Virtual Unknown Views Race for President

In what may be the biggest election upset of the year, a viral marketing campaign could sweep a virtual unknown into the White House. We just received notice this afternoon and are still scratching our heads trying to make sense of it.

Shocking. Completely shocked.

Twitter Unveils Rival Search Engine

Oh wow. Have you seen the new Twitter Search?It's freak'n awesome!

Not just saying this because Moani populates the Twitterverse neither. We can now search tweets on any subject we please whenever and wherever we please. You don't have to Twitter to search. Go on. Give it a try.

If no one's tweeting your search, it ain't worth blogging.

Catchy tagline on the house, natch. No need for kudos.

PETA "Give Peas A Chance" Slogan Rings Too Familiar

Unlikely coincidence or great minds thinking alike? I know everything published in the blogosphere is fair game, so I'll just sit back and let you be the judge.

Corey and Susie Feldman are politically minded reality TV stars. Corey, a vegetarian, is half of the famous child star duo who lived to tell about his tumultuous rise and fall in Hollywood. He and the other half of The Two Coreys, Corey Haim, were recently slapped with a $1M lawsuit for producing their reality show on another network. I mention the litigation because it may be an indication of other suspect behavior. You'll see where I'm going with this in a minute.

Recently, the actor and his wife re-enacted John Lennon and Yoko Ono's famous bed in protest against the Vietnam War to promote a vegetarian lifestyle. Their slogan: "Give Peas A Chance." Applause, applause for lending their fame to a worthwhile cause.

As most of our readers know, The Spewker maintains a presence on Twitter through our virtual reality character, Moan Quivers. Moan reports breaking celebrity news from virtual Hollywood whenever we get around to updating her bot (which is sometimes weeks, but who's keeping tabs). Moan's different image incarnations can be viewed on our Flickr stream, but in the interests of time, voila.

The original Moan

Moan Quivers on virtual Vogue

Give Peas a Chance Moan

Moan Quivers reports live from virtual Hollywood

"Give Peas a Chance" Moan appeared briefly on Twitter back in February, 2008, then found a permanent home on Flickr in mid-May. I created the "peas" slogan because for some reason, pea avatars used to be wildly popular on Twitter. Lately, the trend has waned. Besides, the pea pod costume obscured Moani's naturally blond hair. The whole persona was just plain wrong.

Feldman's PETA poster slogan made my jaw drop. Far be it from me to suggest someone may have ripped off Moan Quiver's "Give Peas a Chance" avatar in an effort to promote vegetarianism. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Lord knows, The Spewker has likely been flattered that way before. Eh - hem.

One time, if these obvious similarities aren't great minds thinking alike, just once I wish The Spewker would get credit where credit is due. One lousy link, comment, or acknowledgment. Is that asking too much?

Icanhascheezburger Teh Special Sauce Lolz

Have to admit, when I first saw so many Facebook friends joining the "icanhascheezburger" fan club, I was a smidge envious. Who was this ican person and how had he/she become so darn popular? I'd been plugging away dutifully for months and The Spewker was still a blip on nobody's radar. Was there something about "cheezburgers" making people go bonkers?

Finally took the plunge and have to admit, the place is a riot. Should have checked it out way sooner and jumped on the bandwagon, but you know, celebrity politics being a full-time job and all, lolz.


see more politics and fun!

Flash Mob Entertainment Goes Global

A flash mob recently convened in Baltimore's Inner Harbor, sparking local interest in the recently popular phenomenon.

I'm more amused by flash mob entertainment from other parts of the world. No need to translate. The humor speaks for itself.

Gary Kasparov Interrupted by Flying Penis

American political candidates aren't the only ones enduring the slings and arrows of opposition. The hilarious effects of glasnost and perestroika were on display as Gary Kasparov, retired chess champion and political activist, interrupted a weekend rally to observe the flight of a wayward wang.

Don't have a cow. The offending operative wasn't real, just hysterically funny.

I'm still trying to figure out Second Life. According to a more astute observer the incident mimicked a similar attack in the alternate reality. According to a report from Belfast,

The prank was staged by 'a couple of pro-Kremlin Young Russia activists' reports the Moscow Times. Mr Kasparov was unharmed.

Kasparov laughed off the incident remarking that it was 'below the belt.'

'I think we have to be thankful for the opposition's demonstration of the level of discourse we need to anticipate,' he said.

