emergencies" are only declared when a white dude gets stabbed, there's Laura Sessions Stepp, and, of course, there's the Metro. Actually, I'd like to thank the Metro for giving me a one-year anniversary gift in the form of a "minor emergency" at Farragut North. "Minor" and "emergency" aren't words that end up next to each other. I heard something about fires. Anyone have any follow-ups?

Also, thanks for reading my blog. I spent yesterday reading an entire year's worth of material. There have been some obvious rough patches, but I'd say that my quality of writing has improved over the last 365 days. I hit my stride right about here. It's hard to replace someone who was as popular as James, but I think I'm doing alright. I'd write this even if no one was reading it, but the fact that I get so many comments really makes me happy. Even when they are sometimes kind of racist or decidedly anti-Rusty, it's nice to know that people are responding. You don't see many blogs with a limited audience (800-1000 unique hits on an average weekday; I started off at about 450-600) get as many comments as I do. I am quite grateful.

Also, sorry for not posting anything substantial lately. Not much is going on. If I were against Councilmember Graham's proposal to ban minors from nightclubs I would spend 1,500 words on that. DCist has certainly paid the issue a great deal of attention. DCist readers should know by now that I agree with the proposed legislation. Sorry, kids.


Evil Shopping

Anyone looking to spend $25 on an umbrella? How about $19 on a t-shirt? Wow, mousepads only cost $16? What if, to top it all off, these products could serve as constant reminders of the thing you hate more than anything else?

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you the DC Metro Store*. Please remember to set aside an additional seven to 19 dollars for shipping. It may seem like a lot, but remember, the DC Metro Store is "committed to your complete satisfaction." I wonder if the WMATA could say the same about their transportation services. Well, they could, but they wouldn't mean it.

My birthday is coming up in a few weeks. I want that umbrella.

*Thanks to reader Liz R. for the heads-up.


Seriously, WTF


Pedestrian Killed by DC's Sins of Omission

Some lady got hit by a bus Tuesday. She died. That sucks. I didn't write about it because I write about Metro enough and, let's face it, people get hit by buses. Shit happens. Unless the driver's drug test comes up positive or some evidence of gross negligence was discovered, there was no reason to dwell on a tragic, but understandable, accident.

I should have bet money on negligence.

The Washington Examiner is reporting that a traffic sign alerting drivers and pedestrians that automobiles can't turn at that intersection unless it's a bus has been missing for months. The poor pedestrian probably thought she had a free path across the street when BAM! From the article, it appears that people knew about the missing sign and didn't do anything about it. Enjoy the blood on your hands, assholes.

Mayor Fenty was on the scene to, well, I don't know why he was there. To investigate? To talk to reporters? To hear the neighborhood's concerns? But he was there. And he was dressed as The Shadow.

Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of the DC Council!?


Fenty thinks that the intersection would have been confusing to navigate even with the correct signage.

“Even if you have all the signing, it’s confusing,” Fenty said. “Our job as the executive branch of government is to make sure these intersections are less confusing.”

The knock on Fenty during the elections was that he was all style and no substance. That empty quote does little to convince me otherwise. He's just telling people what they want to hear. What is he even proposing? Less signs? If you want to make DC's intersections less confusing, I would start by building a time machine. Butterfly Effect the shit out of Pierre L'Enfant. It's your only hope, Fenty.

Thankfully, there are plans in place to make sure people get hit by less buses.

Metro distributed blinking pins, posted safety messages at bus stops and held a school poster competition.

A school poster competition? Jesus Christ. Let's make sure our intersections are properly marked before having our city's 8-year-old draw stupid safety posters. I hated that shit when I was in second grade. If the school poster competition manages to save even one life, I'll eat my hat.


Let's Pick Our Poison!

