well said Bill

I'd like to see James go write for "24," along with the Strib's Grim Jawed Expendables.

I'm sitting here wondering what a writer like James could do with the story of my closest Friends, boy i gotta say, #1 Bestseller.
imho.

Oh yeah, Mn. has some SERIOUS tax issues too, Second highest in the Nation and looking to be #1 if the blood sucking pols have their way. (But that's my fault of course) Beautiful State though! That's not my fault of course because good things do not come from me, only bad, worse and down right unholy, Mmuu-hu-ha-ah-a-a...

Bill wrote: ...one can only wonder what the man will be able to achieve if he finds himself free of that Yoke of Self-Blinded Ignorance.

Removing that Yoke is part of the *what* for each of us.

The irony being that the Quirk was my least favorite thing he writes. 9 days out of 10 I couldn't be bothered to click through from the Bleat. I have a feeling that whatever comes of this change, I'll wind up liking it a lot more. (I'm hoping he squeezes out a couple of novels.)

Doug and the Slugs were not terrible!

Lileks is my first stop every morning. I like to start my day with a smile, or, on those most blessed of days, a Screed.

The big question is, of course, "where will Lileks end up after he ditches those idiots?"

I've always been moderately surprised at how he managed to stay there all of those years without someone else hiring him, for better money and working conditions.

Lileks is a breath of fresh farm air! The effort Mr Lileks expend each week digging up matchbook covers and cookbooks... just so the rest of don't have to!

As for Klaatu; they holdeth no candle to the Canadian Rock-Gods of Prism!

(Geddy be praised!)

I read a few of lileks' columns and other things. While some of them are vaguely amusing, I didn't find them particularly special.

Must be I don't get it.

There are days when the Bleat is ribsplitting hilarious. Other times I haven't the patience to wade through it.

The Quirk never caught my fancy. It was like he was writing in a straitjacket.

I check out the Bleat every day! Being the father of two girls, I've enjoyed reading about Gnat's trips to Target and Chuck-E-Fargin-Cheese with her Daddy. What great memories!!

Bill, I need to thank you for linking to the Institute. As I periodically burst into laughter, thanks also for cluing in the remaining people in my office who didn't know I was an idiot. Ray

Actually, as much as I love the Bleats, to me the soul of Lileks is The Institute of Official Cheer.

As I said, I first encountered him at an entry there called The Grooviest Motel in Wisconsin. Just take a look at that, or The Gallery of Regrettable Food, and stand in awe.

And Stephen J. -- I have Doug and the Slugs on my iPod (and the others as well, damn me to hell) and I agree -- they were fun. Awful fun, but fun.

His September 11 columns are distillations of what the United states, and being Americans, are.

His "IOOC" was one of my first interwebs laughs, too.

Mr. Lileks, and Mr. Whittle are great writing deterrents. Every time I start to put something down, I wnd up thinking "Forget my stuff, go read theirs."

James Lileks is easily my favorite voice on the Internet, both his written and spoken entries. It is unusual to encounter a writer of his caliber, largely because the major dailies eschew such wit and wisdom for proven marketable commodities, like fark. You couldn't pay me to read my local paper, any of the dwindling claimants to that title. But if they had a gem like James and said to him, you need to cover the city council, I'd never deign the paper worthy to wrap my fish in it.

I was never a huge fan of the Quirk either, mostly because I likes my Lileks best uncensored. In the best of all possible worlds, he'll send a single digit salute to the Strib and get picked up by someone who will give him free rein to use his talents and a big stage to do it on.

He was half my introduction to the World of Blogs, in the sense that it was the first time I went "Hey... this guy's diary is actually INTERESTING." At the time I couldn't be bothered with "that Instapundit guy"- I wanted to read what Lileks had to say about him, not his stuff.

Then my father said "Hey, have you checked out that Rachel Lucas chick yet? I think you'd like her." And that was the end of it.

"terrible Canadian rock bands like The Kings"

Oh. My. God. I just had a flashback to junior high school and hearing the "This Beat Goes On / Switching To Glide" extended mix.

But back to the main topic: sadly, this is no surprise. The McClatchy Newspaper heirs have essentially made a decision of ideology. They figure blogs, commentary magazines and talk radio have the conservative/right audience, and they have written it off in order to go harder liberal/left. I watched this (de)evolution at McClatchy's flagship "paper", the Sacramento Bee (Ess), before I cancelled it.