An onlooker said the incident was a 'genital reminder about who is in charge.'

Bah-dah-bum.

The flying wang was an immediate crowd pleaser. News correspondents mass recorded the attack and someone quickly downloaded it for prosperity. A dark haired diminutive correspondent ran out of the room so fast, I couldn't tell if he/she was trying to claim first dibs or satisfy a sudden personal urge.

The wang could have been more than just a prank, possibly carrying a recording device of its own. That would explain the actions of a way too serious security guard who quickly disabled the otherwise harmless intruder. Did you see that guy's face? Scary.

[Source]
[Source]

Live Blog of Celebrity Apprentice 2.28.08

Moan Quivers usually reports live from the red carpet on Celebrity Apprentice. But for some reason, Twitter is down. Moan is crying and cursing and kicking up a storm. Okay. Okay. No problem, Moani, move over to the blog. So, for what it's worth, we're allowing Moan to live blog right here. Have fun, ya'll!

9:05: All systems down. Twitter bot will not work. I'm taking this show to the blog. Hello world!

9:19: The last time Twitter worked, Omarosa was chickening out of being PM and the Donald kind of dissed her because he said Carol was the last woman left standing. Carol and Tito are the two PMs.

9:20: As I had started to say on the Twitter bot, Carol should have been fired last week, but instead it was Marilu. They're both so skinny I hate them. But at least Carol is stepping up to the plate this week. I'm glad a woman is taking charge. It's an ad campaign for a beauty product. This is right up Carol's alley.

9:23 The show went to commercial. Wow, Twitter is really messed up tonight. I finally got back into the account, but it looks totally weird. Did I miss getting the memo about shake up at Twitter? Or is someone hacking into my account? Hard to tell what exactly is going on.

9:25 Yes, Omarosa, women want to see hot men. They don't want to see you. Vamoose!

9:27 Tito's team, Empressario, is doing a hot shoot. But will it sell the product? I'm not so sure. This shoot doesn't make me want to buy dial beauty soap. It makes me want to call an escort service.

9:28 Piers says the fact that Redbook women want to have sex is not a problem at all. Piers probably hasn't gotten any in weeks. Hydra is doing soft porno for dial. I say throw Lennox in that shot too. A threesome! Sex it up, guys.

9:30 Agreed, Stevie B. The shoot is a risk for Empressario. Clean, healthy, trusted, wholesome, family. These are the words right out of the dial exec's mouths and Tito would be wise to listen. Stevie B. is pretty intuitive for a preacher man.

9:34 Prediction: If I had to guess, I would say that Tito will somehow revamp the shoot. If not, the team is going to be toast and either Tito or Stinkaroma will be fired.

9:36 I usually like British accents, but when I hear Piers speaking, I think about his fatherless children and feel all sick inside. Hydra's campaign is focusing on health. The model is biting Carol's shoulder. This might be too racy for them.

9:38 What's up with the dial exec's tie? Bob? That guy in the blue has no taste whatsoever. His tie looks like a jigsaw puzzle.

9:39 Omarosa's claim to fame is that she's a "Reality Star" Hahahaha. I love that. Now one can be a star just by being on a reality show, even if you have no other talent whatsoever. Tito's presentation was pretty poor.

9:40 The Donald asks the execs who they liked more. Going out on a limb here during the commercial and going to say they liked Carol's team, Hydra, better. We'll see when the show returns.

9:44 Already they are going into the boardroom. Drat. I wanted to hear more from the guy with the bad tie.

9:45 Tito was nervous at the presentation, Donald, because he's usually pounding people in the face, not trying to speak. Don't use Tito as a speaker if you want to sell your product. Lession learned. Use him as a person to pound out your opponent...or to be bitten in the ring, as The Donald just pointed out.

9:47 I for one do not think that the hot model biting Carol's shoulder was a problem. Piers is dissing the other side's ad. He says it was boring. Trace is not boring, Piers. If you want boring, look in the mirror.

9:49 I'm not sure why it matters if the teams look at each other's ads and rips them apart. Of course the other side is not going to like each other's ads. The Donald just said that what he likes doesn't matter.

9:50 Yes! I got it right. Hydra wins. Carol is going to get $20K for charity. Love how Celebrity Apprentice gives money away. Such a good part of this show.

