And I am a bit nervous that your kind words might be the anaesthesia before the needle.
No need to be "nervous", wwh. I have no "needles" for you, only genuine regard. I admit I am cynical about Talk Show hosts ... and not only the Gerry Springer types. Also the gushy, fawning types who inspired my "uber-the-top" rant about uber-egos and Nielsen ratings. But you are certainly not a target for any such parody, wwh. From all I have seen, you are neither fawnor nor fawnee - NOT a fit subject for anyone's "needles". If you and I have any disagreement about "uber speak", it is that I believe that "uber" can be used to cloak a deserving derisive comment (perhaps because the speaker is a subordinate of the target, or otherwise vulnerable to reprisals by the target) whereas you believe, I think, that uber-speak should only be used to soften a harsher word (eg. "uber-frugality" in preference to "stinginess"). I believe "uber" can fit both applications. Some people ARE "stingy" and there may be occasions when they SHOULD be called "stingy", not "uber-frugal". But I grant those occasions would be rare (especially in public). BTW how about "uber-onics" , wwh? We have "phonics", "ebonics", "Bushonics". Why not "uber-onics"?
