Seriously.
Pundits debated Twittering.
On the one side was the it's so rude crowd. Honestly, though, aren't these dinosaurs just peeved because they don't know how to Twitter? The other side used the who cares argument. There was a third side. They argued that Senators may Twitter during the speech if it was related directly to the content. So, Senator McCaskill's woo-hoo to Justice Ginsburg is out.
"I did big wooohoo for Justice Ginsberg," broadcast Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri, upon sighting the ailing Supreme Court justice. She could be seen applauding with a BlackBerry in one hand.
Anyone who accuses McCaskill of not feeling the Obama love has never seen this picture:

I am still rather stunned that this was an issue that received attention. In 2009. If my Senator isn't at least aware of Twitter, then I don't think he or she should be reelected. Watching these debates was like listening to the Cleaver's neighbors gripe about those hoodlums listening to that Rock and Roll music and rolling the cuffs of their pant legs. The generational divide was so transparent that I could see a third dimension.
Besides, if they aren't allowed to Twitter, then we'd miss revelations like this one from my own douchetard Texas Senator Joe Barton:
"Aggie basketball game is about to start on espn2 for those of you that aren't going to bother watching pelosi smirk for the next hour."
15 minutes later, he blamed it on a staffer:
"Disregard that last Tweet from a staffer."
"Disregard that last Tweet from a staffer."
If you are feeling a bit constipated, the surest cure is to read Barton's entire Twitter page:
Worse than the coverage of this non-issue was the over use of the chorus from "Rockin' Robin" to introduce the topic. Tweet, tweet, tweetedly-deedly-dee indeed.
Shame, Chris Matthews:

This begs the question... Do you tweet too? I meant to ask you last week on the phone when you mentioned Tweeter.
ReplyDeleteNo. I do not. I spend enough time on Facebook and reading blogs.
ReplyDelete