9:51 I wish someone would shut Omarosa up. Tito is the nicest guy ever and she is fighting with him, pushing the PM on him, pushing her stupid opinions on him. She really needs to be fired. Why is The Donald keeping her?

9:53 Omarosa, Omarosa, Stinkaroma. You are a liar. No one likes you. You are 0 and 2 on the tasks. You have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. You lied and said you wanted to be PM, even though we all heard you push it on Tito. And now you are going to try to hang Tito out to dry. If The Donald doesn't fire you this time around, I am going to go on some kind of protest. I mean it. And it will be big. Like Adrian Grenier. I'll grow a beard. Or let my unshaven legs grow more hair. Something dirty and stinky, like you.

9:55 Okay, they're back. I doubt anyone is going to be asked to leave the room. Not enough time.

9:56 Pray with me everyone. Pray. Fire Omarosa. Fire Omarosa. Go George! There was no concept. It's all Omarosa's fault.

9:57 Noooooo. Trace. DO NOT stick up for Omarosa!!!!

9:58 Maybe she cooked herself afterall. Stevie B. is really the one who knocked down the racy picture and Omarosa just told The Donald she would fire Tito.

9:59 Tito has no idea what the word "exonerate" means. Tito just said that Omarosa shouldn't be fired because she worked the hardest. This is soooooo wrong!!!

10:00 Darn! I'm gonna have to grow hairy legs. The Donald just fired Tito, but he felt so sorry for him, he gave him $50K for St. Judes. Classy. Oh well, Stinkaroma misses the ax again. Tune in next week for incredibly hairy legs and more swipes at Stinky.

Anonymous Comments Rile Ire: A Rebuttal to Criticism of Hillary Clinton Article

BlogCritics online magazine accepts articles from this blogger on a variety of topics. Last week, the publishers were kind enough to run a very controversial article against Hillary Clinton. The criticism continues to mount, not all of it pleasant. Actually, I am being too nice. Some comments have been vile, hateful, abusive, and have added nothing of substance to the discussion.

As stated many times, I don’t mind when people disagree with me. All I ask is for civility and professionalism. Apparently, this is asking too much from certain Internet users.

Comments are emerging as the last refuge of negative decorum. Some people not only are using the annonymity of the Internet to take pot shots at bloggers, but to add insult to injury, doing so without contact information. Like a driveby shooting, they take aim, fire, then flee into oblivion.

My last responsive comment at BlogCritics clearly states I will no longer respond to comments. I have, however, taken the time and trouble to respond to people privately. Yesterday, someone using the moniker “SamI Am” respectfully criticized the basis for my article, but did not provide any contact information. Likewise, my article about the hostage situation at Clinton Campaign headquarters drew a scathing comment from “Anonymous.”

For the record, if SamI Am and Anonymous had the courtesy to comment with contact information, I would not be writing this article. Anyone who virulently attacks an author should at least have the decency to provide contact information. People who take pot shots in the dark are cowards. My readers deserve better.

On the other hand, my readers also deserve not to slog through this babble. For those of you who prefer something with more flair, might I suggest a woodsy merlot.

Okay, let's get started. SamI Am comments at BlogCritics:


If I used "old attacks" to criticize She Who Should Not Be Named, did it ever occur to SamI Am that maybe -- just maybe -- there are some substance to these attacks? Why do so many people attack the Clintons in this manner? Could it be because the attacks are true? Heaven forbid, the attacks are old! My attacks are not recycled hash, merely restated facts to support my position. Hillary Clinton is not fit to be President. Other candidates are not taken to task for every reason stated in my article. I challenge SamI Am to provide links showing otherwise. Yes, maybe one could level one or two of the attacks at certain candidates, but all seven of my points?! I think not.

I have no idea what "'Arkansas Project' fantasies" are. My article merely cites testimony from numerous witnesses about the Clinton track record of intimidation, marginalization, and fear of elimination. Is everyone lying except the Clintons? I suppose everyone was also lying except O.J. Oh, but then he went ahead and wrote that confession. Just when it looked like he might actually get away with whatever he claims not to have done unless he did it.