Ditto, Bill. The Bleat is my first click of the day, every day.

You're second, though.
.

Me too on the first two clicks of the day!

My third click is Rachels FORBIDDEN Apache error page!

Me too on the first two clicks of the day!

My third click is Rachels FORBIDDEN Apache error page!

Which I apparently click on twice!

When Lileks mentioned he had lost the Quirk column, I wasn't particularly sorry. That's because he's funniest in longer-format pieces. You'd get the feeling with the Quirk that he'd just be building up steam, and then *ding* "Good morning!" But I was just getting interested... "Sorry, the five minutes is up."

But when he mentioned he'd lost the Quirk item to do *news beat,* I was actually angry at the Strib for pissing away the talent of what is, easily, the finest writer on staff. Strib subscriptions, one suspects, will be cancelled over this issue. If I took the Strib, I'd cancel. I am tempted to get a Strib subscription just for the visceral satisfaction of cancelling it in disgust, but that would be silly.

Anyway, I'm already in danger of descending into blathering fangirl territory, so I'll clock out for now. But. Damn.

I've found the centipede mountain. It happened shortly after I thought oh what the heck and clicked the lileks.com link.

I had to stop. After trying to get through the Funny Books section, I couldn't. Comic Cavalcade. At Jabba the Claus. The sock.

Flopping meerkat is not very sexy.

Until recently, I always thought of Lileks and Whittle as two ends of a spectrum:

Lileks has always done his little daily columns in the Strib, his Bleats, Filthy Lucre, etc., just plunking away like the Energizer frigging Bunny.

Whittle can go weeks or months between posts, but when he posts, it's a magnum opus. Productivity in Internet-connected offices must drop precipitously when that happens, because you just know you gotta read the whole thing NOW. When I'm in a helpful mood, first I flip over to gmail and let a few friends know that The Eagle Has Landed.

I have not had the privilige of reading Lileks paper columns in any great detail but, what I have seen is truly of the same quality and character as the Bleat. I love the Bleat and his sense of humor and his story telling ability are just too much for me to comprehend. His gift is tremendous and it will be wasted on mundane "reporting" duties.

I had never heard of the man until today. Thanks Bill. I bet you mentioned him so we would all get attached to Lilek and lay off hounding you about your extended absences. Good thinking. "Eat at Joe's" (while I finish cookin' up some taters over at my place.) Brilliant!

Productivity in Internet-connected offices must drop precipitously when that happens, because you just know you gotta read the whole thing NOW.

A few years ago Bill mentioned me by full name in an essay. Within a day, 5 of my co-workers had come up and said "Do you know a guy named Bill Whittle?"

So, yeah, I'd love to see the traffic logs at any large technology firm on the day a big Whittle essay drops.

Short sighted idiots in the papers seems to be the norm these days. Like the SF Chronicle would ever have been worth buying without Herb Caen, or the Chicago paper (that shall not be named) that had Royko.

Miniscule minds with bean counter's hearts. What a sorry condition.

I love Lileks' site, and have been visiting faithfully for a long time. While I love the sections "the American Motel" and "Matchbook-O-Rama", my absolute favorite is "Interior Desecrations"-
http://www.lileks.com/institute/interiors/index.html
If you can read that part of the site without laughing, there's something wrong with you...

I very much agree with you, Bill, that James Lileks is an amazing writer that is appreciated by many, many people; sadly, though, not by the powers-that-be at the Trib.

RA-CHEL! RA-CHEL! RA-CHEL!

Floating Baby Head!

While we're all waiting.
Best! Lyrics! Ever!

The queen of diamonds let you down,
She was just an empty fable.
The queen of hearts, you say,
You never met.
Your twisted fate has found you out
And it's finally turned the table.
Stole your dreams
And paid you with regrets...

Ten thousand bonus points.

What's the next word?

Floating Baby Head is not the right answer.

desperado
you sealed your fate up a long time ago
now there's no time left to borrow
only stardust

im only 3 but eagles are easy

Maybe tomorrow.

Liz,
That's pretty good for a 3 year old but my 5 year old can sing "'et sumbody uv u"
with the best of them.

By the way Bill, glad to see you back in the thick of things. I was wondering if you died or something??? Sure am glad you are doing well. Couldn't happen to a finer person - don't knock out the wall yet - you are humble enough to take it.

