So by now, you have probably read the article about who I am. I figured I should at least say something before I fold up shop here at the blog. There’s been a lot of speculation about my identity and motives for a while, so I should set some of it straight.

First of all, I wanted to address the whole issue of anonymity. I can completely understand people who are skeptical of writers who write with pseudonyms. They shouldn’t have to use a fake name if they didn’t have anything to hide, right?

It killed me all along not to be able to use my own name – although when I started this thing, I honestly never thought anyone would read it and it wouldn’t even matter. I just started doing it to make myself and a couple of friends laugh. I never expected it to get the attention it did. I can see where people in the capitol would be anxious if a staffer was somehow dishing out gossip or inside secrets, but I never did that. I was just a guy with opinions, and I shared them – hopefully in a way that entertained on occasion.

If people are looking for insider dirt or a “look at me, I work in the Capitol because I can name some Assembly members” attitude, those blogs exist. I wanted to be more than that, because I thought I could actually shed some light on some issues, rather than just taking shots. When I did criticize someone, I always provided substantiation in the form of a link or citation. I always operated on the assumption that I could be outed the very next day, and that I should be proud of what I posted. My position on some of the people I criticized has even shifted, in some cases.

Secondly, people are asking me whether all the stuff on the site is true. Sadly, yes. I never did mention my son, as that would make it so completely obvious who I was. But as you can see, I briefly retired during the period he was born, just to have some time off to get ready. The stress from being chased down by reporters didn’t help, either.

Finally, I wanted to thank all the people that knew who I was and kept it to themselves. You are all truly great friends, and provided me with a lot of feedback, information, and criticism. I especially want to thank the people who kept being accused of being me, who held strong and didn’t give it up. I also want to apologize to the people to whom I had to deny it was me. I hope you all understand. Your check is in the mail.

So I’m on to write for the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute. I’m working on some big things for the website, so I hope you’ll all follow me there. It is a great organization – providing commentary, reports, and the Wisconsin Interest Magazine. Hopefully, you all keep checking out the changes that will be going on over at http://www.wpri.org/ in the future. There may not be as many posts about Jim Doyle’s body waxing, but hopefully I can provide some commentary on issues of the day that entertain.

So that’s it. I’ll miss doing the blog. I can’t believe anyone cared about 90% of what I had to say, but I appreciate it. I can’t tell you how much it meant to me to have people linking to, discussing, and quoting stuff that I wrote. I have pretty much gone two years without getting any sleep, and that makes it all worth it.

-Chris

UPDATE: I just filmed an interview with Channel 27 here in Madison. Fat-apalooza will commence at 6 PM. I think they’re putting it on the web, too.

Oh, and another thing – I was the one who came up with the term “Frankenstein Veto.” That is all.

UPDATE UPDATE: WKOW has the video of my fat melon on their site. I honestly don’t even know what my quote means – and I keep looking to the left because one of their reporters was walking out of a door on the set.

I’m applying for a new life insurance policy (my wife is insisting I get it – which should worry me significantly), and last night I had my over-the-phone health check. It’s the thorough interview where they ask you if you’ve ever had gingivitis, grown an extra head, sykydive while using an intravenous drug, or whatever. They asked me if I drank heavily, if I did heroin, and if I used marijuana. That took me all the way to Tuesday of this week.

Anyway, they were asking me if I had any of these horrible diseases and I kept saying my health was clean as a whistle. In the middle of these questions, though, I started coughing and couldn’t stop. This angered me, as with every cough, I could see my premium going up. “Cough” CHING! “Cough.” CHING! They probably think they’re getting some dying guy who just lied to them on every question. I can’t wait to see my first bill now. I’ll probably be paying more Courtney Love.

In December of last year, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported on a program known as “Sex Out Loud” at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The program, with a budget of $90,000, serves the purpose of providing “graphic workshops on how to give and receive sexual pleasure.” Supporters of the program claim it’s necessary, given how 80% of students aged 18-24 are having sex (the other 20% just aren’t trying hard enough).

One quick point up front – for most of us, the challenge isn’t giving or receiving sexual pleasure. The real challenge is giving or receiving sexual pleasure with someone else in the room. I mean, seriously – sex is the easy part. The hard part is finding someone to do it with. One you have found someone willing (or drunk) enough to form a meaningful overnight bond with you, you’re really 98% of the way there. Teaching some guys sexual “techniques” is about as useful as teaching a porcupine to skydive.

Furthermore, where did we go wrong when sex became so important that the UW-Madison felt they needed to teach it? Let’s face it – sex is growing in importance. It’s everywhere, and everyone is doing it. In fact, the cost to society for all the sex going on is incalculable when you consider the damage done by children without families. So why do we place such a premium on an activity that everyone can do? And do we really need government encouraging us to do it?