I don't think SamI Am read my article. It says nothing about ambition or being overly ambititious. Instead, Clinton is portrayed as a do-nothing junior senator who used the State of New York as a stepping stone to the office of President. She has never lead any major organization or company. Contrast that to Bill Richardson, Governor of New Mexico and former Secretary of Energy; Joe Biden, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Banking and Finance Committee; or Dennis Kucinich, former Mayor of Cleveland. Clinton has a failing record on the only major project she ever ran, her lamentable attempt to rehaul national health care. Also, if recovery from stumbles is the way to measure candidates, then Clinton rates a big fat zero. Other than her own self-serving accomplishments such as attending prestigious universities and winning election to the U.S. Senate, I challenge SamI Am to reference any position of leadership maintained by Hillary Clinton.


At least SamI Am is civil. I admire that. I humbly accept the label of "shallow" for my intense dislike of this candidate. However, my article is not shallow. On the contrary, the first five reasons for my opinion are supported with numerous factual examples. Additionally, SamI Am's criticism does nothing to discredit my opinion. Hillary's marriage to Bubba is in name only. His numerous affairs and womanizing practically scream "sham marriage" whether or not SamI Am cares to admit it. Likewise, Hillary's desire to transform America into a socialist nation is blatantly apparent in her book, It Takes A Village. This drivel reminds me of utopias gone bad. The idea sounds good in theory, but in practicality, all socialist societies are on the way to or eventually become dictatorships. No thank you.

Items and ideas long since dealt with and dismissed as the product of political enemies? Hoo boy! Does SamI Am honestly believe in the whole "vast right wing conspiracy?" If so, there's a bridge in Brooklyn for sale. No other Democratic candidate has suffered so many individual eye witness accounts of immorality, vicious behavior, cover-ups, outright lies, and deaths of close associates. One or two disgruntled employees with an axe to grind? Dismissed. Three or four political enemies with an agenda? Also dismissed. Over twenty-five dead people, missing archives, five or six campaign financing lapses, at least five examples of two-sided issue support, coupled with at least three reputable non-biased non-agenda driven accounts of mistreatment and ruthless behavior? Sorry. Not dismissed. Worthy of credibility.

SamI Am needs to wake up and smell the coffee. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and takes a dump like a duck, it's a duck. SamI Am would prefer to think of it as a turkey, I suppose, perhaps one deserving a pardon. No can do. No Thanksgiving pardons until after the election.


Restating truthful facts originally articulated by others is not a bad thing. Restating the truth prevents the Clinton machinery from reshaping itself into something respectful and worthy of support. If SamI Am wishes to dismiss the truth, that is SamI Am's perogative. SamI Am can believe whatever SamI Am wants to believe just as children are allowed to believe in Santa Claus and The Toothfairy. Also, the article was not sexist. Believe me, I think the same thing and worse about hubby Bubba.

I will part from the SamI Am commentary by reminding anyone who has read this far about the gist of my article. It was not written to support any particular candidate, rather, I wrote the article to prod Americans to vote their conscience in the primary election. A hop on a Hillary bandwagon -- when in fact there is no bandwagon -- is misguided and ultimately destructive to the principles of democracy.

On to Anonymous: Sweetheart, whoever you are, you really have issues.

Anonymous commented on an article unrelated to Hillary's polling problems. Instead, the article provided a summary report about the developing hostage situation at Hillary's campaign headquarters in Rochester, New Hampshire.

"Hillary knows she's got trouble in the latest polls. That's why she's in Vienna, Virginia today for a Democratic pow-wow rather than her campaign headquarters in Rochester, New Hamphire." That is all the article said about Hillary, her presence in Vienna, Virgina, and her recent polling results.

For this, Anonymous tries to rake me over the coals for taking "cheap shots" and "manufacturing false logic." How far off a limb should one sink to get so down and dirty? Anonymous takes the art of low to a whole new level.

What other Democratic candidates were at the strategy session in Vienna, Virginia? Does Anonymous even know? Anonymous does not link to any sources. I hereby send out a challenge to anyone for proof of other Democratic candidates presence at this meeting. Did a majority of them attend? Find the facts and ye shall be rewarded.

No one can dispute Hillary's recent problems in the polls. I, for one, place no reliance in polls because they are notoriously incorrect. Nonetheless, the statement is factual and supported with a link to facts. Hillary's numbers are sinking and therefore, they are troubling. To her. Prove otherwise, Anonymous, I dare you. Can't? Didn't think so.

Cheap shot, indeed.