I think everyone is pretty clear on my feelings towards Metro and towards the (at least)$611,000,000.00 stadium giveaway. Now I read this on DCist:

The renovations, slated to cost $20 million, were supposed to funded by the federal government, thus allowing the District to squeeze everything else into a tight, D.C. Council-mandated $611 million price-cap. But as WMATA details in its press release on the ground-breaking, "the $20 million project budget is being funded on an interim basis by the District of Columbia." What gives?

According to a
D.C. Wire report on the matter, the federal funds, written into the 2007 budget, were never approved in the waning days of Republican control. Now that power has passed to the Democrats, it's up to the District to convince them that the renovations should be paid for by the feds. And if they pass? City Administrator Dan Tangherlini, in a moment of surprising candor, said: "Then a bunch of District transit priorities crumble."

First, let's hope that Congress gives us the $20 million. My capacity for schadenfreude stops at about the point where potential improvements to my commute are on the line.

One thing I do enjoy quite a bit is being right. I thrive on it. This stadium deal was a mismanaged disaster and DC should be ashamed. Our politicians were so busy giving away their chickens that they hadn't noticed that twenty million of them hadn't hatched yet.

Despite an overwhelming mountain of evidence that Major League Baseball sodomized Washington, the stadium still has its supporters willing to talk about revitalization and the city pride that comes from having a baseball team.

These people are morons.


Georgetown Report

On Saturday evening, I made the executive decision to take some Eagles fans to Rhino Bar in Georgetown. It was my decision because the Eagles fans were girls and didn't really know anything about sports other than that they were supposed to root for their hometown teams. Rhino calls itself DC's Philadelphia Eagles bar, so I figured that would be as fine a place as any to watch the game. Being surrounded by the misery of hundreds of Philly fans after their inevitable loss was just icing on the cake for me.

This was going to be my first trip to Georgetown in months. I usually try to avoid Georgetown at all costs. What with the expensive drinks, the popped collars, and the general douchebagginess of the area, I felt that Georgetown was truly one of the reasons why I hated Washington. This Saturday excursion proved me correct.

First and foremost, fuck Rhino Bar. I know I've made this point a thousand times, but it will always remain a thorn in my side. How the Hell can you be a Red Sox bar, an Eagles bar, a Buckeye bar, a Nittany Lion bar, and an Orangeman bar? Pick a region and stick with it for Christ's sake. The Penn State Nittany Lions and the Ohio State Buckeyes are in the same conference for crying out loud. That's like having a bar that doubles as a Red Sox bar and a Yankees bar. Real sports fans should shy away from that incestuous shit.

Not to accuse Philly Eagles fans of not being "real sports fans," but they could have cared less about the particulars of Rhino's allegiance. Rhino was packed. So packed that I saw the line to get into the place and immediately turned around. We retreated to a bar on Wisconsin and M called Old Glory. They had a deck with televisions. Awesome.

The walk from Rhino to Old Glory was marked by an especially excellent occasion. We walked by a homeless woman on M Street. One of the Eagles fans, the incredibly alert Cyber Agatha, noticed that it was the one and only "Brenda." People often e-mail me asking to send pictures of the infamous former Friendship Heights resident. Well, folks, she's on M Street. Have fun with that.

Anyways, Old Glory.

My original problem with the Old Glory deck was that they had a space heater going. I don't know if you've noticed, but we haven't had typical January weather for quite a while. The space heater was unnecessary. This is an admittedly benign complaint, but it was annoying nonetheless. The bar shifted into another degree of annoyance when the deck started filling up. The restrooms were literally ten feet from the deck. But when the deck hit capacity, the bar shut the doors and started a line to get outside. To leave the deck and take a piss meant that you had to forfeit your spot outdoors. Think about how utterly ridiculous this is. A bar punishing its customers for peeing. Fucking idiotic.

Another observation that hit me while on the deck and which continued for the rest of the night was how insanely beautiful and vapid the crowd was. Idiocracy + formal dresses = Georgetown. I'd like to say I've never encountered such a toxic combination, but I have this very same observation every time I decide to venture to Georgetown. I would pay a hundred dollars to have the dozens of overheard conversation erased from my memory. How can people who appear so well-raised be so boring, insignificant, and stupid?

