After Big Pants dumps you, what?
That's the question longtime news anchor CNN Daryn Kagan, has been asking since the corpulent radio comedian, Rush Limbaugh dumped her in February. Then CNN, without telling her why, didn't renew her contract after 12 years.
When the going gets tough, they say, the tough gets maudlin.
Kagan, 43, is worrying friends after launching a Web site, DarynKagan.com which is totally dedicated to so-called "happy news."
It's as irony-free as Barney & Friends.
Kagan's site portends to appeal to the "half-full crowd," a cultish new phenomenon that's got sociologists worried.
With videos of heart-warming stories, her site features people or animals who overcome obstacles, physical impairments, or poor grooming to make a difference in the world. Such as the three-legged boxer mix who bravely manages to eat, sleep and wag his tail; a blind, three-fingered filmmaker who makes documentaries in 3-D; a three-breasted woman who sends her breast milk to India; a three-cornered fish who teaches "school" in Appalachia; a one-legged man who competes in national butt-kicking Special Olympics, and an untiring two-legged Palm Beach physician who limits his practice to diseases of the rich.
Kagan reportedly owns two three-legged cats,Tri-pod and I-lean.
"Omigod," say a former CNN co-worker, who asks not to be named, "she's a journalist, she's forsaken cynicism, and she went to Stanford!"
Dr. Edgar "Choch" Manaña, of the University of Alabama has been working with sufferers like Kagan for many years. The disorder is called, "dysfunctional positivism" or "hallmarkian confusion," and is marked by overdone pathos, bathetic overload, fascination or obsession with balloons, and the tendency to wear primary colors, especially yellow.
"They can develop propensities for banjo music and cotton candy; lose their critical abilities, and obsess over pictures of puppies," says Manaña. "Greetings cards often mean more to them than friends and family."
Victims of the disorder have ended up in criminal courts- usually from inappropriate public enthusiasm. "People don't have much patience with the pathologically trite," says Manaña. "Suicides have occurred when inflated expectations, collide with quotidian realities."
Kagan, 43, tried an unsuccessful intervention on Rush for his tragic, isolating flatulence, and was devastated when her good intentions got her thrown out of his life. The tabloids questioned her loyalty. But, she told BlatherWatch, "The answer, my friend, was blowing in the wind."
It was the noxious gastric exudations from her big boyfriend. "My head was turned, alright," she says, but not because of another guy!"
This from BlatherWatch a year ago:
The tabloids are full of an incident in a Manhattan elevator where a Premiere vice president had to be taken to the ER after Limbaugh broke wind on a 44-floor descent. The victim, who suffers from asthma, reportedly had to be given CPR and is considering a lawsuit. Big Pants' farting has been the talk of New York media, and the five or more incidents in the last year, including one in the presence of Lynn Cheney and another in a Black Hawk helicopter with the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, are seen as the basis of rumors of his retirement this year. Because of his gaseous exudations and his on-going drug possession problems in Florida, Limbaugh was disinvited again this year to the State of the Union festivities.
Kagan explains her turn to the consolation of mawkishness “I was at a point," Kagan told AccessAtlanta, "where I was like, ‘OK, I need to decide, does the world stink or is the world a good place?’
After viewing http://darynkagan.com - I spent about 30 minutes looking down off the Aurora bridge - wondering what kind of mess I'd make.
After some introspection, I decided to go home and finish off the rest of my 6-pack and post this instead.
Of course there's always another day. Fair warning to Adobe employees - I don't like Priuses!
Posted by: spambutcher | January 28, 2007 at 01:41 AM
Wouldn't Daryn herself deserve some sort of "hero" or "compassion" recognition just for having been involved with Rush?
BTW, I understand since they have removed his viagra supply he is now know as "Premature" instead of Rush.
Posted by: Liz | January 28, 2007 at 10:11 AM
Good one, Liz.