Chris Crocker Viral Meme Rocks YouTube

I'm finally starting to get this whole viral video fad. One video strikes a chord, then everyone claws for a piece of it. They tweak, they change, parody, and spit. Each time a new short goes up, someone decides they can do one better, or different, or in some cases, not anywhere near as good, but perhaps still funny.

Let's all pile into that phone booth, now. Ready, set.....oooomph!

Such is the case with Chris Crocker, latest Internet phenom, direct from his ItsChrisCrocker channel on YouTube. Yes, happy little Chris is ditching the Internet (or so some vloggers hope) for bigger and brighter places: your television set. Poor computer deprived or otherwise oblivious people have no idea what television nimwits have lying in wait. In the interests of time, rather than try to describe how Chris's fifteen minutes came into existence, feast your eyes on my Cette Semaine du Spewed Videos feature below. There, you will get a condensed version of the Chris Crocker After School Special. Next stop, the Hallmark channel.

Sweet Chrissy is fielding a lot of flack for uploading videos faster than Britney Spears can spit out children. Mainstream vloggers are up in arms over the amount of viewing time Crocker videos and their progeny receive. They actually blame Crocker for diverting attention from their "regular more homey" videos.

I suppose these bad feelings have something to do with the content of Crocker videos or the acting. Serious vloggers have panned them as blather. While somewhat entertaining, in all honesty, I have to agree. The same thing that makes drivers rubberneck at a traffic accident makes Internet users watch Crocker vids and virals.

But could it also be that Chris's blatant homosexuality and obvious emotional problems rub mainstream vloggers the wrong way? If so, then I'd have to say more is brewing over at YouTube than the emergence of a new Internet celebrity. The folks in charge would be wise to keep a tight lid on the uploads before some members become known as the "YouTube Six."

My first thought was to catach the viral wave and upload my own Crocker meme, but then, reality set in. I'm a grown-up with real grown-up responsibilities. I don't have time to produce such nonsense. Besides, the outbreak is about done. There is no variance on the meme that hasn't been done before, or at least one hopes. For once, I agree with the cute little mouse puppet. "It's over. It's done. Move on!!"

Still, the virals keep slogging in. I had to cut off my playlist at ninety-nine. In the history of YouTube, I think that's the most any video has ever viraled. If anyone knows of another, I'd love to hear about it.

I have decided to link the virals to this article, just in case someone wanted to watch the full length feature movie. If you manage to catch the anti-Chrissy vids, let me know whether you think the YouTube mainstream are spinning off their crocker.

Dad At Comedy Barn

Holy cow! Viewed over six million eight hundred thousand times and still going strong. Favorited more than twenty-four thousand times and probably on its way to an all time record. More than fifty-one hundred comments, the last one made eighteen minutes ago when I checked.

What Internet phenomenon is shooting off into the stratosphere, you may ask? Why, it's none other than Dad at Comedy Barn. Who is Dad, pray tell? He's none other than "Doug from Memphis, Tennessee." And by the time I get done writing this, more people are going to hear Doug laugh than probably the entire amount of people who have ever heard Doug laugh in his whole life (which seems to have been kinda long judging from the looks of him).

You heard me. The Internet is viral. So viral that Doug is more popular than anything playing on the WB. Okay, maybe not. Unlike television, there really is no way to know whether YouTube's numbers include repeat views from the same viewer. Perhaps Nielson should consider an expansion, taking its little survey business over to computer users and conducting its incessant polling via some insidious tracking device.

Ahem. You read it here first.

These days, it seems like everyone is desperate to laugh. Why else would I try so hard to make this blog entertaining? Informative, always, but have to admit, the entertaining part does not come easy. So, when I come across something as viral as this, I have to ask myself, does it deserve to be spewked? My resounding answer...yes.

At first, I was relunctant to view. What could be THAT funny? Even more cause for pause, why would I want to sit and watch something that clearly lasts for eight plus minutes? Hoping it would get to the actual joke rather quickly, I swallowed and clicked.

I'm a tough nut to crack this early in the morning, but Dad at Comedy Barn made me crack a smile, and to my surprise, a small chuckle also escaped my coffee smeared lips. The joke will come early enough, I promise. For everyone who truly wants a break from the rat race, have a gander at this latest Internet phenomenon.

