Don't go big time on us Jack.

And by the way, Stanford's "column" is moving dangerously close to Larry King territory . . .

Stanford's column has been offtrack for months now. Today's was a little better, but in general I've long since grown weary of his "lifestyles of the rich and inane" routine.

If Stanford's column were a blog, we'd all be singing a different tune, no doubt.

The criticism here smells not so faintly of elitism, tinged by the inevitable sour grapes that derive from someone else's demonstrated success in a field unrelated to our own.

Orchids to Jack.

Onions to those who confuse criticism with being critical.

Well Said Pablo. Phil has a job to do, like anybody else. I know if I read nothing else in the Trib, I check out his column.....Congrats to Jack for well deserved attention.

I don't even live in Portland, but still love reading 1221. I'm sure it'd be even more funny if I were living there. Kudos, just the same.

The criticism here smells not so faintly of elitism, tinged by the inevitable sour grapes that derive from someone else's demonstrated success in a field unrelated to our own.

That's crap. Is there some particular reason that a print columnist should be off-limits for criticism? I don't give a rat's ass about his success or lack of it. But he column over the years since the Trib launched went from being political-insidery to "this rich person was heard to say this funny thing at this restaurant" and similar nonsense.

I think it's perfecly valid to criticize that. Especially since most of the people who do so were once huge and massive fans of Stanford's column. When the Trib started, it was the first part of the paper I read, without fail. Now I mostly find myself skimming it instead, to see if it's worth actually reading.