for 13 January 1999. Updated every WEEKDAY.

'Twas the Night Before
Christmas

Working the week of Christmas I simply abhor.
Getting any task completed is a genuine chore.
Then along came a story of holiday cheer,
A fish and a hack all whacked out on beer.

A hack like myself could certainly relate
To the humorous story of fishy's ill fate.
When to my astonishment a shadow arose,
From over my shoulder my boss read your prose.

"Well what is this? What is this Suck page?"
(By now I was feeling the wrath of his rage)
"I came here to see what's wrong with my LAN!
Now chase down my print job, or you will be canned!"

The problem was simple that I had addressed,
But my boss was still angry, he was not impressed.
He said not a word, no thank you, nor quip.
He outstretched a hand that held my pink slip.

So here I am in Palm Beaches warm sun,
A smile on my face, yes, I'm still having fun.
My palm tree is decorated with gold balls and white lights,
I truly enjoy a Christmas with 80-degree nights.

So thank you to Suck for another humorous year.
With you and yours in mind I raise up my beer!
"Happy holidays Sucksters, you writers of trash!"
From a dedicated reader, soon to be short on cash.

Wade Thomas
<w_thomas@bellsouth.net>

See how rhyming makes dull
things seem fine? We're
thinking of rhyming straight
through '99!

Year of the Rat

OK, Mr M., I confess that
boomers leave me barfing -
and not in any small way.
Anyone who reads any of the
materials produced by them
during the '60s - or in the
recent let's-all-look-back
craze - will realize that
most boomers run around
saying something to the
effect of "Ain't I so
righteous?" My former boss, a
boomer who celebrated her
50th less than a month after
taking on her current job,
was skilled at inflicting
guilt on one for A) not being
a former '60s radical and B)
still managing to have
thoughts like "justice" and
"freedom"; as if one were
unworthy to work for a boomer
because one were influenced
and not influenced by them.

Despite the fact that all
this modern WWII propaganda is
really "Pay Attention to
Aging Boomers" propaganda, I
do like the other evident
message: The Germans tried to
take over the world by first
promoting an image of
eternal youth and then by
letting the old rich people
send the young poor people
into battle. I'm enjoying the
educational turn currently
evident in Hollywood.

Bill Bailey
<arkouda@doxos.com>

O won't you go home Bill
Bailey? The boomers are many
things - certainly they are
bulimia-inducing as you note
so well - but let's not put
them on the hook for WWII.
Let's just put them on the
hook for being who they
were/are/and [shudder] will
be in a few short years.

Mr. M

Shut up. With every noun and
verb you prove how devoid of
redeeming value you are. You
are a fruit with a cynical
peeling and bitter meat all
the way to a rotten core. The
only just punishment for you
is to muddle your way through
life, shouldering your share
of responsibility (though I'm
sure you'll duck out of as
much as possible) and
reaching that level of
maturity that allows you to
reevaluate your certainties
and to confront the
uncomfortable truth that you
have at times been an
arrogant and buffoonish ass.

Dan & Gale Chance
<dgc@mindspring.com>

Dear Dale & Gan,

Enough with the Camus
already! Like I don't know my
life - rightly! justly! - is
all about shouldering unfair
burdens simply because I
committed the sin of just
being born. Like I don't know
I have a buffoonish ass - one
that even Suzanne Somers -
the chick in the T-Bird in
American Graffiti, fer
Chrissakes - can't reshape
through space-age technology
and all the Thigh Masters
currently being produced in
Chinese prisons by guys with
one kidney and stolen corneas
(at least they can buy
dog-fur coats openly there).
Like I don't know I'm a piece
of rotten fruit that's
actually meat with a core
(all on a stick and covered
in batter, I bet).

Hey, let me lay it on the
line: My old man, who
actually hit the beaches in
Normandy and ate hot Nazi
lead liberating the same
shitty continent that his own
parents had left only years
before, fought that good
fight so his kids could be
anything they wanted. I
salute him and give Tom
Brokaw the finger.

Cordially, Mr. M

Clearly anyone who would be
so gauche as to advocate such
things as impeaching the
president for committing
perjury or obstruction of
justice, reducing the size
and scope of government, or
barring junk science from
courtrooms (just a few
examples of recent WSJ
editorial positions) is a
Neanderthal, if not a
fascist.

While some would argue that
Dorothy Rabinowitz's
continued exposés on the WSJ
editorial page of prosecutors
who have railroaded innocent
people, such as the Amiraults
and Grant Snoweden [sic], on bogus
child abuse charges, is an
example of "the kind of
tough, smart journalism that
can actually make the world a
measurably better place," you
are right to ignore it
completely.