Discredited: Microwaving Food in Plastic Does Not Cause Cancer

A long time ago, an old friend gave me a tongue lashing for heating up food on a plastic plate in the microwave. Let me add, this friend practically lives on the Internet.

"Never ever never use plastic to heat up food in the microwave," she admonished. The proverbial they have conducted medical studies, she continued, "proving microwave rays release carcinogens into your food which is very very bad."

Yikes, I thought.**Gasp** Cancer.

I did my own research, diligently searching for appropriate articles. When the bulk of information seemed to confirm my friend’s admonishment, I decided to leap on the bandwagon. Scrupulously adhering to the prohibition against mixing food and plastic, preventing members of my immediate family from engaging in this seemingly innocent but dangerous practice, I bowed to the wisdom of the proverbial they. After all, they would know, wouldn’t they? These people must be experts if they’re conducting studies about such things. I vaguely recall my husband being extremely dubious, but eventually dropping the debate when he couldn’t cite any source of conflicting information. That’ll teach him for lacking the gift of automatic recall.

Well, today my husband is vindicated. According to Vaness Wasta, public relations officer for premier medical facility and Baltimore jewel, Johns Hopkins Hospital, I am neurotic. Only a neurotic person could believe a myth like the one about microwaved plastic. "Most people who come to us, looking to validate [the myth about microwaved plastic causing cancer], are skeptical of it," said Ms. Wasta. "But there are people who by nature are pretty neurotic and actually believe it."

Excuse me? Neurotic? I think not. Gullible maybe, but neurotic, no way. The more I blog, the more I realize how much disinformation is out there. It’s mind blowing, really. In the past, I certainly believed more of what I read on the Internet, but in my defense, even Snopes isn’t infallible.

Ms. Wasta, and I quote, says, "You think maybe older people are more gullible than younger people, but you find that younger people have grown up with the Internet, and it may be more difficult for them to figure out what a reliable source is." I guess I’ll just have to stop hanging around those younger people. They’re such a bad influence. For once, baby boomers rock.

As it turns out, microwaving food in plastic containers, or probably anything plastic does not cause cancer. Just another "myth from the Internet ooze," pronounces the local rag. As an aside, the local rag lately appears much more impressive. Less bias, better investigative reporting, better columnists. The shake up in their editorial staff seems to be paying off. I’m not ready to jump the fence completely, but if their publication continues this trend towards journalistic integrity, I may have to stop referring to it as "the local rag."

The article also debunks the Mayo Clinic myth concerning the egg, meat, and grapefruit diet, as well as the Harvard Medical School myth about cash for human testicles. Good to know. I don’t recall reading viral e-mails on these subjects. Then again, I delete anything that slips into my inbox without a proper subject heading.

Traffic Tricks for Desperate Bloggers

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Goatse is a Hoax and Other Internet Disinformation

I had originally planned to do another article about a strange Internet phenomenon called Goatse. To cool Internet people, goatse is yesterday’s news. Me? Never heard of it. Luckily, a person can google just about anything. I quickly learned more than I’ll ever need or want to know about this most disgusting, revolting, sophomoric, cannot look away online experience, otherwise known as goatse.

For those with weak stomachs or traditionally strong moral values, please stop reading this article. In the end, you will be incredibly offended and/or sickened, and I will feel quite guilty for offending and/or sickening you. For everyone’s sake, surf away. Surf away and never look back.

Still here? Think you can take it? Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Anyway, as I tried to say earlier, this article is no longer about a strange virtual reality phenomenon. Not that goatse, or its gerund form, goatsing, are anything but strange. No, no, no. Just the opposite. To be polite, I will call it the stretching of a private body part not meant to be stretched, leaving it so distorted and disgusting, and the front part of the body so revolting and distended…well…I’m not going to belabor this…

Click here if you have nerves of steel and want to be goatsed.

Apparently, the phenomenon became so huge the image disappeared from the original goatse site. I think someone complained. The poor thing is now up for sale. Isn’t that always the case? Just when the party gets rolling, cops show up and it’s time to go home. Luckily, someone else picked up the banner. Otherwise, those who thought they had nerves of steel would not be uncomfortably writhing in their seats.

Two days ago, as I began searching for blogging communities, I happened upon a story on Digg.com that had been dug by more than 2,000 people (now over 3,600). That’s a significant amount. Naturally, I wanted to know what the fuss was about. I checked out the story.