I didn't know who Kagan was before (except for Michael's and posters previous comments.) I never saw her on Fox but I wonder why they dumped her? She's still attractive . . . no age signs there.
I'm thinking that she loves being on camera and wants to keep doing what she's doing so is doing it the only way she can right now. Geez, I'm sure not a cheerful happy-face myself . . . but I have to give her some credit. She's trying and she seems to be doing a credible and professional job of it. I liked the bee story . . .
Aahhh, what does that say about me?
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 10:47 AM
I watch a lot of CNN and I liked Kagan on the air. It seems as though she has reached some sort of personal epiphany regarding the effect of the media on society.
Sort of like Oprah without the ego.
I was sad to see her go, but could there possibly be any hotter anchor than Tony Harris?
Posted by: Liz | January 28, 2007 at 11:03 AM
Must be a slow news day around here.
Posted by: jb | January 28, 2007 at 11:16 AM
Oh, I just noticed I said fox when I meant cnn . . . sorry. Only get full cable on my school TV. Haven't seen Tony Harris.
Did you like Aaron Brown, Liz?
Agree with you about Oprah and ego . . .
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 11:19 AM
On the mornings that I went to work late I watched her on CNN Newsroom. She seemed to be good at what she did. Could have fun when appropriate and get very serious when that was where the news took us. She had a warm smile and eyes, obviously backed up by a fully funtional brain. Perfecto!!
Hope she shows up some time soon on a national program.
Posted by: chucks | January 28, 2007 at 11:20 AM
Poor Daryn. First a viagra-fueled love affair with Anal Cyster and now this. I'll bet that the screwing she received from CNN was the better of the two.
Posted by: Ted Smith | January 28, 2007 at 11:26 AM
watched? probably leered . . .
I think Hillary has a warm smile and Pelosi's eyes are liquidy warm . . .
I'm sure they're too old. Usually takes age and experience to become a real bitch. Like me - right chucklenuts?
Where you're concerned, I wear it proudly.
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 11:30 AM
Sorry Joanie.
Didn't want this to become a personal thing with you.
I have no problem with a strong woman who can look you in the eyes and tell you what she is really thinking. I have no problem with Pelosi in that regard. May not agree with her on most issues, but never doubt she is saying what she is really thinking. I feel that you are probably the same.
However, I have been arround car salesmen for over thirty years. A long time ago, I lost respect for people who adjust thier possitions for short term gain. That is how I see Sen Clinton.
Posted by: chucks | January 28, 2007 at 11:43 AM
Chucks, I agree with you 100% about Hillary and Im a liberal. When the rest of the Dems were apologizing for being naive about giving Bush the power to go to war, Hillary introduced a bill to prohibit flag burning....
Posted by: sparky | January 28, 2007 at 02:31 PM
So that makes her a bitch, Sparky?
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 02:48 PM
And chucks, isn't that how most politicians operate? No, I don't like it either. I think she's taking direction from Bill and might come across as rather manipulative and tactical, that does not negate her history - much of which has been honorable.
Right now she's a woman trying to be a "man's man" and I think it is a losing strategy. But, a lot of people are disagreeing with me.
I don't like huge generalizations from rightwingers nor from those of us on the left. There was time, Sparky, you said you didn't either.
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 02:54 PM
It is imperative we find someone who is NOT like Lieberman, someone who can crush the nuts of the republicans when they get out of line.
Posted by: coiler | January 28, 2007 at 03:17 PM
Ah, Joanie
I was at a hockey game (of course) I really like Aaron Brown, particularly during 9/11. He was classic.
What was the cause of the big falling out? He wouldn't come back from a golf game to cover the shuttle disaster? They had to bring Miles O'Brien in for the coverage, which was a good call, because he is a licensed pilot.
CNN is the only American news network I get. So I am not familiar with what goes on on Fox.
My husband and I leave for a week long cruise next Friday. My reading, Barack Obama's 2 books.
