Sound Politics: Mrs. Shark replies to the liar

October 22, 2006

Mrs. Shark replies to the liar

A couple of weeks ago I busted Blatherwatch blogger Michael Hood as a serial liar. Among Hood's sillier lies was that a "Republican sugar-daddy" is paying me to write this blog. Hood replied here that his lies are okay because we're friends!

sharing that coffee, having eye-contact, and meeting each other's SO's...

(We did meet for coffee once and my wife and I chatted with Hood and his companion at a cocktail party recently). Mrs. Shark to Hood:

Dear Liar,

Stefan and I are married. I am his wife, not his "SO". I think it is telling that you say, even after having met me, that Stefan has no visible means of support -- thus your ridiculous claim that he must have a Republican "sugar daddy." If you knew a married woman who blogged daily for her hobby, would you not assume that her husband was the primary breadwinner? Why do you not assume that Stefan's wife might be able to contribute substantially to his support? Although you probably profess to be a diversity-loving liberal, perhaps you are also prejudiced against my earning capacity simply because I am an Asian female? The truth is, Stefan is not only smart and fortunate, but he also married well.

I married up. And if Mrs. Shark were blogging instead of working, she'd be twice the hell-raiser that I could even hope to be.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at October 22, 2006 09:18 AM | Email This

Comments

1. Stefan--
You are very fortunate to be married to a woman who has the courage to call Liar Michael Hood by his well-earned monikor....LIAR.
Michael Hood is a drifter who cannot commit to anything or anyone. He gets caught up in feelings of the moment...rather than COMMITMENT and well-thoughtout PRINCIPLES.

Mrs. Shark...
It would be very interesting to all of us Right-thinking people to hear from YOU! Perhaps a weekly MRS. SHARK thread???
That's something LIAR MICHAEL and LIAR KLOWNSTEIN cannot provide their readers as they are waaaaaaaay too dysfunctional to have a loving & committed relationship like you & Stefan.
Frankly, I think both of those morons are gay....or at least members of the QUESTIONING KOMMUNITY!

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 22, 2006 09:28 AM

2. Way to go Mrs. Shark! I link Mr. Cynical's idea of a weekly Mrs. Shark thread.

Posted by: TrueSoldier on October 22, 2006 10:13 AM

3. SHould be "like"

Posted by: TrueSoldier on October 22, 2006 10:14 AM

4. I also think it would be great to hear more from Mrs. Shark. You go, Sharkess!

Posted by: katomar on October 22, 2006 10:16 AM

5. I Like it, call the LIAR out!

A Mrs. Shark thread to "Jazz things up round here" would be good!

Posted by: SP Fan on October 22, 2006 10:48 AM

6. So, if Mr. Sharansky has a wife, but she is not his Significant Other, who is then?

I guess he is at least showing good Republican morals by having a mistress, or, as seems more fashionable, a young boy that he considers more significant.

Posted by: JDB on October 22, 2006 11:49 AM

7. Another vote for more from Mrs. Shark. :-]

Posted by: Methow Ken on October 22, 2006 11:50 AM

8. Mrs. Shark does have a way with words...brevity, concise and right on the money.
Being the spouse of a Blogger Extraordinaire like Stefan cannot be easy. There is great sacrifice on her part I am certain.
Thank you Mrs. Shark. I know Stefan would not be doing this if you did not approve.
Your future comments would be greatly appreciated.
PS--
I too believe that Michael Hood and David Whatshisname are social psychopaths..driven by closet feelings they dream up in their loneliness. It's nice to know Stefan has a strong wife who can provide stability and support his efforts. These LONELY LEFTISTS are probably doing this Blog thing in a desperate last gasp to get laid. How unfulled they are!

Posted by: dude on October 22, 2006 11:51 AM

9. Mrs. Shark does have a way with words...brevity, concise and right on the money.
Being the spouse of a Blogger Extraordinaire like Stefan cannot be easy. There is great sacrifice on her part I am certain.
Thank you Mrs. Shark. I know Stefan would not be doing this if you did not approve.
Your future comments would be greatly appreciated.
PS--
I too believe that Michael Hood and David Whatshisname are social psychopaths..driven by closet feelings they dream up in their loneliness. It's nice to know Stefan has a strong wife who can provide stability and support his efforts. These LONELY LEFTISTS are probably doing this Blog thing in a desperate last gasp to get laid. How unfulfilled they are!

