#12
I just want to be told all the things the Secret Rantburg Cabal decided can't be mentioned. That way I won't be killed like I was after I related the history of Mr. Davis, Mrs. Davis, Gentle and That Troll. Self-reincarnating is darned hard work, you know, and I only have three lives left. Y'all can have my pony -- horse, of any size, isn't kosher anyway.
And I want magically to become a poet. And have invisible fairy wings, for when there's a traffic jam. And, and.... and I want to be clever enough to think of better wishes!!!!
#16
I wandered lonely as a clod
That floats on high o'er vales and hills,
When all at once I saw a crowd,
A host, of golden imbeciles;
Beside the lake, beneath the trees,
Fluttering and dancing in the breeze.
Continuous as the stars that shine
And twinkle on the milky way,
They stretched in never-ending line
Along the margin of a bay:
Ten thousand saw I at a glance,
Tossing their heads in sprightly dance.
The waves beside them danced; but they
Out-did the sparkling waves in glee:
A poet could not but be gay,
In such a jocund company:
I gazed--and gazed--but little thought
What wealth the show to me had brought:
For oft, when on my couch I lie
In vacant or in pensive mood,
They flash upon that inward eye
Which is the bliss of solitude;
And then my heart with pleasure fills,
And dances with the imbeciles.
Any changes around he haven't had an effect on the content on bit. If one doesn't like the comments they are free to ignore them. Don't like the site don't come here.
Posted by: SPoD ||
03/18/2006 20:33 Comments ||
Top||
From a Toronto Sun columnist. Paris in the spring.
By SALIM MANSUR
PARIS - During the Ides of March, the City of Light glows with anticipation of spring. But this year it is deceptively calm, and behind its gaiety lurks doubts and fear for the future.
I am in Paris - a city I am always joyful to visit - attending a conference on European security in the post-9/11 world of radical Islamism and the war on terror.
It has been a gathering of a few politicians, journalists, academics and community activists, and behind the formal presentations our informal discussions have invariably turned to the peril that France and her neighbours sense is upon them since the suburbs of Paris turned violent and ugly last autumn.
Following the 9/11 attacks on New York City and Washington, France and the rest of Europe initially rallied behind the United States. Newspaper headlines in Paris read: "Nous sommes Americains (We are Americans)."
But such feelings of solidarity with an America assaulted by terrorists dissipated when President George Bush decided to take the war declared on the U.S. by Osama bin Laden into the heartland of the terror network, first Afghanistan and then Iraq.
Then France's President Jacques Chirac, unlike Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair, decided to make France the leading opponent of the United States at the United Nations against the war for regime change in Iraq.
Behind Chirac's decision to oppose Bush lurked the long-held belief among a segment of French politicians and intellectuals of making France "une puissance musulmane" - a Muslim power - by drawing the Arab-Muslim world under her wings.
Charles De Gaulle, France's war hero and founder of the fifth Republic, adopted this belief as a strategic policy after taking France out of Algeria, and then tilted Paris in support of the Arab countries following their debacle in the June 1967 war with Israel.
Chirac is De Gaulle's pupil, and his role in shaping Gaullist policy for the Middle East amounts to a case study in stoking the ambitions of Arab dictators, most notoriously that of Iraq's Saddam Hussein. The Gaullist ambition is to have France head a coalition of countries as a counterweight to what Parisian intellectuals view as an intolerable hegemony of the United States in world affairs.
Chirac and his prime minister, Dominique de Villepin, who seems to me to be nursing a nostalgia for Napoleon's fleeting glory, also believed that in opposing Bush's drive to bring democracy to Iraq, they would buy security for France from politics of radical Islamists.
But Europe has failed to buy security. On the contrary, France is learning that the agenda of radical Islamists is being supported by Iran, whose bid for nuclear power has so far been uncontainable by European diplomacy.
In Lebanon Rafik Hariri, a former prime minister and friend of Chirac, was killed by Syrian agents. With this murder, a message was delivered to Paris not to mess with the Damascus/Tehran axis in the Middle East and its Lebanese proxy, the Hezbollah.
Moreover, a cluster of events - the bombings in Madrid and London, the murder of Theo Van Gogh in Holland, the riots in the suburbs of Paris, the torture and murder of a young Parisian Jew (Ilan Halimi), a resurgence of anti-Semitic violence, the intimidation of Muslims (particularly women) by Islamists, and the effects of the recent controversy over Danish cartoons of the prophet Mohammed - have seemingly brought Europe to a tipping point. At last, it is awakening to the perils of a new form of totalitarianism within its borders.
