Saturday, September 23, 2006
A Drudge Report
BLOGOSPHERE. It's not looking good. Last week, we noticed but overlooked the odd placement of photographs about two entirely different Drudge items, one about anthropology and one about the Boss Bitch of the Bigtop.
Side by side. A coincidence?
Maybe an accident of layout, we thought. But maybe not, too, Then came tonight's bombshell. Who on earth cares if Barbra Streisand's tits are hanging out? (Of course, Ann Althouse might, but she's ultra-sensitive on the subject of women's breasts. In fact, she should probably read Dr, Sanity and breathe into a paper bag or something, but that's a different entry.)
The telling post was linked to this lurid piece:
You would think that by the age of 64, most women would be self-conscious enough to ensure their choice of evening wear does not expose parts of the body which have...well dropped below standards.
But no one seems to have shared this with legendary entertainer Barbra Streisand as she stepped out in this rather unflattering black dress at the Clinton Global Initiative in New York.
Streisand seemed to forget what a photographer's flash can do to a black dress as she unwittingly revealed she had left the black bra tucked up in her drawer at home.
The thing is, do average Americans care about Barbra Streisand? No. She's an illiterate multi-multi-millionaire limousine liberal with a fan constituency consisting of little old ladies in track suits who go to see her in Las Vegas in between bouts with the slot machines. So why does Matt Drudge insist on afflicting us with stories about her?
Perhaps the answer lies in the skull he would no doubt like to have presented to us this way (if he weren't such a hard-nosed, objective journalist):
You see, the new skull is supposed to be a relative of Lucy, the three-foot-tall female ape scientists like to claim is the Mother-of-us-all. Because she walked on two legs, even though she had the IQ of a turtle. Hmmmm. The resemblance is starting to seem significant. Barbra also walks on two legs. Cool.
The Mother of us All? Is that what has Matt Drudge so distracted? The thought of a primordial female of extremely rudimentary brain power who is nevertheless our common ancestor? Is this what primes the pump for a journalist of his standing? Just to be sure, we went back and looked up the original Lucy. Here's what we found:
"Lucy," was a skeleton of "Australopithecus" &Hominid from 3.5 million or 4 million years ago, which was discovered in Ethiopia. This skeleton belonged to a young woman, and now she is the most famous woman in the world of paleoanthropology. Although the transition from ape to human being remains a great mystery, a series of discoveries of fossils are revealing the secret to us little by little.
The skeleton AL 288-1 was nicknamed Lucy, after the Beatles song "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds", which was played as the find was celebrated. Lucy was only 1.1 m (3 feet 8 inches) tall, weighed 29 kilograms (65 lb) and looked somewhat like a Common Chimpanzee, but the observations of her pelvis proved that she had walked upright and more in the manner of humans.
Johanson placed Australopithecus afarensis as the last ancestor common to humans and chimpanzees living from 3.9 to 3 million years ago.
Okay. It IS exciting to think that Barbra might be the "ancestor common to humans and chimpanzees." It would certainly explain her political acumen -- and her spelling. However, it entirely fails to explain why Matt Drudge would find her sexually attractive. Anthropoligical significance is intellectually stimulating but hardly an aphrodisiac. Unless you've never had a girlfirend
Oh. You're right. We didn't think of that.
We also found a picture of Matt Drudge. No wonder he went thermo-nuclear on the Lewinsky story...
We hope Matt and Barbra will be very happy together. We also hope what's-his-name the husband doesn't kick Matt's ass for his lowdown dirty thoughts about the Mother-of-us-all. You know. Marcus Welby wouldn't like it. Look lively, Matt.