You are not a polished writer like Lileks is but, yours is from the gut and it hits home in a way few can manage. I pore over each of your writings and say - DAMN wish I had said that.

Second that, bolivar.

Thnaks to Bill, when I people watch, I find myself mentally noting "Pink... gray... pink... pink... gray... pink..." until the depression sets in. Then I switch to sky gazing.

The improvements in the colors and contrasts are spot on.

Where's Rachel? I keep checking......

I first heard of James Lileks from Hugh Hewitt's radio show. I tried reading the Quirk a few times, but I just couldn't get into it. It was like trying to read A Prarie Home Companion, only this time written by someone with talent. It's interesting, but really, just fluff.

On the other hand, the Bleat is a favorite around my house.

What the Strib should have done with Lileks is stick him in the opinion section to write about important local and national matters and demote some newb to beat reporter.

With the national exposure that James gets, you would think that he would be considered more of an asset. Of course, anyone that invests in the "dead tree media" these days needs their collective heads examined anyway, so it's not unexpected.

Bill - This is a one off, but where is the link to buy the book? I want them for presents to people who need them.

Thanks-

robohoho its not up yet but it will be soon.

I don't really know where to post this.

I Need A Number!

While we wait for Bill to release his next, much anticipated, post?

Preamble: First, I would like to apologize to Bill for this intrusion if he has any immediately imminent plans to engage e!3 resources. Bill, I don't want to impose on your allocation of the precious resources but, since there is all this brainpower sitting idle while we wait, there are a few topics of discussion I would love to throw against the e!3 whiteboard just out of curiosity. Second, although I feel like the guy sitting all alone at a table in a restaurant who inserts himself into the engaging conversation of the group sitting at the table next to him, who, by the way, actually have other people to engage in reasoned conversation, I would like to establish, as a statement of fact, whatever anyone disagrees with in this post is, in fact, irrefutably, Dougman's fault! In case anybody forgets, expect to see both deference to Bill's right to both set (and own the intellectual property rights) to e!3 initiative. Also expect a closing reminder of Dougman's absolute responsibility for any faults, logical errors and\or spelling and grammatical mistakes in whatever statements I submit into perpetuity, for ever and ever, Amen.

Back to my purpose: I Need A Number!

OK, I have added the short version here: (Dougman, Why did you give me the mental diarrhea below? We haven't even met. Why didn't you teach me how to express my thoughts as clearly an concisely as the great Bill when I was in school? I am not accepting the lame excuse that you had not been born yet as an excuse!)

The Short Version: Given the facts regarding demographics and the current setup and forecast for Social Security solvency, why is it we never even hear mention, from any source, of either the adjustment in the contributions rate or the adjustment of the retirement age required, if we were to take action now, before the baby boom retires? (I understand these are both rates of change over time.)

I know the answer for the politicians is VOTES. But why isn't the voice of reason driving the point home that the only workable solution is to do something that requires the baby boomers to take a hit. The only possible time to make the adjustment is when the demographics are in our favor.

Also: What makes people "within a few years of retirement" exempt from having to pay any part of the accumulate debt? Why is it that only those born after date X have to shoulder the burden? Isn't this "Social Security Deficit Exempt" group the only group that has actually had a vote the whole time? (Since earlier I assumed I was older than Dougman, I will now take the inconsistent position and blame Dougman for this too. Dougman is apparently very flexible.)

The Long Version: For those of you really suffering with "Waiting for Bill Sydrome", here is the VERY long version Dougman made me spew. (I take no responsibility for my failure to go back after I realized it required the Short Version above and make sure the logic and all the variable references are correct because Dougman let go some burrito byproduct and I had to post immediately or die.)

Fact: A Social Security system, SSSys, which is funded by resources taken from current population of wage earners, SS Contributors, and provides income for the post wage earner population, SS Recipients, exists, and will continue to exists, for the foreseeable future.

Fact: The SSSys, was started with no initial resource balance, so current contributions from SS Contributors are used to fund current distributions to SS Recipients.

Opinion: This is a acceptable situation in a benevolent society.

Fact: Supporting such a situation requires contributions at rate, CurWageEarnerContributionRate, from all wage earners, SS Contributors, from their first earned wage until their last earned wage. The age range of contributions has no dependence on the age at "first earned wage" or the age at "last earned wage".