BTW, my nephew has arrived safely in Iraq (last week). I have mailed him one "care" package. But the bastards at Canada Post give no breaks to military shipments. I have also "adopted" a Canadian woman serving in Afghanistan. I mailed them each an 8 1/2 by 14 bubble envelope with snacks and toiletries. Cost me $25.00 each. Canada Post should be ashamed of themselves. I understand that the U.S. Postal service has a special package rate for military personnel overseas.
Posted by: Liz | January 28, 2007 at 03:33 PM
Liz, Re: Aaron - I really like him, too. He used to be local anchor in Seattle and I was one of his biggest fans. He could be so irreverent! One of a kind!
You have a heart that cares, Liz. How did you find your Canadian adoptee? Is there a program that ties citizens to soldiers or is she someone you knew before-hand province-side?
Cruise to where? I have never been on one but am considering it. Friends tell me a cruise is a great way to unwind. That sounds awfully good to a teacher in the middle of winter!
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 03:49 PM
Joanie,
You must know that the Clinton administration had the same intel for eight years that the Bush admin had for the year before we got into this war. She had to have been previe to the info Pres. Clinton received. You know that she and Bill discussed it as well. She voted for the war because, based on the intel available, it was the best course of action at the time.
Now that the war sucks in the minds of most Americans, she is back pedaling. A few of us still believe that the war was and is right, but that is an arguement for another day.
R or D does not matter. Vote on convictions, campaign on you convictions and let us decide based on the truth. I am tired of politicos acting like 1975 Cal Worthington used car salesmen. You know the type "I'll stand on YOUR head to make a deal.
I believe that is what Gregoire did. And she got elected and is doing exactly what she said she would do. I still do not agree with her on most issues, but she is honest.
Posted by: chucks | January 28, 2007 at 04:02 PM
Coiler, is there another Democrat like Lieberman? Geez, I hope not!
I was not a supporter of Obama until I learned more about his Harvard days. I think he's tough underneath. I am growing more and more fond of him . . .
From what I can ascertain, he's got a consistent record on the war - speaking out against it even before becoming a Senator and before the US went into Iraq.
He also voted against the bankruptcy bill . . . that's a big one in my book.
I'll bet there's a lot of disciplined energy, erudition, ability to strategize, compassion and ambition in that tough Harvard grad! I'm so ready for a smart president again!
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 04:09 PM
chucks: She voted for the war because, based on the intel available, it was the best course of action at the time.
No, it wasn't. She was wrong then and is still wrong. At least she has the courage to stand behind her decision . . . she's not backtracking. You want her to backtrack? Be a flip-flopper? She is saying he didn't have a plan. Well, did he? The way I read it, she is exactly the kind of person you should like given your advocacy of this whole mess. She's with you . . . so what's the gripe?
And, I still don't see how that makes her a "bitch?"
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 04:18 PM
As for Gregoire, she's already being accused of not sticking to campaign promises regarding taxes . . . so, again, your argument seem kind of inconsistent to me.
As for used car salesmen, all politicians have to sell themselves. I think you have a problem with her sort of woman-ness. Sorry, so far you haven't given me anything on which to think differently. So, you don't like her style. Say it if that's all there is to it. C'est la vie.
BTW, not only was I against the war from the very onset of any talk about war - because, yes, there was lots of information supporting no war - but, I, too, thought Bush would totally mess it up. He had no expertise on Iraq himself, didn't see the point of getting any, and fired anybody and everybody who tried to give him some.
Still don't understand what you're basing you hate of Clinton on?
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 04:27 PM
Joanie
Does your email link work?
It's probably better to take the holiday discussion off the board. I don't imagine most of these hardasses ever take one.
If your link doesn't work, click on my name, it's my "spammer" hotmail account and I will reply from my legit account.
