Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Fisher Out. Next Victim.

Well, it's been swell, folks. My stint as Non-Achen Blogman ends this evening. To all of you, even the Betcha can't eat just one M&M crowd, thanks for sticking with me and thanks for the comments and the kindness you've shown me. Mr. Joel's fears that you might treat me as a class treats its sub were all for naught. It's been fun enough that I'd happily come back for more, should he and you ever want me to darken these pages again.

In the meantime, those of you who like this stuff (and those who enjoy shouting back, ideally in a clever fashion -- my friend Charlie Varon calls our work the product of the American Cleverness Industry), I invite you to my weekly chat show here on the big web site: Potomac Confidential happens Thursdays at noon, so please join me.

And my column is both here and in the paper product on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sundays (the Sunday edition alternates between Metro and Sunday Arts, where it's called What You Don't Know About Radio).

Thanks again. Sydney Trent and Tom Shroder will take you the rest of the way through your Joel-less week and His Porchness returns next week for more fun and games. Onward! Excelsior!

-- Marc Fisher

By Joel Achenbach  |  July 6, 2005; 8:39 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Supreme Knowledge
Next: The New Sucker

Comments

Ha! "His Porchness." I'm lovin' it! As far as I'm concerned you're welcome back anytime.

Posted by: Sara | July 6, 2005 10:28 PM | Report abuse

I was starting to get use to you marc. But please come back again as a guest blogger.

Posted by: fdg31 | July 6, 2005 10:36 PM | Report abuse

I was starting to winder if Fisher actually has a real job, what with the volume of postings. But nice work, good luck back in reality-land.

Posted by: PJ | July 7, 2005 1:29 AM | Report abuse

Thanks again for standing in, Marc.

Tomfan must be absolutely giddy waiting for "Tom...Unchained!" on this blog.

bc

Posted by: bc | July 7, 2005 9:06 AM | Report abuse

Blogging is an odd gavotte, betwixt the bloggers and those whom have been blogged. Mr. Fisher has lead the dance quite nicely in JA's absence.

Posted by: Word Smith | July 7, 2005 9:10 AM | Report abuse

bc: You're right, but I'm going to do my best to keep a low profile. I don't want to creep the guy out.

Posted by: Tom fan | July 7, 2005 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Thanks for filling in, Marc...speaking as a former substitute teacher, I think you've probably had a pretty nice time in Joel's blog this week! I've enjoyed reading your work!

Posted by: Erica Snipes | July 7, 2005 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Hate to break it to you, Marc, but some students make fun of the sub without the sub ever realizing it. Shocking, I know. Not that it would happen to you, of course...

But if you have the moxy to say "Excelsior!" - with all the implications of MARVELness it carries - then you are absolutely welcome to the blog anytime.

Posted by: Kane | July 7, 2005 10:33 AM | Report abuse

I think Marc's extreme blogging output spoiled us. Now I'm impatient as I wait for the "next victim" as he puts it.

Posted by: Sara | July 7, 2005 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Maybe he or she is holding out on us until we produce our quota of comments for Marc's last entry. Nine isn't/aren't enough; we need at least 15.

Posted by: Achenfan | July 7, 2005 10:43 AM | Report abuse

i think marc may have actually risen the blog bar on joel just a little bit - achenbach's gonna have to start paying more attention to use when he returns. Definitly good to have you, and I hope the next guest blogger is as interesting.

Posted by: LP | July 7, 2005 10:45 AM | Report abuse

i mean paying attention to "us" i, apparently don't pay enough attention to my spelling

Posted by: LP | July 7, 2005 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Ah shoot, we'll miss you! And not just because you spoiled us rotten with the oh-so-frequent bloggings.

Although that might be a lot of it.

Posted by: toady | July 7, 2005 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Thanks Marc! Shoot, I'm getting just a little bit misty eyed.

Posted by: Baggins | July 7, 2005 10:58 AM | Report abuse

K. We have 15 comments. Let the blogging begin.

Posted by: Sara | July 7, 2005 11:04 AM | Report abuse

So, who's sydney trent? forgive my ignorance on this one - but i wanna be prepared and all.