Fact: Contributions from SS Contributors are collected at rate CurWageEarnerContributionRate up until CurWageEarnerEarningsLimit (SSWages x CurWageEarnerContributionRate = SS Contributions).

Total Contributions are a function of SS Contributors, CurWageEarnerContributionRate, Total SS Contributors Wages - SS Contributors Wages above CurWageEarnerEarningsLimit.

Fact: Individuals transition from, SS Contributor, to SS Recipient at age, SSRetirementDate.

Fact: The U.S. has experience significant variances in the birth rate in the timeframe since the initiation of the SSSys which causes the relationship between both the number and the contributions\distributions of SS Contributors and SS Recipients to vary over time.

Fact: Demographics indicate there was a surge in births during the "Baby Boom" which causes variances in both the income from Contributions and the spending for Distributions.

Fact: During the period when the ratio of SS Contributors and Total SS Contributions exceeded SS Recipients and Total SS Distributions, favorable excess funds were not saved for distribution when the ratio became unfavorable.

Fact: Existing plans for Total SS Contributions (SS Wages x CurWageEarnerContributionRate) do not accommodate forecasted increase in SS Distributions anticipated as the ratio of Contributors\Recipients and Income\Sending changes from favorable to unfavorable.

Fact: (?) The options to correct the imbalance between Contributions and Distributions are:

A. Increase CurWageEarnerContributionRate by A% for future Wages as of DateA
1. This results in a increase of the transfer of wealth between current workers and current retirees plus future retirees.
B. Increase CurWageEarnerEarningsLimit by B$ as of DateB
C. Increase the SSRetirementDate.
1. By C1 before the "Baby Boom" retires and the ratio of Contributors\Recipients become unfavorable.
2. By C2 (which will have to be steeper than C1) sometime after the "Baby Boom" retires and the ratio of Contributors\Recipients has become unfavorable.
D. Reduce Benefits to SS Recipients
1. Now
2. After the "Baby Boom" retires and the ratio of Contributors\Recipients become unfavorable.
3. Before the "Baby Boom" retires while the ratio of Contributors\Recipients is favorable.

If Bill post "Seeing the Unseen" ignore anything here and enjoy with me. (Blame Dougman if you miss it by even a minute reading my spew.)

After all that, I did not make it clear what Number I was looking for.

Assuming everything used to produce the solvency dates released last month...

If we were to change the Social Security Retirement Date as of, say 01/01/2008, what date would make the system solvent?

If we accept that it is not a set retirement date, but a retirement date changing over time from 01/01/2008 forward with even the current slope, what is the vertical adjustment, in years/days at 01/01/2008 required?

Dougman, Now do you see what your burrito addiction cost us? I look stupid and it is all your fault!

Bill, I get the impression Dougman has been around e!3 for a long time. But my question is, how do you deal with it? I can't see to type with a gasmask on.

Mmmmn , . .Breakfast Burrito , ..@)*>*)

Well, Unquiet Mind, I don't really have an answer to your question, but I do remember being absolutely convinced, even 20 years ago, that retirement age would be at least 85 by the time I got there. (That's another 42 years for me, looks like SS just won't exist any more since they don't seem to want to fix it).

I'm new to Lileks's stuff but after reading 5 different "quirks" I laughed out loud (man I hate using that expression) 5 times. Thanks for introducing us to him Bill.

I'm another regular Lileks reader who entered the wide wild blogosphere via his door. Liked Quirk, miss the Backfence, but thank the good Lord we still have the man himself Bleating on a daily basis.

Mr. Whittle, it's good to see you back and excited about all your goings on. I've been a weekly drive-by for a few years, so I'm glad to see you back in business! And please! I agree with a previous poster: you and Lileks are opposite ends of the same spectrum; both with the wondeful talent, but with wildly different -- but equally engrossing -- ways of expressing it. Thank you.

Bill, Bill, Bill...

You cannot listed to Klaatu and measure them by post-punk standards.

They formed and did most of their best stuff in a time when "The Lion Sleeps Tonight" and "Seasons in the Sun" were the NUMBER ONE SONGS OF THE YEAR.

When Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons and Neil Sedaka were making COMEBACKS.

When Barry Manilow was a CHART-TOPPER.

In *that* context, they were spectacular!
;-)

> Fact: The SSSys, was started with no initial resource balance, so current contributions from SS Contributors are used to fund current distributions to SS Recipients.