Posted by: Liz | January 28, 2007 at 04:40 PM
no no no no no joanie!...chuck's "bitch" comment was way up there. I was agreeing with him that she changes her tune with the way the wind is blowing. She has studiously refused to admit she made a mistake in voting to give Bush the powers that allowed him to start the war, and I just heard her on the radio yelling at Bush that he has to get us out of this war!!!!!!!!!!....It just is disingenuous to me. She is too much of a package deal...with all her money she has dozens and dozens of handlers. I want someone who at least gives me an illusion of being closer to the people and not be President By Corporation.
The bitch comment is, unfortunately, all too common when referring to women who have very strong opinions. I tend to assign the "bitch" title to attitude and delivery rather than the substance. I dont think Hillary is a bitch-- but Mary Matalin is a bitch! heh....and in the spirit of fairness, we refer to men with the same demeanor as "bastards"....
Posted by: sparky | January 28, 2007 at 05:07 PM
sparky wrote When the rest of the Dems were apologizing for being naive about giving Bush the power to go to war, Hillary introduced a bill to prohibit flag burning.... then joanie wrote So that makes her a bitch, Sparky?
And I write:
Yep. Bills to prohibit flag-burning are a colossal waste of time and unconstitutional.
Posted by: lukobe | January 28, 2007 at 05:24 PM
President by corporation - good one - and I agree.
I haven't seen "bastard" on this blog - probably has been here, but I haven't seen it. We need to quit accepting the "bitch" title when it appears. I'm sick to death of it.
Mary Matelin - don't like her much anymore either. Also, I think Mona Charon(?) and Coulter would qualify . . . but, it gets so abused and overused, and has such a general meaning for guys who don't like women, that I will take it on every time I hear it.
Not sure, though, that I totally agree about Hillary. See my post above about her . . . she's playing the game invented by the guys.
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 05:29 PM
So the definition of a bitch is someone who introduces a bill about flag burning?
Or is it the "someone who introduces a bill you don't like?"
Do some thinking, L, and post something beyond obvious please.
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 05:31 PM
OK Joanie
I will quit using the B word an any post I do about any woman. Do not like her. But not the word any more. We all have much better issues to spar over.
I don't much like Hitlary when I read it on other blogs as much as you do not like b. Hitler is a name reserved for the evil bastard in history and for no others.
Gotta go, the grand daughter is hungry and wants me to build lasagne. Much too much work, but when she says grampas lasagne is the best in the world, I must cave.
You are correct about me and strong women. The 9 year old controls my life.
Posted by: chucks | January 28, 2007 at 05:50 PM
Thanks, chucks. Appreciate that sensitivity. Also, haven't read the "Hitlary" thing.
Thanks, too, for doing your part in creating new generations of strong women! :)
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 05:55 PM
One more thing about Hilary refusing to say she was wrong . . . if she doesn't believe she was wrong, why should she say it? Isn't that being disingenuous? As soon as she says that, she becomes a "flip-flopper."
Her husband and Albright both thought it was right at the time so why deny it now?
To me, she's the most authentic. Which is one reason I don't like her much. She should never have been for the war but she's being honest in continuing to admit she was and still thinks she was right at the time.
What a bunch of mealy-mouthed people - not Hillary - the others who with 20/20 hindsight are saying they should have known better. They should have but they didn't.
I like Edwards but he is guilty as well. Nice of him to "change his mind later."
Kucinich and Obama on record as against going in from the beginning. Kucinich will never be elected; Obama might be.
But, I don't hate Hillary. She has always been true to herself (I think) and she is respected by the people she represents and she is empathetic to issues with which I agree: increasing veterans benefits; education; health care . . . social issues are pretty high on her agenda. Can't hold that against her.
But, she is Bill on economic issues. That's pretty much where I part ways with her.
