Ah, why do I let myself get into arguments on the internet? I know they're never going to be productive, but I can't seem to stop myself from poking at the arguments anyway. But, getting pissy with a media critic for being critical of a show you like - kinda lame but, well, human. Describing the attitude of said critic (who happens to be a woman) as that of a "jilted lover" and requiring "backstory" to explain? Is letting one's own pissiness lead to sexism, honestly. (I don't play the sexism card often, but - jilted lover! Like they would've used that phrase if it was Maurice rather than Maureen Ryan.)

In political unnecessary arguments, the weirdness with the oath at the Inauguration is turning into one of those classic tempests-in-a-teapot, of course. First Biden made a crack about Roberts at his and Obama's first press conference in office (which I thought was funny, but the funniest part is Obama's bitchface there afterwards. He's clearly thinking something like, "DAMMIT, JOE, WE PRACTICED THIS. CAN YOU NOT CONTROL YOUR OWN BRAIN OH MY GOD.") Then, there was a report that Roberts readministered the oath to Obama this morning, presumably to try to cut off the conspiracy theorists. Tragically, though, you can not kill conspiracy theories, born as they are of desperation and fear and a need to believe them. The new reason Obama's not really the president, I'm sure (aside from the "omg-he-was-sekritly-born-in-Indonesia" birth certificate angle, which the wingnuts have not at all given up): he didn't take the redone oath on a bible, so it doesn't count.