In Paris this year, I sense, spring comes as a ghoulish reminder of another time when Europe watched and wondered how France would respond to a deathly menace. Hindsight, an exact science.
#1
Nice clean recitation of events regards la belle France and the cowboy America. I didn't know de Villepin fancied himself in the vein of Napoleon, LOL, but the rest is a solid fit. This is the sort of primer that the kooks I deal with need to begin teething. All they do is suck, at the moment, LOL.
Thanks for posting this, TW. I'll try it out on a few people. :)
Sympathy, in many quarters, was nothing more than a flattering suit the Europeans tried on for a few days to impress each other. If sympathy was genuine, it wouldn't have dissolved so quickly or dissolved because we went into Afghanistan to hunt down the murderers.
#5
Like secular Commies, the Muslims, i,e, God-based Socialists/Marxists/Bolsheviks, hacve no where to go but up - as illustrated by their demographic probs, or in the alt what both the Commies and Radical Islamists want America to unilater do, Westerm-Euro Socialists are "volunteering" to downwardly regress and, ultimately, to die. The Raddies = Commies > WIN BY DEFAULT, OR WIN AT MINIMUM COSTS!?
#6
Newspaper headlines in Paris read: "Nous sommes Americains (We are Americans)."
That was in hopes that the U.S. would place its vast assets at the disposal and command of the UN. That hope vanished when the U.S. essentially dusted itself off, shook Europe's hand and said "thanks for the sympathy - but we've work to do".
Reaction against the demand by Afghanistan that Pakistan stop naming their WMD after Afghan kings
Farrukh Khan Pitafi
There should be only one standard to judge everything. If you call yourself civilized, there should be no word like double standards in your dictionary. Then, candidly speaking, there is only one tenuous difference between a dictator and a puppet ruler. The dictator pursues dirty policies to strengthen his own rule, whereas the puppet figurehead introduces even dirtier policies just to placate his foreign suzerains. From Pinochet to Najibullah, there emerges a clear pattern to substantiate this argument. If there is no gainsaying that General Musharraf is a despot, it can also not be denied that President Karzai is a puppet on strings. And in the world of puppeteering, there is a single rule that defines the game. The one who can sell his conscience once, can sell his soul to more than one bidder. While Karzai was planted by the US forces, his recent postures prove that he is effectually dancing to the Indian tunes as well. You dont believe it? Just take a closer look.
When owing to its identity crisis Pakistan wanted to sell its Central Asian credentials and historical profile, Karzai stood up claiming that Afghanistan was a South Asian country. When Pakistan named its missiles after the Muslim conquerors of Afghan origin, especially after Sultan Shahabuddin Muhammad Ghauri who had defeated Hindu Raja Prithvi Raj Chauhan (Prithvi being one of the Indian missiles), the Karzai government formally asks Islamabad not to use names of Afghan heroes for such a purpose, obviously to please the Indians. Likewise, the Afghan government literally begged the US administration to arrange President Bushs surprise visit to Kabul before his itinerary so that a whimsical case against Pakistan could be presented to bolster New Delhis position vis-à-vis Islamabad. In doing so, Mr Karzai cared a fig about the fact that India, which has sold its strategic ally Iran to win a nuclear deal from Washington, can do much worse to his country to gain much lesser benefits in return.
The question of using names of Afghan rulers for our missiles too needs a closer look. In my view, Pakistan should have no qualms in renaming its missiles provided two queries are addressed. First, since the concept of nation states and hence of national heroes has evolved ages after the rule of Mahmud Ghaznavi and Shahabuddin Ghauri, does Kabul recognise Pakistan as a separate political entity dating back to the mediaeval ages? If it does not, this request obviously holds no water and therefore is a malicious attempt to deny Pakistan its heritage and history. Yet, if it does, it is high time that Kabul acknowledged and apologised for the horrendous crimes committed against our people by its former rulers. The scorched earth policy of these and other Afghan rulers, who considered areas now comprising Pakistan as their expendable periphery, is proverbial. Ghaznavi ransacked the region and took away the regions wealth and most valuable possessions. Ghauri quenched his thirst with this regions blood. Ahmed Shah Abdali, in the name of piety, robbed the land of its virginity and purity. None of these rulers committed any less a crime here than Kaiser William IIs armies in Europe before and during World War I. Why then, what is sauce for the goose should not be sauce for the gander?