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 06:05 PM
wow
i stay away and come back to find myself agreeing with joanie.
the use of 'Bitch' is really aimed at putting a woman on the defensive and aimed at her gender. not quite at the same level as the 'N' word perhaps, but it has a similar impact.
rather than aim a word at their gender or their race, aim it at their conduct. for example, i would never call snarky a bitch. instead, i find her intellectually dishonest at times but that goes to conduct not gender.
i also agree with not using the hitler term as in 'hitlery' or calling bush a nazi. those are specific terms that should be reserved for the evil doers who so rightly earned them.
Posted by: PugetSound | January 28, 2007 at 06:23 PM
Who are you PS?
You have said here more precisely and more concisely that which I was trying to say. Well done.
Please note that I have never called Bush a "Hitler" but I have deemed the actions of his administration "fascist."
I think this is your best piece of writing. You've earned an A.
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 07:40 PM
I don't agree with your characterization of Sparky.
Why, PutS, did you put my email in as your email? Just curious...
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 07:56 PM
Bushler has more than earned the nazi moniker, the whole world is joing us in smashing the nuts of the GOP nazi party
Posted by: coiler | January 28, 2007 at 07:59 PM
"I don't agree with your characterization of Sparky.
Why, PutS, did you put my email in as your email? Just curious..."
i've never checked your email address. i just put in the first fake one that came to mind. no trickery intended as my first initial starts with j so that's what i used.
in regards to snarky, she stated that randi rhodes didn't make those bush assassination joke but once. i've listened to randi rhodes and i knew that wasn't true. so in response i linked to an mp3 that clearly gave another example. if snarky was honest snarky would have said, 'whoops, i stand corrected.'
you know, in the spirit of being intellectually honest.
instead she came up with something called 'troll stew.'
or her trashing of the radio equilizer when he broke the stories on the demise of air america. snarky called brian maloney the 'radio fertilizer.'
when it became self evident i called snarky on it and asked who was full of fertilizer now. if your honest, you own up.
for example, you once got the 'quiet american' and 'the ugly american' books mixed up. i pointed it out and you owned up to it. i respect that.
Posted by: pugetsound | January 28, 2007 at 08:30 PM
The Randi Rhodes story is old and even FAUX news gave up on it a long time ago, ok? Anyone who is foolish enough to continue to support Bushler needs help, anyway, ya know?
Posted by: coiler | January 28, 2007 at 08:58 PM
Another example of liberals eating their own.
Joanie writes:
"I don't like huge generalizations from rightwingers nor from those of us on the left. There was time, Sparky, you said you didn't either."
Posted by: Steve | January 28, 2007 at 09:21 PM
"The Randi Rhodes story is old and even FAUX news gave up on it a long time ago, ok? Anyone who is foolish enough to continue to support Bushler needs help, anyway, ya know?"
ah coiler, missing the point of the post which was about past history hence it was by definition old.
but hey, judging by your posts you are consistent. now why don't you go ask mom if she'll let you have some of her el marko pens so you can get back to work on those 'bush=hitler' signs that your so very very proud of.
Posted by: pugetsound | January 28, 2007 at 09:23 PM
"Hillary of Hope"
Posted by: Steve | January 28, 2007 at 09:24 PM
sniff, sniff... Steve/PuTs
Posted by: coiler | January 28, 2007 at 09:33 PM
PutS: you once got the 'quiet american' and 'the ugly american' books mixed up. i pointed it out and you owned up to it. i respect that.
You are mixing me up with somebody else. Or else find that post and link it.
I never mixed up the two books. The only Quiet American I know is the movie.
This is one you'll have to prove to me, PutS.
Coiler . . . someone else broached the possibility that PutS and Steve are the same. Can it be?
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 09:58 PM
Also, "The Quiet Man" - if I remember correctly which was a John Wayne/John Ford movie. And also one I would never confuse with The Ugly American.
Posted by: joanie | January 28, 2007 at 10:08 PM
Go Styble Go to hell!
Chronic diarrhea for Mercifurious is Dead!
Posted by: Mercifurious is Dead | January 28, 2007 at 10:13 PM