I had a dream last night

that I was giving some sort of symposium on some sort of public policy and I noticed that Taylor Swift was sitting in the second row of the audience next to a woman I was pretty sure was Kathy Griffin but I wasn’t really sure and I didn’t want to ask and look stupid because of course I should know who Kathy Griffin is and it was weird that I knew who Taylor Swift was because I really know very little about her but anyway I got to a part in my presentation where I discussed people who are polarizing and I decided for some reason that I had no choice but to use Taylor Swift as an example so I called her out on being a polarizing public figure even though as I said I barely know anything about her but I couldn’t call out the woman who may or may not have been Kathy Griffin as a polarizing figure because again I wasn’t entirely sure the woman was indeed Kathy Griffin and again I didn’t want to look stupid even though Kathy Griffin is very much a polarizing figure and she would have been a much better example to call out and the look on Taylor Swift’s face when I called her out as being a polarizing figure was a mix of unwelcome shock and uncomfortable embarrassment and I kept saying she was a polarizing figure anyway and I don’t remember how the dream ended but here’s a picture of Bitch Kitty in a box:

Faux News pixelated a rubber mask. As though it were a nipple. The Republic is safe!

Bernadette Peters has walked through this door. Kathy Griffin has walked through this door.

I HAVE WALKED THROUGH THIS DOOR.

Find out why at CRFOLLIES.COM

Mental

Just because you've heard of the word genocide does NOT mean you should use it in any context other than to describe actual genocide. Aside from the fact that "mental genocide" makes no sense, comparing Kathy Griffin holding a plastic head covered in stage blood -- whether or not you agree with or even understand its underlying message -- to the mass slaughter of entire demographic populations makes you beneath levels of contempt you're clearly not remotely equipped to comprehend.

YOU are disturbing

Technically, that photo is neither a mother nor a wife nor a human being. Grammar! And technically, you appear to be a wife in name only. You chose to marry him, you chose to have a child with him, you had over a year of an ugly campaign to understand exactly the level of scrutiny and expectation you'd face if you became his first lady -- which now makes you fair game for all that scrutiny -- and now you have chosen to very publicly not live with your husband-in-name-only at tremendous expense to the public. I agree with you that the photo is disturbing, but don't insult us by playing the wife card in your feigned indignance. And if you're so desperate to hide in your gilded tower out of the public eye, then stop making pointless tweets and giving perfunctory interviews to the media your husband-in-name-only so vehemently attacks. I don't respect you, I don't feel sorry for you and I don't have any interest in the tone-deaf meaninglessness you bring to the public discourse.