The very best headline ever. No, really.
h/t bubblegum tate

Comments

  1. Anonymous12:32 AM

    My immediate responses:

    Imagine that!

    or

    So this is news?

    ReplyDelete
  2. elswhere12:50 AM

    Okay, so my cat was lurking around my lap and I was reading your blog and then I clicked over to that headline and laughed (or should I say CRACKED UP) so loud and so suddenly that my cat JUMPED and skittered away on his old arthritic legs.

    So my cat says "thanks, invisible computer person, for almost giving me a heart attack."

    And I say: Hee hee hee ha ha snork!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mich10:29 AM

    Just say NO to crack, or should I say the crack from your crack? Or the crack from someone else's crack?

    OK, I'll stop now...

    Michelle

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous1:28 PM

    Hagerstown Maryland! That's just up the road from my house! I'm goin' on up to the jailhouse and check out this butt head!

    Happy Birthday Boy #2. And Boy #1 too.

    xxoo

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

what I'm talking about above--the letter in RWR

I've cut out bits here and there but the gist is there. I don't want to cut too much because she's a good writer (other than the actual thinking/tolerance part) and it's bad idea to ignore that fact. . . . romance isn't about just any "two people" celebrating "love in its many forms." Organizations such as the Man-Boy Love Association would certainly refer to themselves as celebrating love "two people" (or more) finding love in one of its many forms" . . . while they actively promote pedophilia. Think RWA can't go down that slipper slope? Think again. Under our present definition, we cannot exclude such "love stories" under the category of "romance". We, as a culture, seem to have forgotten how to say "enough is enough," but RWA can--indeed, must--do better than that. . . . And, please, spare us the arguments about "censorship" and "inclusiveness." Preference for "one man,...
Read more

No snark. Bad puppy. No. (Review stuff.)

A two star Amazon review on His American Detective: "Bodice ripper about gay men by a woman." and I'm longing to comment "don't you mean a waistcoat ripper?" God, no. Stop me. The reviews rarely rattle me any longer -- except when I spot a truth in a bad one. When that happens, I actually lose sleep. This means I still care about writing.  Speaking of reviewers and writers: A couple of days ago, a writer said she was tired of getting white ladies writing reviews of her books. She had an excellent point in the long run: her stories are meant for a particular audience and she wants them to resonate with those people and get more reviews from them.  But that first line was just....horribly obnoxious. I say this from my POV of course. Not a white lady who writes reviews -- but as a review grubber.   Anyone who disses any reader (especially ones that give honest reviews) deserves to be cast into the pit of being ignored.   ...
Read more

rambling about selling AA romance

Image
I changed the title. I keep changing the contents because I keep changing my mind. Sue me. Karen is doing a interesting bunch of interviews and discussion about AA Romance at her blog . I keep weighing in, though it's clear to me that I should keep my mouth shut. I was blathering along about how I don't judge by genre, and I look for books by writers I like or that have good reviews when I suddenly realized that I haven't read that many reviews for AA books. hmmm Is that because they're there and I just skip over them? Where are those reviews? Well, well. Could I be a closet racist after all? (I'm always looking for signs. Got to stay on top of this sort of thing.) I know some people see AAs like inspirationals, which has its audience built into its genre**. I can't help it, I see a kind of "keep out" sign with inspies. [edited to remove small rant about inspies that has nothing to do with my point] I see it as a club for Christians and there's no...
Read more