If your university isn’t telling you how to have sex, they are likely conducting a study on why you’re not. According to a study released by researchers at Johns Hopkins last week, “increased physical activity may also prevent decreased erectile function.” Is that really news? Chances are, if you’re fat, you’re going to have decreased erectile function all right – since it will likely cost you money to speak with a live woman. Next up from the researchers at Johns Hopkins – “Decreased erectile function linked to having food in your mustache.”

Think about how important already sex is to men. In order to get it, they are willing to do anything – get hair plugs, buy nice cars, imperil their marriages, jeopardize their presidencies, and worst of all, pretend they like Sarah McLachlan. It clouds our judgment and forces us to ignore obvious flaws in the women we pursue. If you are a man looking to have sex with a woman, you hear yourself say delusional things like “it’s so cute when she plugs her nose with oatmeal,” “I prefer mono-brows” and “you know, she really gets around well for only having one leg.”

But why is sex so special? I mean, think about what sex actually is at its most basic physiological level – it’s a 90 second activity that results in a fleeting moment of happiness. Word on the street is that you can even provide that moment to yourself (so I hear. Just a rumor.) So why do people care about it so much?

From a man’s perspective, I think I have the answer. Sex is important not because of the actual act of sex itself, but because it allows a man to say the following:

“I can’t believe I found someone willing to let me do that to her!”

You see, despite your slovenly lifestyle, marginal paycheck, and questionable looks, suddenly you found someone willing to ignore all of that to engage in the most intimate of acts with you. And that fact alone is awesome. You wake up the next morning fully expecting a ceremony where you’re awarded a gold medal for “tricking a woman into thinking you’re worthwhile.” It’s a validation of your lifestyle – a measuring stick to see where your street value currently stands.

And that’s really what’s important about sex – not how you do it, but whether you have the opportunity to do it. When Sex Out Loud says that they’re teaching “the kinks and fetishes that can help students satisfy their sexual desires, and that sexual pleasure improves physical and mental health,” it’s a crock.

I mean, really – is there anyone who hasn’t figured out the “pleasing” process? Are there still women trying to please men by putting a live lobster in their underpants? (Wait – don’t answer that.)

Depending on your view of how people came into being, some dude thousands of years ago had to figure out the modern way of being “pleased.” So gold star to that guy – although he probably had to buy an expensive dinner. And shortly after being the first guy to have sex, he also notably became the first guy to forget a girl’s phone number.

Senate Minority Leader Scott Fitzgerald’s office sent me this clever re-working of some of Doyle’s comments. It’s illustrative of the ridiculous ways that Wisconsin governors can use the budget as a word puzzle and enact laws that the legislature never intended.

I was thinking about the word “ruthless.” What is “ruth,” and why are you such a bastard if you don’t have any of it? I think the world needs more ruth.

Other observations:

80% of Super Bowl ads now feature talking animals. It’s advertising gold.

Doritos reminds us what a historic event this is for African-Americans – then urges them to buy their chips.

People under 25 years old likely have no idea why Prince is famous. That being said, his halftime show was spectacular. Was that a Foo Fighters song?

With the Bears loss, Brett Favre retains the deed to the City of Chicago. He owns you guys.

Jim Sorgi: Super Bowl Champion.

In watching video of Charlie Sykes’ television show from last week, one thing in particular struck me during the discussion of Barack Obama. In the reading I’ve done, there seems to be one group that is most skeptical of Obama’s chances of being elected President. That group?

African-Americans.

Ask white people whether they think Obama can be elected president or not, and you’ll get an almost unanimous, “well… yeah – he can.” Whether he actually will, or whether they would vote for him is a different story – for instance, I think he can be elected, but I’d never vote for him.

Take, for example, this Washington Post article, which talks about the tenuous line Obama has to walk with black voters. If he does the things necessary to become President, he has to take positions that risk alienating the African-American vote. If he adheres to philosophies of his South Side Chicago constituency, he’d be seen as too liberal, and therefore lose the support of valuable moderate voters.

Even if he were able to walk that tenuous line, blacks still seem to be skeptical of Obama’s electability. African-Americans may not believe America has progressed to the point where they would elect a fellow African-American. I strongly disagree with this sentiment – all Colin Powell would have to do is wave his finger and it would send flocks of white people to the polls as if they were giving away free John Mayer albums.

The more cynical interpretation of this sentiment would be to say that blacks don’t want to believe that America would vote for a black president. If there could be an African-American president, would white people think that racism is now no longer a problem? Would blacks worry that white people would wash their hands of issues of racial equality once they elected a black president, as if everything’s on an even plane now? Wasn’t electing TWO Palmer brothers within two years of each other enough?

On a somewhat related topic, I enjoyed this column by Peter Beinart of the New Republic on the root of Obama’s popularity (free registration required). I think he gets it right.

100% of the research for this post was drawn from the song “Black Republican” by Nas and Jay-Z.