Opinion: This is a acceptable situation in a benevolent society.

Funny, pretty much all pension plans at some point started with a zero balance. I wonder how many of them are still complete ponzi schemes after 80 years?

Acceptable? NO.

BTW, other recommended blogs (after Bill, of course) are

Dr. Sanity

Varifrank

The Doctor is a good day to day site. Frank is a better writer (some of the best rants you will ever read when he gets onto one) -- not as good as Bill but notably more frequent. With Bill you have a nice blend-spectrum of frequency with quality.

My US$.02

This is going to seem a bit random.

About a month ago, when I was driving back from the NASCAR race at the Texas Motor Speedway, just outside of Amarillo I passed an RV towing a black Jeep (Grand Cherokee I think) with ejectejecteject.com spelled out in the back window with those stickers you use to put your address in the front of your house. Does anyone here recognize the description? I thought that was pretty cool, but I didn't get a picture.

UM, social security benefits should be means tested before distribution. Tell me why a person with a million bucks in the bank at retirement should be drawing benefits paid for by a 20's something working couple with two kids? The entitlement makes the entire system a wealth transfer from young to old. And God only knows what's going on behind our backs as politicians finagle and manipulate the national budget based on their desire to maintain a spot at the top of the food chain. You want social security reform? Then get the so-called "trust fund" out of the hands of government and into the private sector. It's scam all right. Steal from one generation to pay another. Government is not responsible for me in my retirement, I am. That's my job. It should be the job of every American to plan for his own future.

OBH, What I was accepting was the existence of a safety net for the elderly. SS was one way of establishing one. Agree or disagree with what it has been for the last 80 years, call it a ponzi scheme, fine, it is still there and will continue to be there for some foreseeable future. My question was directed at trying to pick a single number which everyone would understand to quantify just where SS stands. Assuming everything else remains as is assumed in the studies we are hearing numbers from and limit the possible adjustments to a singe factor, Date of Retirement. Everybody understands that. What are they telling us it is now? Now, how far does it have to move to make SS solvent? Then I want to beat everyone maintaining the ponzi scheme over the head with a X years, XXX day long stick! I picked 1/1/2008 just to fix a point for calculation and to maximize the people who are impacted\concerned.

MP, I concur on means testing and feel the same way you do regarding personal responsibility. In fact, I agree with the sentiment of most of what you said. I was not trying to say adjusting the retirement date is the only possible adjustment. I was trying to focus a spotlight. Knowing such a hard number like X in the following: "If we want to do the SS we have planned, everybody has to work X more years starting tomorrow.", might make it easier to hold to some form of reason and accountability those endorsing the current plan, manipulating the system, and dancing those graceful sidesteps while endlessly proposing alternatives and actually doing nothing.

I first encountered Lileks through The Institute of Official Cheer, specifically The Gallery of Regrettable Food. Somebody pointed it to me the day my husband came home with a nasty case of food poisoning, so while I waited up to make sure he'd be okay (or as okay as you get with food poisoning), I was reading through the Gallery.

The irony of that sticks with me. Thankfully, my gag reflex is not easily triggered.

It was some time before I managed to work my way through the site to the Bleat, and I'm glad I did. I've been reading it for many, many years now and my only regret is that sometimes the archives get broken. Pity, that. My mom's journal has the same problem.

Has anyone seen this Iowahawk parody of Lileks (and others) from a few days ago?

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2007/05/star_tribune_co.html

In case you haven't seen him, Iowahawk is one of the funniest parodists on the Internet.

I read Lileks with enjoyment on a routine basis.

That said, to hear Mr. Whittle praising him so unstintingly is a bit disorienting. It's like hearing Miles Davis shower accolades on Zamfir. Is he hearing something we don't? we wonder.

I have been reading Lileks since 2000 or 2001. I know was a regular daily reader on September 11. I was introduced to his writings through very left leaning co-workers at my acedemic research libery. They only know of the Gallery of Regrettable Food. I dug deeper and found a gold mine. Then to my delight, I began to hear him on Hug Hewitt.

Bill, both you and James have had me in tears. (Lileks sometimes has me in tears of laughter to boot). Sometimes I have to stop midway, walk around stunned and digest the information. Both of you have hit the nail on the head so many times.

I've said it before and I will say it again. We cannot repay you both enough for being our heart and voice in a world gone mad.

Thank you.