Posted by: LP | July 7, 2005 11:14 AM | Report abuse

I think Sydney is Joel's OTHER editor.

Posted by: Tom fan | July 7, 2005 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Here is the intel on Sydney Trent:

On April 23, 1951, in Farmville, Va., 16-year-old Barbara Rose Johns took a courageous stand against segregation. In doing so, she helped change a nation and define a family.

Sydney Trent, whose article "Stand and Deliver" appeared in yesterday's Washington Post Magazine, is Barbara Johns's goddaughter.

Sydney Trent is the Post Magazine's Deputy Editor, apparently, or at least was in April 2004 when she wrote the article.

Posted by: Cubedweller | July 7, 2005 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Marc--I want to thank the Academy. My editor for all those nice words. Achenbach for all your support and one cell phone call. My computer for not letting me down. Thanks typepad for hosting this blog. And to the 15 thanks for being so nice M&Ms

Posted by: fdg31 | July 7, 2005 11:43 AM | Report abuse

ahhh - thanks for the info - i feel better -

Posted by: LP | July 7, 2005 11:52 AM | Report abuse

Okay, now we've gone to lunch, we've been patient. Still no sign of today's sub--it is crossing my mind that it's time to start writing dirty words on the blackboard, but then I remember, I'm not that kid; I'm good--this is how I survived 12 years of public school, an active inner life, no acting out.

Posted by: kbertocci | July 7, 2005 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Maybe you should embrace the inner repressed child, kbertocci. I might join you. Even though I'm not that kid, either.

Posted by: Sara | July 7, 2005 1:16 PM | Report abuse

OK, I'm a little slow, but I just caught up with the news about the London tube bombings. Probably why the blog has gone dark . . .

Posted by: Achenfan | July 7, 2005 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Whats with emailing a comment? No fun.

Posted by: nomes | July 7, 2005 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Looks like we have a runaway blog.

Posted by: jw | July 7, 2005 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Apparently, nobody showed Sydney how to do this--maybe they figured, Joel does it, how hard can it be. But it took Joel a few tries before he figured out how to turn on the comments feature, if I remember correctly.

Posted by: kbertocci | July 7, 2005 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Hmmm - I feel like I should have better things to do than wait around for the blog to work okay again.

Alas, I really don't have anything better to do. Maybe someone should email sydney and let her know we're waiting for her here?

Posted by: LP | July 7, 2005 1:54 PM | Report abuse

E-mail a comment? That's not very fun. Perhaps we should just start commenting on that blog on this blog.

Posted by: Sara | July 7, 2005 2:31 PM | Report abuse

good idea, sara.

sydney, please enable comments! we have tons of snarky, witty and pithy points to brighten your day.

as far as the metro goes, i think the numerous problems with people being dragged down the platforms outside cars or trains derailing, are much more serious threats than a terrorist attack. remember when they removed all the trash buckets because of "terrorists"? and how dirty the stations got immediately afterwards? i'd rather have a clean metro than a super-secure one any day. just ask london residents about their camera-on-every-corner system.

Posted by: edward | July 7, 2005 2:44 PM | Report abuse

good idea, sara.

sydney, please enable comments! we have tons of snarky, witty and pithy points to brighten your day.

as far as the metro goes, i think the numerous problems with people being dragged down the platforms outside cars or trains derailing, are much more serious threats than a terrorist attack. remember when they removed all the trash buckets because of "terrorists"? and how dirty the stations got immediately afterwards? i'd rather have a clean metro than a super-secure one any day. just ask london residents about their camera-on-every-corner system.

Posted by: edward | July 7, 2005 2:52 PM | Report abuse

and sometimes, sydney, if you're lucky, we'll post our comments twice. it's double the fun!

Posted by: edward | July 7, 2005 2:57 PM | Report abuse

They took the trash cans away to deflect terrorism in the metro? Interesting. Obviously, whomever is in charge down there does not subscribe to the Broken Windows Theory- that those same trash cans can themselves deflect the bad guys. Makes tons of sense, I know. I guess about as much sense as taking them away in the first place.....