Well, Old Glory was all good and fun. The E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES! lost to the New Orleans Saints. We decided to move on to The Guards. Not my all-time favorite bar, but whatever. It was drinking time. The Guards was packed with people. It always is. My friends and I decided to order two drinks instead of one to avoid waiting in line for booze again. So, I ordered six Red Bull and vodkas. To my abject horror, this set me back $72. For $72 I could have bought six handles of Zelko Vodka and five cans of Red Bull. I would have ended up way drunker. Making matters worse, some moron who was somehow affiliated with the group I was hanging with tipped the bartendress four dollars on a $60 tab. This was grossly unacceptable, so I was forced to overtip on what was already a staggeringly high tab.

(Also, parenthetically, The Guards has a similar policy to Old Glory when it comes to making people in the bar wait in line to get back in. Old Glory does it with the restrooms; The Guards does it with smokers. I think the smoking ban is stupid. However, I understand why non-smokers like it. I also understand that such a policy will mean that I will smoke less. (I smoke a pack a month; I think it would make sense to stop before this becomes a problem.) But not allowing smokers back into the establishment is incredibly stupid. It shows an amazing amount of disdain for their customers. Halo, a gay lounge by Logan Circle that was non-smoking before the ban, had it right when they let smokers back into their club immediately. They'd even have the bartenders guard your drink. Kudos to Halo. Shame to The Guards.)

By three in the morning, I was a broken man. I had managed to spend over $150 and I was going to have to go out again the next afternoon for the Patriots game. I was ready to vomit, pass out, and just press "reset" on my life. While drunkenly waiting for a cab, I ran into a girl. I have no idea how it came up, but she mentioned she went to college In Massachusetts. I was naturally intrigued. I asked her where. She responded, "Holy Cross." I mentioned that Holy Cross was, in my opinion, the second most beautiful campus I had ever visited (UPenn is #1). She thanked me for the compliment and asked me where I went. I told her I went to AU. She responded with a flurry of obscenities revolving around how AU was for dunces and imbeciles. A school that could never live up to Holy Cross. All in the flow of a friendly conversation. Her natural response to my praise of the lovely Worcester hill that Holy Cross sits on.

That's Georgetown for you. You go in looking for a good time. You leave broke and ridiculed. I got home and pulled the trigger to get all the last bits of alcohol out of my system. I was hoping I could do the same with every last memory of Georgetown. To wake up and forget that I had ever spent time there was the happiest ending I could come up with for my Saturday night. I'm writing this on Monday night, so you can guess how that wish turned out.


A Truly Glorious Day for the Style Section

You may have noticed this in the comments of my last post, but today's Post features not one, but two articles by the official Why I Hate DC mascot, Laura Sessions Stepp. The first deals with the lack of tourists visiting the Treasury Department. Boring and lame. I'm only interested in what the Honorable El Ess Ess has to say about today's youth.


Sessions Stepp has decided to emulate the best scribe the Style section has to offer, Lisa de Moraes, and write about television. LSS won't just write about any program though. Oh, no. She wants to write about a PBS documentary about....wait for it....Generation Next!

Here's Stepp's stupid opening paragraph:

They've been called many things by the experts who study them: Generation Y and Generation Why?, Echo Boomers and Millennials, the Google or MyPod Generation (the latter a combination of MySpace and iPod.) Their test scores have been analyzed, sex lives examined and shopping habits catered to -- probably more than any other generation's.

That emphasis is mine. Geez, Laura. I would agree that my generation has been totally overanalyzed. I wonder where the fault lies? Oh. Here we go.

Laura, for the love of God, please leave the 16-25-year-old demographic alone. Please. Please stop telling old people that we break-up with each other over text message. Please stop making references to "freak dancing." And, please, for the love of all that is holy, please refrain from referring to me as a "Nexter." That is a seriously stupid word that you've coined.

