Did you know Chris Cillizza makes videos that provide you with your much-needed Fix, in video form? We didn’t know either, until just now, and now we are crying (with joy). What kind of political smack is Mr. Cillizza pushing this week? “There will not be an upset in Delaware.” How long did it take you to read that sentence? Well there are eight “words” there, and a word usually takes about ten seconds to read, so that’s eighty seconds — plus the period, which is at least another ten seconds — so that’s a total of 1:30. And yet it took Chris Cillizza’s movie one minute and thirty-one seconds to explain what you could read with more than one second to spare! And also Dana Milbank forgot to pop out of a cake and call Hillary Clinton a bitch, so what’s the point of even watching?
This is the part of the article where we typically “embed” the awful video in question. Except we are not allowed to do this because that is just how lame this so-called “FastFix” — which isn’t even fast — really is.
So instead we will just zoom in on Chris Cillizza’s sexiness:
[WaPo]
{ 28 comments }
Looks like PeeWee Herman meets Waldo. (Not pretty, Riley!)
Wow, that's Sara Benincasa's best impersonation ever.
I'm kind of disappointed in Bill Mahr. I was expecting at least one more interesting clip to be released. He seems to have gotten caught up in something called a "conscience".
Conscience should compel him to release all the clips he can; he may have gotten called up in something called "running out of clips".
The bum said he had more than 20 clips and showed two!
Serious journalists should pay attention to details.
It's "dabbled INTO witchcraft," guys. Check your sources.
Wait, what happened to his chin?
I bet he gets laid tonight!!
Maybe by you but sure as fuck not by me. He looks like a Combat Zone regular.
Who is this lame David Cross impersonator?
Hmmmm. A nice playmate for Trig.
"Hey kids — Dad's friending you on Facebook!"
History shows again and again
How nature points out the folly of men
Go go Cillizza!
People have this witchcraft thing all wrong – the dude who supposedly took her to the altar stated that he only said, "I'll fuck you for a brew", and she thought he meant a witches brew.
Just because you are bright and informed and can express yourself does not mean we want to WATCH YOU. I mean, Christ; we're eating here!
Chris, you know what else might help Christine eke out a win? I'll even spell it for you: L-O-B-O-T-O-M-Y.
I never knew Chris Cilizza was the spelling champ of his 3rd grade class. It's apparently been downhill ever since.
Why does the WaPo allow their scribblers to play with the video equipment? Aren't they afraid they'll electrocute themselves and sue?
I really hate these fuckheads.
I guess I'm the only one with a crush on Cillizza. What can I say, nerds do it for me.
Thanks – now I know what he looks like after eating ACTIVIA. You suck.
Hey, no live-bloggie Gloria Allred taking a dump on Meg Whitman, with the domestic help's help?
I would've spelled it "L-O-B-O-T-O-M-Y."
Man, Ted from "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" has really let himself go.
Not quite as exciting as the Fix twitter stream, a rapid-fire list of what uninteresting people were saying yesterday about politics and in-depth commentary on various Starbucks locations.
Here's a basic reality, which for some strange reason, The Washington Post keeps ignoring: Literally 99 percent of print reporters and editors are NOT "camera-ready," "camera-prone," broadcasters on any level, skilled at broadcasting on any level, charismatic in general, photogenic (sorry), telegenic (sorry), well-spoken (it's true), and they are lacking in broadcasting skills, lacking in public speaking skills, lacking in television skills, lacking in presence, and severely lacking in on-camera charisma. That's true. I have spoken to print guys who went on camera–and they told me point-blank that they had zero idea what the hell they were doing. I advised them to immediately stop going on camera, and study, for at least six months, public speaking, broadcasting, some basic speaking skills, some basic acting skills, and various other aspects of broadcasting. In short, most print people suck on television, on radio, and in film–because they are NOT broadcasters. Most of them simply should not be on the radio or on camera. And that's true.
They all have faces for newspapers.
That is sooooo not my "fix", trust me.
Jesus FUCK. What'd we ever do to YOU? Warn us about the fucking abomination after the jump next time!
I think I may be sterile now – & for good this time.
Comments on this entry are closed.