Welcome to AWordOnFailure!
Here you'll find the hosts with the most on the entire interweb -- Paul and Alex. Now that we've been successful bloggers “online columnists” for months it seems prudent to put up a welcome message for you, our esteemed reader.
Before getting to out fantastic content, realize that this isn’t blog; it's an online magazine. So don't mistake this as an online diary. It’s an expression of some of our ideas, observations, and queries. The topics covered here range from philosophical puzzles and problems, to economics and politics, to everything (we feel like covering) in between.
While everyone on the interweb should be obligated to read all our posts, it isn't really necessary. In fact most of our posts are separate and distinct - so you can dive right into our gianormous archive of older posts and start with whichever one catches your eye... and then express your own view in a witty lil comment!!
And on a final note, we'd like to say our target audience is the average, reasonable, and rational, adult; the everyman everyperson. But, really, our target audience is just our fellow broken misanthropes.
Treatfest.
-------------
April Fools?
So what you get here is an explanation from each of us... we're each going to offer some deep critical insight (read: gross character assassination) into what's wrong with the others' perspective. It should be noted we intended this post to come out on the first day of the month, but in time honoured AWordOnFailure fashion, it didn't.
Enjoy.
Lol Always,
Paul & Alex
---
What's Wrong with Paul D?
'After all, what do I know? (Paul Daniels, AWordOnFailure)'
When I began blogging with Paul many months ago little did I know that I would be entering into an unholy alliance with the bastard lovechild of Niccolo Machiavelli and The Grinch. The ' twenty-something Canadian surfer-philosopher' exterior masks the true Paul D - a man with the stress levels of a 65-year old Air Traffic Controller and the twisted mind of Gollum. Paul D refers to himself as 'jaded'; but in reality when God was handing out compassion, Paul D was sitting in the corner, pulling the wings off butterflies and stealing candy bars from babies with spina bifida. Whats worse is that his contempt for humanity seems to grow at the same astonishing speed that his batting average plummets.
Paul D's blogposts are a reflection of a tortured, soulless misanthrope, and suffer from two fundamental flaws. The first is a solid, unthinking belief in the infallibility of his own ideas and the second is a bizzarre, unprincipled hatred for any one with a different idea to him. At various points throughout Paul D's rocky and wholly unsuccessful blogging career he has declared that Pop Music sucks because Paul D says it sucks, and that anyone who does not agree with him is an idealist who should kill themselves. In one particulary enlightening tantrum, Paul D declared that blogging was stupid, despite the fact that he was writing on....err, a blog.
Another thing. While Paul D's long-suffering co-blogger attempts to answer important questions such as ' How will history judge George W. Bush?' or 'Does Japan have a right to hunt whales?' and often answers them with wit, wisdom and lols - Paul D deems fit to fill the blog with questions such as 'When is it OK to leave Orange Juice in the Sun?' and 'What's the definition of Porn Star?' There are two kinds of Paul D posts. The first is 'Angry Ranting Paul', where Paul takes on something wholly innocous (such as sitting next to a poor person on a bus) and decides that it is the worse thing since the Holocaust. In these posts, Paul D often tries to channel the spirit of PJ O'Rourke, but often channels the spirit of Grandpa Simpson; and often sounds like the patron saint of upper-middle class elitist twats. The second is 'Wise and Reasonable Paul', where he attempts to be an impartial social observer and make a definitive pronouncement on some middling aspect of social relations (often subjecting Jimmy and Jenny to a bunch of mundane household chores in the process). Often, Paul D takes a lot of words to say what everyone already knew - classics include his pronouncement that 'talking about boring things is boring', and that 'you should tell your partner if you have an STD'.
In conclusion, 1) Paul D's posts are often short because he has nothing interesting to say, 2) Paul D is sometimes wrong and 3) it is a well known fact that Paul D chucks, not bowls, the ball in a game of backyard cricket. I could say more, but I think that's enough for now. After all, wouldn't want people to think I actually have an opinion. These are things I have thought through, but will give the impression that I made it up on the spot. After all, I know more than you, so shut up.
---
What's Wrong with Alex?
For a few reasons, hippies are the scourge of the earth. One of which is that the typical hippy is an idealist. Now I'm not gonna stand here and suggest Alex is a hippy; he may be a lot of things (read: womanizer), but he has repeatedly told me that "free is another word for socialism." Because being a socialist is another hallmark of our typical hippy I think we can safely infer that Alex is not one... despite his other hippy qualities (e.g. intentionally keeping his living space the opposite of clean). But Alex is, at the very least, an idealist. You might have missed this, since the only interesting things about his posts are the titles, but if you take the time (read: days) to check out his posts you'd come to know the Alex that I do. TREATFEST!
In the long (read: short) tradition of AWordOnFailure, Alex has consistently written concise (read: convoluted) posts about everything from why it's okay for him to slept with his own MILF to why it's NOT okay for him to sleep with his teacher-who-is-also-a-prostitute. But inconsistency aside, when Alex isn't preaching who you should and shouldn't be allowed to have sex with, Alex likes to tackle the “important” issues we face (read: make kingly proclamations about what people should do, while not doing anything about it himself). We see this when he says we shouldn't let staving kids starve and why kiwi's aren't good enough at being kiwis. But this is the plight of idealists: shooting for the stars, then when it comes time to buck up, making for the exit. Why are idealists like this? Well, cuz deep down inside they know that if the world was as perfect that they want it to be, it just wouldn't work. And Alex knows this: he's repeatedly told me “the world would be an awful place if everyone were happy” and written about why he's against jokes. WORST CHRISTMAS EVER!
But hold the phone: not all idealists are like this – some of 'em actually take steps to actualize the changes they advocate. They make sacrifices in their lifestyles so that the underprivileged they support can have it a little better; they protest the public policy decisions they believe are wrong. So I guess it's just Alex who, instead of spending his energy fighting those who try to discriminate on the basis of membership of a group and dress code Alex goes on holidays to the sex tourism capital of Thailand (gah!). And instead of helping ensure the death penalty has no home in NZ, he hides away alone at the top of his ivory tower indulging in his own mundane interests that involve no one else. ROFLCOPTER!
I guess it's easy enough to excuse Alex for these crimes. His inability to put a coherent sentence together when speaking (thanks to cleft palate) probably relates to his inability to formulating a coherent written sentence (thanks to being raised in a barn and molested as a child). So he's doing the best he can (i.e. being a law student who is physically unable, thanks to his club foot, to make it to class on time). But, at the end of the day, Alex is just confused by his own inconsistency. After all, it's hard to know what he really thinks when he write posts denouncing some political leaders while defending W. bush AND “So-Dame Insane” (as Alex colloquially refers to the late leader of Iraq). LULZ!!1!
No comments:
Post a Comment