(The worst part of this is that, no matter what, I am buying her book the day it comes out. I am feeding the monster.)


El Ess Ess Update

A week ago I asked my faithful readers to alert me to anything involving the crack journalist Laura Sessions Stepp. Yesterday I actually got a few LSS-related e-mails. I'm quite grateful. Thanks!

The big news is that her particular brand of investigative journalism will no longer be featured in the Style section. Instead, it's moving over to Health. This sucks because I now have to read all the bylines in a section that I've been ignoring since moving to Washington in 2001. Perhaps this is retribution for her refusal to accept the Post's buyout offer a few months ago? I'll save such juicy gossip for the people who follow that sort of thing.

Well, kids, you know what to do. Scan the Health section diligently. I am eagerly anticipating her piece on high school students forming into something called "cliques."

For the Last Time, I Don't Want "New Blogger"

So, Blogger took down all of its "old" blogs yesterday for "maintenance." Clearly, they were trying to strong-arm hold-outs such as myself into using their new Blogger software. No dice. I am far too lazy to make the switch and to start "tagging" posts. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Well, I said that I wanted to tackle the editorial in Monday's Post regarding the Virginia Episcopal schism. I'm not going to let technical difficulties get in the way of writing something that absolutely no one wants to read. So, here goes.

I made the stupid comment on Monday that the editorial made some valid points regarding the theological shift in the American Episcopal Church. I obviously didn't read the piece very closely, because this editorial is void of reason, common sense, and evidence. The editorial uses the same debate technique beloved by social conservatives everywhere: the building of straw men.

To wit:

The core issue for us is theological: the intellectual integrity of faith in the modern world. It is thus a matter of faithfulness to the lordship of Jesus, whom we worship and follow. The American Episcopal Church no longer believes the historic, orthodox Christian faith common to all believers. Some leaders expressly deny the central articles of the faith -- saying that traditional theism is "dead," the incarnation is "nonsense," the resurrection of Jesus is a fiction, the understanding of the cross is "a barbarous idea," the Bible is "pure propaganda" and so on. Others simply say the creed as poetry or with their fingers crossed.

Um, ok. Some people who call themselves Episcopalian may very believe that the resurrection is a fiction and that the Bible is pure propaganda. Of course, they wouldn't really be Episcopalians, would they? Despite the liberal tendencies of this denomination, the belief that Jesus, the Son of God, died for our sins is still a central aspect of the Church. To attribute the denial of these beliefs to "some leaders" is both irresponsible and ridiculous. If the authors are unable to identify the very people who are denying the central articles of Christian faith, perhaps they shouldn't be so rash as to leave the church altogether.

First, Episcopal revisionism abandons the fidelity of faith. The Hebrew scriptures link matters of truth to a relationship with God. They speak of apostasy as adultery -- a form of betrayal as treacherous as a husband cheating on his wife.

Ok. Again, I don't think Episcopal leaders are denying Christian faith. Our leaders aren't modern day Simon Peters; denying a relationship with Christ three times before the rooster crows.

Second, Episcopal revisionism negates the authority of faith. The "sola scriptura" ("by the scriptures alone") doctrine of the Reformation church has been abandoned for the "sola cultura" (by the culture alone) way of the modern church. No longer under authority, the Episcopal Church today is either its own authority or finds its authority in the shifting winds of intellectual and social fashion -- which is to say it has no authority.

Yes, Scripture is pretty unambiguous when it comes to the acceptance of homosexuality in culture. So what? I find it absolutely ludicrous that the Episcopal Church can be accused of ignoring Scripture in favor of contemporary culture when every Christian in America, even the born-again ones, do the same thing. I'm willing to bet that there are all sorts of things mentioned as sins in Leviticus that are accepted by the authors of this editorial. For all I know, the authors celebrated this editorial with a big heaping pile of shellfish. That's a Leviticus no-no. Perhaps the authors had sex with their wives when they were on the rag. That's another no-no. I'm also guessing that they've never sold an adulteress into slavery. The picking and choosing of Scripture to obey has been going for about forever. There's no need to freak out because one "sin" becoming more acceptable is particularly icky to straight men.