Posted by: dude on October 22, 2006 11:52 AM

10. I wonder if there's a reason why Hood is not married? I can't imagine anyone who would commit to such a liar.

And frankly, I'd delete comment #6. That's the kind of garbage that is tolerated at HA, but should no be tolerated here.

Posted by: Jeff B. on October 22, 2006 11:55 AM

11. I guess he is at least showing good Republican morals by having a mistress, or, as seems more fashionable, a young boy that he considers more significant.

Again, some people simply need their heads knocked.

Posted by: jimg on October 22, 2006 12:08 PM

12. I'm proud of her being so proud of you! That's what great marrisges are made of.

Hat's off to both of you!

Posted by: GS on October 22, 2006 12:28 PM

13. JDB, you are a carbuncle on the ass of humanity. It's too bad they haven't developed antibiotics for the likes of you.

Posted by: ERNurse on October 22, 2006 02:04 PM

14. Mrs. Shark is one of my wife's best friends, and there are many great reasons for that. She served as the Maid of Honor at our wedding. She's a great mom as well, with two great kids. The whole family is really smart. My best to all of you!
If only they would begin endorsing limited government, fiscally responsible candidates like Libertarians... :)

Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on October 22, 2006 02:31 PM

15. Three cheers for Mrs. Shark!

And btw, she is a threat to the Hoods of this world not necessarily for being an "asian female", but an asian female who likely doesn't vote with the nutroots.

Posted by: Michele on October 22, 2006 02:41 PM

16. JDB, to call a spouse a Significant Other is to demean the spouse. If one has a husband or wife, they have MORE than just a "SO" -- "SO" IMHO is used in today's lack of commitment world where you want to consider the person more than a girlfriend/boyfriend but don't want to commit to a marriage. (Or for those trying to be politically correct who do not know the status of those they are talking to. The same was "Ms." has replaced "Miss" and "Mrs." much to my chagrin!)

Posted by: My Boaz's Ruth on October 22, 2006 03:20 PM

17. What M.B.'s R. said!

Posted by: Me on October 22, 2006 03:54 PM

18. So, if Mr. Sharansky has a wife, but she is not his Significant Other, who is then?

I guess he is at least showing good Republican morals by having a mistress, or, as seems more fashionable, a young boy that he considers more significant.

I know you're a lib, so by definition you're intellectually inbred...let me pull out my lib-conservative/conservative-lib dictionary for you.

Wife=legal spouse, the person you've committed to sharing your life with, for better or worse.

SO=shack up, f@#k buddy...not Mr/Mrs Right, but Mr/Mrs Right NOW...

Wife=if you say that's my wife, no explanation is needed.

SO=usually followed by excuses...

So...people who are married don't have significant others.

Posted by: South County on October 22, 2006 04:24 PM

19. It doesn't surprise me a bit that Jerry Branson has a problem with marriage.
After all, trolls are unisex.
Right Jerry?

Posted by: aaaaargh on October 22, 2006 04:43 PM

20. I second that-

More blogging from Mrs Shark.

Posted by: Andy on October 22, 2006 05:36 PM

21. I like most Mrs. Shark's biting wit, but the "wife not SO" jab falls far short. The term "SO" was invented precisely to encompass both wives and girlfriends (and husbands and boyfriends). The word makes it much easier to compose party invitations, unless you are too uptight to invite unmarried couples to your dinner party. Cultural conservatives may not appreciate that, for some purposes, our culture treats the fleeting bonds of marriage the same as more hallowed bonds, but it does. Trying to pretend that the word is wrong looks either foolish or juvenile.

Posted by: David Wright on October 22, 2006 06:59 PM

22.
Personally, I think Mrs. Shark ought to kick Michael Hood's sorry ass. Imagine his dilemma if she shows up at his door! Hood would probably start crying and beg for mercy ala the French!

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 22, 2006 07:08 PM

23. Here is Michael Hood's own biography from his blatherwatch Blog:

My dad was an elected official and growing up, politics was daily fare, not unlike the tuna-noodle hot dish we were force-fed. We didn't get a TV until late childhood because my parents thought it was a crazy fad that would go away.

We listened to the radio.