Posted by: LP | July 7, 2005 3:11 PM | Report abuse

They took the trash cans away because they weren't bomb-proof. The new ones are, or so they say.

Posted by: jw | July 7, 2005 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Bomb proof trash cans? what will they think of next....

Posted by: LP | July 7, 2005 3:33 PM | Report abuse

So if a bomb went off outside of them, those would survive and everything else would go? Portable bomb shelters. Although I realize they're probably meant to contain a blast from inside the can.

Posted by: Sara | July 7, 2005 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Well, bomb-RESISTANT, more like. Kind of like how my watch is water resistant. It's ok in the pool, but not at 100m. I leave the analogy open to all those who got 800's on the SATs.

Posted by: jw | July 7, 2005 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Sara: you never cease to amaze! That premise is funnier and more topical than 99% of the sketches on SNL this last season.

Posted by: jw | July 7, 2005 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Homeland Security: Protecting Our Trash From Terrorists since 9/11/01....

Makes me feel safer, knowing my crumpled tissues and old fruit rinds will never fall into enemy hands....

Posted by: LP | July 7, 2005 3:50 PM | Report abuse

I'd curtsy, but I don't know how to do it very well and I always end up shaking like a leaf in a hurricane and ultimately looking like I should have gotten 800 on the SATs.

Posted by: Sara | July 7, 2005 3:55 PM | Report abuse

I meant just the verbal. For the analogies. What's a perfect score now with the new test, anyway?

Posted by: jw | July 7, 2005 4:03 PM | Report abuse

I could see a city carelessly drafting the specifications on a contract for trash cans, and the contractor delivering cans that will survive a blast rather than contain a blast. This may have already happened. I'm not saying either way.

Posted by: jw | July 7, 2005 4:05 PM | Report abuse

I meant overall.

And I have no idea, I took the ACTs. And on that test, 36 is perfect.

Posted by: Sara | July 7, 2005 4:05 PM | Report abuse

I work for City government. In engineering. Those specs could have come through my hands.

Posted by: Sara | July 7, 2005 4:11 PM | Report abuse

36 is not a very formidable number. Although I have always been partial to it.

Posted by: jw | July 7, 2005 4:12 PM | Report abuse

I personally like 54. I don't know why. And 9354. I think it flows when you say it. No one agrees with me though. I think I just am better at speaking than most, and this is why I am able to make it flow.

Posted by: Sara | July 7, 2005 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Now, now, LP, don't go mocking Homeland Security! I mocked the TSA agents and it got me quite a lot of flak earlier. Or is it okay to mock the faceless agency but not the agents themselves? Actually, what if no one decided to become a TSA agent because the whole way the system functions is so random and ineffective? What if none of the positions could be filled? I mean, don't the actual agents share some of the blame for merely accepting the job to begin with?

Posted by: Cubedweller | July 7, 2005 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Doth I mock? Methinks naught. Protecting our empty evian bottles and discarded apple cores is the noblest of noble occupations. Where do I sign up?

Posted by: LP | July 7, 2005 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Too late LP. You've revealed your keen sense of humor, so you obviously are disqualified.

Posted by: Cubedweller | July 7, 2005 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Dear Joel,

I didn't bother to read your entire column because, because, because, because, b e c a u s e, because of the horrible things it does! To my mindvironment that is. See, I am a mono-seasonalist, see? That means I wish I lived in Hawaii but I don't because unlike 99.9% of Americans, I suck at business and I am even worse when it comes to investing. I think this must be what it feels like to be a radical Islamist living in the midst of a liberal capitolist democracy only my weapon of choice is an air conditioner instead of a IED. I see that you have monoseasonalist idealogical leanings too and I am telling you to GET OUT NOW before you become lost in the swampy ideology (aka: wistful feelings of intense resentment against invisible stuff you can't do nothin ' bout.) of radical monoseasonalism. Maybe I should have read more of your column after all, but what the heck, its too late now, eh? Maybe Congress should regulate laptops or interent access or something.

Aloha Baby,
Moi Moi

Posted by: Moi Moi | July 15, 2005 2:06 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company