Third, Episcopal revisionism severs the continuity of faith. Cutting itself off from the universal faith that spans the centuries and the continents, it becomes culturally captive to one culture and one time. While professing tolerance and inclusiveness, certain Episcopal attitudes toward fellow believers around the world, who make up a majority of the Anglican family, have been arrogant and even racist.

I was taught in fifth grade that starting paragraphs with "first," "second," and so on was considered poor writing.

Also, WHAT THE FUCK. This paragraph is shit-house crazy. How the fuck are Episcopalians racist? Explain yourself!

Fourth, Episcopal revisionism destroys...

Wait! No! You're not going to accuse the Episcopal Church of racism and then drop it without a shred of evidence, are you!? Wow. Not even an anecdote? Something!? Ugh. Fine. Keep going. Assholes.

Fourth, Episcopal revisionism destroys the credibility of faith. There is so little that is distinctively Christian left in the theology of some Episcopal leaders, such as the former bishop of Newark, that a skeptic can say, as Oscar Wilde said to a cleric of his time, "I not only follow you, I precede you." It is no accident that orthodox churches are growing and that almost all the great converts to the Christian faith in the past century, such as G.K. Chesterton and C.S. Lewis, have been attracted to full-blooded orthodoxy, not to revisionism. The prospect for the Episcopal Church, already evident in many dioceses, is inevitable withering and decline.

The irony of Virginia Episcopalians quoting noted homosexual Oscar Wilde is duly noted. Also, "the former bishop of Newark" is as close to anything remotely resembling evidence in this editorial.

Fifth, Episcopal revisionism obliterates the very identity of faith. When the great truths of the Bible and the creeds are abandoned and there is no limit to what can be believed in their place, then the point is reached when there is little identifiably Christian in Episcopal revisionism. Would that Episcopal leaders showed the same zeal for their faith that they do for their property. If the present decline continues, all that will remain of a once strong church will be empty buildings, kept going by the finances, though not the faith, of the fathers.

Again, I must accuse the authors of over-inflating the specter of "Episcopal revisionism." Episcopalians recite the Nicene Creed and the Lord's Prayer without any reservations or crossed fingers. I honestly think the authors have confused the Episcopal Church with Unitarian Universalism which is more political movement than religion and whose members can believe whatever the Hell they want.*

I'm sorry, but I don't buy what they're selling. Their claims that their schism is less about homosexual bishops and more about theology is weakened by the fact that they chose someone who advocates the incarceration of gays as their new fearless leader. And the claims that Episcopalians are no longer Christian are totally unfounded. The same pillars of faith exist in the Church. If you're unfamiliar with it, I urge you to click on that link to the Nicene Creed. It's a straight forward declaration of Episcopal faith. This declaration in undeniably Christian and leaves little room for ambiguity.

The authors have reinvented the American Episcopal Church as a secular, racist organization. They've built their straw man without any need for evidence. They should be ashamed of themselves.

*I am being glib about Unitarian Universalism, so I should note that I have no problem with it. Any belief system that urges its members to become better, more accepting people is alright by me. It's just not a religion is all.


The Crash

I've never had so many people e-mail me asking if I was going to write about a particular story or event. Well, I suppose I've put myself in that position by writing about Metro all the freaking time.

So, yeah, a Green Line trail derailed and 18 people were injured. Washington Hospital expected two people to stay overnight. I bet the pregnant lady who started having contractions is one of them. If she ends up popping that kid out of her Shady Grove*, I hope she picks a suitably hilarious name. Perhaps "Vernon Greenline, Esquire"? Funnier choices are welcome in the comments.

I feel silly writing about this. I've been making the case for the past 11 months that the Metro is a disaster. This sort of thing fails to surprise me. If anything, I am pleasantly surprised that there was an accident that didn't kill a Metro employee. Baby steps.

