Weekend

I noticed in the SI post I said "liteary" when I meant of course, literary, and if anyone actually read this site and happened to disagree with some of my core beliefs, they'd think it made me out to be fraud, should I have had enough visibility to be fraud. This brings me to the weekend. Is it completely pointless to think of someone as a fraud if they don't have their own cable news talkshow, that is, someone who is not highly visible to others (okay, visible to a very small fraction of the American population period), and someone who is not obviously a fraud? That question has one error involving the phrase "not obviously" but that doesn't matter since the answer - embrassingly unbeknownst to me before say, now - is of course it's completely pointless. The hardest part of growing up is trying to forget my delusions of grandeur and completely meaningless rivalries. If only I were a Bush, then I could keep these meaningless rivalries and pass it off as "political synergy." Alas.