After all, even if
Rabinowitz's journalism did
result in several innocent
people having their
convictions overturned and
being freed from prison, it's
important to keep in mind
that not only is Rabinowitz a
Republican, but that one of
the prosecutors she attacked
is Janet Reno, who is not
only a left-leaning woman,
but is a friend and appointee
of the Clinton White House.
If attacking a woman of such
wisdom and virtue is the best
Rabinowitz can do, well then,
it's hardly appropriate to
even think of her work as
journalism, is it?

Keep up the good work and
remember, even if you're
lying its not really lying if
the lie is told in the
service of a greater truth.

Bruce Fancher
<bruce@iterative.com>

Crank that moral indignation
way up to the sky, Bruce -
it's fun to be righteous. But
just for a little factual
balance, you might want to
check out the Journal's
letters-to-the-editor,
where one writer after
another points out the
substantive errors made in
the conclusion-first-facts-
later stuff that makes up a
good portion of the
newspaper's ed-pages.

At the risk of disappointing
you a bit, I'll part the
curtains enough to reveal
that I - gasp! - view Bill
Clinton with more venom than
I do even Max Boot and Co.;
that I think the great bulk
of government causes do way more
harm than good; and that I
don't actually think that
perjury is, like, cool. And
I've closely followed Dorothy
Rabinowitz's reporting on the
Amiraults and Harold Grant Snowden -
pretty sure you misspelled
his name, by the way - with
at least as much interest as
you have. Not that I'm
anything I imagine you'd
describe as a conservative -
and I'm not a Republican -
but I'm also not the person
you want to think I am.
Sorry!

But here's the problem: The
Journal's ed-pages warriors
are so determined to spell
out the party line that they
stretch their facts - often -
beyond the boundaries of
reality. The issue is not what they
believe; the issue is that,
driven by an intensity of
feeling that sometimes leads
them to distort facts and
offer warped analysis, the
Journal's ed-pages staff
harms its own causes with
work that can be picked
apart. Purity of ideology
isn't impressive; nuanced
analysis is. The folks on the
editorial pages of The Wall
Street Journal are very pure.

Here at home in Los Angeles,
I forget myself every once in
a while and pick up a copy of
the L.A. Weekly, a really
unbelievably pathetic
alternative newspaper. In the
Weekly's world, brave
leftists take the fight to
craven, dishonorable
corporate executives and
conservative officials; union
organizers stare into the
light of a new tomorrow, free
from greed or ego; and every
Republican whose name appears
in print is a sneering,
hateful bastard who'd be
tearing the guts out of every
poor minority in sight if
only the Army of the Pure
weren't around to keep them
in check. The Weekly makes me
sick. See what I'm saying?

I ... don't ... trust ...
unbalanced ... views.

Ambrose Beers

Having just read today's
column:

Max Boot? Max Boot!!!? Not
being an avid reader of the
WSJ's editorial page, I can
only express surprise and
amusement at the high
position my fellow UC
Berkeley alumnus Mr. Boot has
attained, which I must
ascribe to the Dinesh D'Souza
effect: No matter how
mediocre or ill-informed a
journalist you may be, as
long as you consistently and
loudly maintain a right-wing
stance on every possible
issue, you will get a job
after college.

As for the aforementioned Dr.
Irene Kassorla and what I
presume was a description of
her home, I admire your
restraint in not mentioning
the most salient items on her
curriculum vitae - her roles
as Monica Lewinsky's
therapist and
confidence-booster and
Ken Starr's snitch.

Paul Wagenseil
<pwagenseil@randomhouse.com>

Thanks for the scoop. Having
attended school with a loud
gaggle of NAS members along
Dinesh's lines, we know what
you mean. But come now, try
not to encourage more
mediocre and ill-informed
writers that they'll have no
trouble finding employment.
Lord knows we know there are
plenty of us around as it is,
paycheck or not.

How dare you insult my
taste! I've earned my two -
YES, TWO - kitchens for all
42 rooms in my house, and I
did it on a teacher's salary
by being frugal for many
years. Sure I lost two kids
and 18 pets, but the Ben
Franklin stuff paid off. I am
so HAPPY! I have it all, you
miserable little sod. Suck
sucks when it carries this
vitriolic type of attack on
the fruits of full-out
CAPITALISM. May your hell be
sitting with a full belly of
tainted turkey in the
ethereal British Museum
waiting for Marx to complete
his satanic document, and no
WC in sight.

Other than that, HAVE A
WONDERFUL HOLIDAY SEASON!

Sincerely,

Mac Reynolds

I am very, very excited for
you.

Ambrose Beers