Some person from beginnorth.com claimed the candidates on the CNN YouTube Democratic Debate got goatsed for about 1/24 of a second. When people start talking about images projected for fractions of seconds, I can’t help but visualize SNL’s Mr. Subliminal. Kevin Nealon certainly had a way with split seconds.

According to beginnorth's article, the goatse image caused Hillary's face to sour. I didn’t have a chance to watch the debates, so I don't know whether Hill pussed or not. It sounded a little odd that something so split second actually produced a reaction, but I guess it's been known to happen. Beginnorth cleverly uploaded an image with goatse on CNN's screen, and asked other bloggers to confirm the goatse. Some did. One was a CBS affiliate in Minot, North Dakota.

What great fodder for my blog, I thought, but couldn’t find any more stories. I spent the next two days tooling around my site and joining communities. Goatse landed on the back burner for later development.

Lo and behold, when I finally returned, the goatse story was buried. Basically, people crushed it into the ground, stomping it like a cigarette, and grinding it into a pulp. Bloggers were angry. Why?

Well, goatse was a hoax. Kindy catchy. Goatse was a hoax that had no blokes. Its friend had a yen to create dead ends. Its deal made me squeal….oh….never mind.

Not only was the whole story a hoax, but its creator later transferred the story to their blog. What I mean is, the original Digg story was not on the person’s blog. I know this because I viewed it myself. The story appeared all by itself on a white page with no links. That alone was a little weird, but newbie me didn’t catch it. Two days later, the story was on the person’s blog on a black page. That blog contains this introduction:

“[Strange blog that no self-respecting blogger will ever read again] is a new blog that is part artistic experiment and part haven for the surreal side of our world. There will be articles, fake and real, but the glue that holds the blog together are the [pun on blog name] that make it up. A detail is simply a bizarre twist on reality. It can be a story or a picture. Fake or real. Funny or scary. Anything.”

Excuse me? Anything? Fake and real? How are people supposed to know the difference? Why don’t we all just close our eyes and dream the news? I hear lucid dreaming is the new black.

Graphics whore rode in on a white horse to defend bizarro blogger’s honor. Calling people sheeple, the person said everyone should have read the front page disclaimer before treating the story as a true news item.

"To me," posted grphxo, "the really provocative parts of this article are not within the article itself, but are the astoundingly clear examples of terrifying human behavior. The fact that many people (even though they watched the entire debate live and never saw the goatse image) believed it to be true. They took their own experience, their own FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE of the event and toss it out, substituting an internet claim for their own reality, swallowing the fake with ease. Some even claimed “I thought I saw something!” to cover the possibility that they might have missed it."

Problem is, the original story was not on bizarro’s blog. Whoops. Minor detail.

Like I said before, the Internet is turning our society into phishers and byters. One cannot necessarily believe what one reads on the Internet. Some disinformation is accidental, and some, as seen here, is unfortunately intentional. Bloggers have a duty to check out all the facts before posting an article. The new media must take its cues from old media. Fact checking is a basic tenet of journalism. Bloggers must have integrity. If the facts don’t check out, then say it’s alleged. Don’t just copy a bizarro blog item and publish it as your own.

For those who are disappointed this wasn’t an article about goatse on CNN, I have a surprise for you. Again, big disclaimer. This time run, do not walk to your nearest exit.

Do not look at this image if you were the least bit offended or sickened by goatse!

There. I wipe my hands of it.

Click to see Spewed Videos du Jour.

The Internet Celebrity Circuit

My husband is pressuring me to look for a real job. But I aspire to become an Internet Celebrity. If not me, then who? If not now, then when?

I'm thinking, if VH1 made a short about Mr. Pregnant, they'll broadcast just about anything. Some of Preggers' tubes are chuckle worthy, but some are just plain outrageous. If his rambles are a blueprint to blogging for profit, I may want to give my latest fancy some second thoughts.

On the other hand, Preggers struck a familiar chord with this one. If Letterman doesn't eventually offer this guy a guest spot, I'll eat my wiki.

Whacked by Wikipedia

My oh my oh my oh my oh my. I really had no idea Wikipedia was such a battlefield. Sure, I had heard rumors to that effect, but now that I've experienced my own personal Waterloo, I can safely say they are NOT rumors. Anyone who tells you anything to the contrary is flat out lying or involved in the Wikipedia conspiracy.