I was an English major and after college my career path took me directly into the restaurant business as a world-traveling chef and eventually a restaurateur. I gave it up to become a writer in 1990.
I was once a Town Councilman in LaConner, WA but defeated in an election by a man who didn't wash his hair. The Republic is the better for it--I'm too grumpy and elitist to be a politician, a profession I admire and respect.

I've done comedy and background on NPR for Garrison Keillor's 'A Prairie Home Companion;' been a commentator for 'All Thing's Considered' since 1994. I'm the Northwest stringer for the French news wire, Agence France-Presse. I've been the restaurant critic and weekly dining columnist on the Seattle Post Intelligencer.

Michael....your qualifications to speak on virtually any topic that is important is...well, quite unimpressive and mediocre!
In other words...you are a LOOOOOOOOOOSER dude!

Posted by: dude on October 22, 2006 07:18 PM

24. jdb\biteme\halfwit, the blowjob king, oozes out of the sewer to make another appearance. Polish any good knobs lately jdb\biteme\halfwit?

What's his name, blowjob king?

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 22, 2006 07:34 PM

25. David: The awkwardness about invitations to those about whom you don't know marital status and so forth was settled long, long ago by simply using the invitee's name with "and guest". Where've you been?

Posted by: katomar on October 22, 2006 08:02 PM

26. This post reminds me of a story from college in the late 80s. The hippie that sat in front of my in physics was super politically correct and would often correct people when they said something that implied a scientist was male. One day the Prof. was telling a riddle about a man and his son were in a car crash and they were taken to the hospital but the Dr. said I can not operate on this boy as he is my son. Mr. Hippie was about the only one in the class unable to figure out the Dr. was the boy's mom.

Posted by: Steve on October 22, 2006 08:43 PM

27. Steve, nice, very succinct. The joke's on them!

Posted by: Jeff B. on October 22, 2006 09:34 PM

28. FYI - "Significant Other" started in the early to mid 1970's when living together without being married was becoming the new thing to do. When a man and woman (not married) were living together, they would introduce the other as "my significant other" to specifically indicate that they were NOT married. To refer to someone's spouse as "Significan Other" is not only incorrect it is also ignorant and insulting. Just an FYI. :)

Posted by: Washington Voter on October 23, 2006 11:52 AM

29. Michael Hood has been a wonderful husband/SO to many and a fabulous father as well. His record as a daughter and mother is unimpeachable! We are hoping you will celebrate our significant-othering by donating to Blatherwatch.

Posted by: FREMONT on October 23, 2006 02:59 PM

30. "His record as a daughter and mother is unimpeachable!"

So you're saying he bats for both teams?

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 23, 2006 09:13 PM

31. Washington Voter @ 28:

Among my acquantainces, spouses count as "significant others", and both the urban dictionary ("Partner in a relationship; mate or spouse; boyfriend or girlfriend; companion") and Merrian-Webster ("a person who is important to one's well-being; especially : a spouse or one in a similar relationship") back me up on this usage.

Now it may be that in your generation, or your circle of acquantainces, another usage was or is common. But to go so far as to claim that it is "ignorant and insulting" to refer to a spouse and as SO is more indicative of someone looking for an excuse to get indignant than someone who has a genuine quibble about a definition.

Posted by: David Wright on October 24, 2006 01:31 AM

32. ?So you're saying he bats for both teams?" Mr. Hood, paradigmatic sportsman that he is, bats for whichever team offers him the most billions of dollars...(as long as the team colors are blue and/or green)!

Posted by: FREMONT on October 24, 2006 09:21 AM

33. DW @ 31:

Did you not notice the "FYI" at the beginning of my comment? How about at the end of the comment with the smiley face? It was apparent that some commenters were either not aware or had forgotten how the term "Significant Other" came to be used. I was simply informing them how the phrase started. I used the word "ignorant" - the true meaning - to signify "not knowing" as in "the commenters were ignorant of the origins of the phrase". (I didn't get the memo that the definition had changed - must have missed that meeting.) It was obvious to me that there was a miscommunication and commenters were not understanding how someone could be insulted. I was just letting them know how it could happen...just for anyone that was interested in knowing (i.e. FYI). I have no problem understanding how someone could be insulted by the use of "SO" vs. spouse. It seems to me that Mrs. Shark was insulted because she has the same definition I do regarding "Significant Other" since she made that distinction. Apparently, she didn't get the memo either!

Posted by: Washington Voter on October 24, 2006 03:41 PM