That's it for commentary. Instead of writing about the most recent Metro whoopsie, I'd rather address the editorial in the Post by a priest and a parishioner defending the abandonment of the Episcopal Church in Falls Church and Truro. They make some good points but I still insist on disagreeing with them. This will take some time since I want to make sure that I use logic and reason instead of writing the first thing that comes to mind. It's like giving yourself homework!

The best part about addressing this sort of thing is that religious debates never make people angry.

*That joke is courtesy of "Toby" who is again writing at Vividblurry.com.


Calling Out Anonymous Commenters

A few weeks ago I wrote a long-winded, stream of consciousness post on the proposed Metro fare hike. It can be found here. Someone left the following comment anonymously:

I have never waited more than five minutes for a train in the last year that I've had this particular commute. And only a handful of times have I actually waited five minutes. My typical wait is 2 - 4 minutes and often times the trains are closer than that. I'm not sure where YOU are getting on (probably some stupid ass station in Virginia) but in the city, the trains are fairly reliable.

Would any of my fellow Red Line travelers like to offer Mr. Anonymous a rebuttal using this morning's commute as evidence?

When the trains are coming every six minutes, they tend to fill up pretty quickly. And I'm getting on at Friendship Heights! Please let me reiterate my sympathy for anyone trying to catch a train at Cleveland Park. That has to be soul-crushing.


You People Have Let Me Down

I was a bit busy yesterday. You may have noticed I didn't post anything. Heck, I didn't even read The Washington Post! Saved myself 35 cents! Did any of you read yesterday's Post? I bet some of you did. And if you're one of those people, shame on you.

From now on, when you notice the words "Laura," "Sessions," and "Stepp" in a byline, please notify me immediately. E-mail me. Send smoke signals. I don't care how, but make sure I know about it. This is especially germane when we're dealing with an article that tries to explain to adults why college students find drinking more exciting than homework. Seriously, that was the theme of her last piece in the Post. Wrap your skull around that. How old do you have to be to find this surprising? My 83-year-old grandfather still talks about his college fraternity hijinx. What does that make Stepp? 107?

That is a fierce powersuit.

I would spend another 1,000 words or so making fun of LSS, but the story is a day old and DCist already did a lot of the leg work. Wonkette already stole Late Night Shots from me. Don't let DCist take my precious.

Come on, gang. Let's not have this happen again.



The Washington Post has blown the lid off what will surely be the story of 2007. I know it's early, but I feel pretty confident that the journalistic excellence of Tara Bahrampour will be unmatched over the next 364 days.

Ms. Bahrampour has made the startling discovery that teenagers often keep online journals. These "Internet diaries," sometimes referred to as "blogs," are all over the Internet. There are even websites like LiveJournal, Xanga, and MySpace that are dedicated to hosting these "blogs." I don't know how the Earth continues to rotate on its axis after this seismic article was written. Surely Ms. Bahrampour will go down in history as a contemporary Marie Curie for the impact of her discoveries.

Bahrampour's investigative work even uncovered some excerpts of what some local teenagers are writing:

"Unfortunately I feel very distant from everyone. . . . Maybe it's just how I function. I think its probably my worst flaw."

"i feel she could be the one i know it is crazy because well i am 18 and all that but i really do i am just scared i have never let someone get as close to me as i have let her."

"i feel . . . invisible."

Disaffected youth? In Northern Virginia? Who would have thought that teenage melancholy could hit us so close to home? This melancholy has infected our computers and interwebs like a virus. Truly a sad day for the future.

Thank you again, Tara Bahrampour. Your work, surely the first article ever in the history of mankind to discuss the pros and cons of MySpace, should win you the Pulitzer. Of course, credit goes to The Washington Post for having the courage to use valuable copy space to expose this problem. Honestly, this piece absolutely blows away The New York Times investigative work on warrantless wiretapping. The Post knows a real story when it sees it.