In the first place, the site is not designed to be navigated by wee ordinary folk. Forget about locating a meaningful start tutorial. That place is set up like a house of mirrors. Click here, go there, read this, think about that, get fed up, have lunch, try all over again, and by the way, ha ha ha, we're smarter than you.

Is it too much ask for a relatively simple way for newbies to post articles? The sandbox? Puh-leeze. What am I, a house cat?

Then there's the problem of determining whether your material is wikiworthy. You'd think a simple reference search would provide a simple answer, but not so. Even the search process is turned inside out, probably to send sniveling wannabes waddling out the URL.

They weren't getting this wannabe packing so fast. My tenacious side took control, plowing me straight ahead, rules thrown to the wind, bull in a china shop, and all that good kind of stuff. I'm just gonna do it, I thought. Honestly, in my mind "have channel" or "got channel" are catch phrases worth fighting for. Boy, was I ever wrong. For the record, here is my first carefully constructed paragraph preserved for prosperity:

“Have channel,” “got channel," and grammatically correct derivatives combined with “channel” are catch phrases connoting inexplicable appeal, noteworthy capabilities, and favorable perception of staying power of a person or format engaged, utilized, or employed in the media industry.

The rest of the article was basically commentary designed to arouse interest in phrase usage and origination. All in all, a good hour or so pathetically spent navigating ill-conceived linkage and buffering the rough edges of my little two paragraph gem.

Now for the piece de resistance about Wikipedia: they have bot patrols and volunteer editors on standby with nothing better to do than hex questionable articles, most of the time just as quickly as they're posted. If contributors can navigate their way to the right page -- and that's a very big IF -- they can protest inevitable removable, but the hex acts like the kiss of death. Once an article tastes its slimy pucker, chances of a reprieve are generally slim and none.

As I attempt to make sense of being whackipediaed, my article hangs in limbo awaiting the final blow. What really creeps me out is the way this stepford community functions. It's kind of like grade school, but with geeks in charge who are out for blood. Lording over those who dare enter without the secret codex (thereby destined to suffer gory acts of ultimate destruction), they lurk and linger, poised to pounce at the mere click of a mouse.

In the opinion of my personal henchman, my article got hexed for good reason. Let the following verbatim explanation stand as a warning to those delusional enough to think they possess original wikiworthy material:

"The point is that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. We try to be as inclusive as possible with regard to who can do what, but this site is not merely a repository of random information. Subjects of articles need to already have a degree of notability that can be verified from reliable sources--this is not the place to go to help something become notable. If the phrase does achieve notability, then there will likely a place for it here, but not now."

Noble project. Whacky execution. But who am I to judge?

"Muffins" Are Food for Thought

Last night, I had my own personal experience with strange Internet trends. I have yet to understand why people are entertained by them or continue to perpetuate them. Perhaps someone with a lengthy list of fancy college degrees could convince their Congressperson to fund another pork barrel project, a study to determine why we humans waste so much time on frivolous endeavors that make no sense and add nothing to world productivity. This of course would be a worthless pursuit in itself, but let's not focus on that right now.

I'm referring to a video posted on YouTube some time ago entitled Muffins. I had never seen said Muffins, nor had I heard anyone refer to any Muffins phenomenon until last night. I was just told to go watch the muffins video. So like the good little soldier I am, I did.

Um. Yah. Next.

Muffins kinda reminded me of the old joke No Soap, Radio which I first heard at about age eight and recently heard again from my twelve-year old. Yikes. How can something so dumb stick around for so long? Why, the No Soap, Radio joke is practically a cultural phenomenon. For some reason, I find this notion particularly troubling.

The dumbing down of America. The pundits are probably right. Americans are becoming dumber. Pretty soon there'll be no one with any brain cells left. We'll all be forced to survive using archetypal images and primal urges. Oh yes, the day is coming. Just take a good long look at our President.

For those of you who never heard of this cultural phenomenon wannabe, I've dedicated Today's Spewed Videos to the original Muffins and its progeny. If these snippets aren't enough, you can find plenty more on YouTube by searching the name of the video.

I really am very curious to know why this little gem didn’t die the slow agonizing death it deserved. Tributes to Muffins continue unabashed. If only the people who created this drivel could find a way to profit from it. Now that would be something I would stand up and applaud.

Click to see Spewed Videos du Jour.