Maybe not, but it's pretty darn funny.
In a Denver Post Article today, the opening paragraph is:
State Rep. Mark Waller says he can't quite articulate his thoughts about the current session of the House of Representatives, but he insists they're nonetheless valid.
In other news, has anyone else noticed that this notice has been coming up on the Denver Post site:
You've reached your limit of free articles for this 30-day period. For full digital access, sign up today for just 99¢!
I guess we've all been mooching too much, for too long. The setup on the paywall is pretty flimsy, though. I got by without much trouble.
This probably should be in the open thread, but no one is going to read anything in the weekend open thread this late on a Sunday and I don't want to wait til tomorrow morning.
Plus, I'm an adult and I'll do what I want.
The Washington Post allows 20 free articles a month. The NYTimes allows, I think, 10 a month. The Houston Chronicle and the LATimes don't allow any free articles, as I recall. You just get to read the webpage summaries.
Whatever the Post needs to do to survive is OK with me. We need newspapers! Not everyone can read stuff on those tiny device screens. I'll pay .99 a month to my father's old newspaper.
Good, but not as good as this quote from Herman Cain: "I might not have the facts to back this up, but……."
James Brown to Bootsy Collins: "I don't care what you do the rest of the time. Just be there on the '1'"
If you don't mind only seeing three lines at a time, you can read the article behind the banner telling you to pay.