And then the crimes do not end here. Our Afghan brethren proved mercenaries to the British in their war of our conquest and confronted the Raj only when they were not paid money. When the Muslims of South Asia tried to migrate to their country owing to continuous political persecution and a religious edict, Afghanistan like modern day Australia closed its borders and let uncountable amongst them perish. When Pakistan was created, these folks left no stone unturned to snatch NWFP and Balochistan away from us in the name of Pakhtoonistan and Greater Balochistan, by fuelling unrest and insurgency in these areas. There has hardly ever been a time when they did not aid our enemies. And is Zalmay Khalilzad, the sworn enemy of Pakistan, not an Afghan by origin?
What did Pakistan do in response? It opened its doors to the Afghan refugees during the Soviet invasion. It tried to broker the best deal possible between the Afghan political groups so that a lasting post-Cold War settlement could be achieved. Even when it all failed, the Taliban policy was created only to ensure that the Afghans do not resort to their old habits of serving Pakistans enemies. If it blew up in our face, it was only because of the fact that it was a logical extension of the US strategy of using Islam to counter communism in Afghanistan. Even at this moment, Pakistani soldiers are dying in their own country fighting a war to protect Kabuls new regime and often innocent Pakistani citizens are killed, abruptly dubbed as collateral damage, for the purpose.
Small voices are heard already in Islamabad, expressing doubts that maybe it is in the Afghan blood to deceive their Muslim brothers and to fraternise with their enemies. These voices further point out that maybe it is better to rename our missiles, because the weapons christened with the Afghan names may one day explode on our own heads rather than on our enemys. I can only hope that they are wrong. Yet given the lessons of our long past history, it seems reasonable to just rename them.
Since there should not be double standards in affairs of any realm, Pakistan should ask Kabul to table its demands of renaming the missiles through some international forum. Once Kabul does that, owns Ghaznavi, Ghauri and Abdali as its leaders, and brands Pakistan a separate entity since those times, Islamabad should not have any hesitation to not only rename its missiles but also to demand reparations for the crimes committed by these people against our ancestors. Germany had to pay 132 billion gold marks or $40 billion (which in Kissingers words are equal to $323 billion today) as reparations after World War I. I think the same amount would be good enough for us. Or else Pakistan should be allowed to devise its Marshall Plan for Afghanistan. After all, there must be one standard to judge everything. As for Mullah Omars alleged presence in Pakistan, even though Islamabad knows he is not here, he was head of a government that we recognised. Hence we have every right to accord him diplomatic immunity if we so wish. Meanwhile, the friends in Kabul should first look into the mirror before pointing a finger at Pakistan.
The writer is an Islamabad-based independent columnist and media policy consultant
Posted by: john ||
03/18/2006 08:09 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It all boils down to reparations. Even if Mullah Omar isn't in Pakistan it's ok if he is...so why doesn't this wanna be AP stringer turn Omar in for the fast $10M reward?
#2
Quite odd that Pakistanis would think India would name a missile after a defeated King of Delhi.
Especially one so gullible.
Mohammed Ghauri attacked Pritviraj many times but was repeatedly defeated. He was however forgiven after each assault. The final time, he won.
The muslim Ghauri was not so forgiving as his Hindu enemy Prithviraj.
He had Prithviraj sent in chains to Afghanistan, where he was blinded. He was later tortured and beheaded.
Even in death, he was disgraced. He was buried at the entrance to Ghauri's tomb, so that vistors would forever walk over the unmarked grave of the king of Delhi.
The Indian Prithvi missile is named after the sanskit word for "earth".
Indian missiles are named Prithvi - earth, Akash - sky, Agni - Fire, Sagarike - oceanic, Nag - snake, Astra - weapon
Posted by: john ||
03/18/2006 12:27 Comments ||
Top||
#7
6, could you possibly be a bit less opaque please. Some of us here (me, for example) need things kind of 'spelled out' for them. Sorry if I am not as quick, but I would like to understand what the hell you are talking about. Thanks in advance.
Posted by: Whiskey Mike ||
03/18/2006 23:02 Comments ||
Top||
PARIS - Friends and supporters of Al-Afif al-Akhdar are convinced: the life of the veteran fighter for secularism and democracy in the Arab world is in danger. A year ago, the Tunisian Islamic movement Al-Nahdha, which is persecuted by the authorities in its country, condemned him as the author of the scandalous book "The Unknown in the Prophet's Life." A Tunisian citizen, Akhdar has for decades been waging a stubborn campaign to expose the dangers of Islamic fundamentalism, including those espoused by Sheikh Rashed al-Ghanoushi, the leader of Al-Nahdha, who has been in exile in London since 1991. In an unsigned declaration on its Internet site, Al-Nahdha referred to Akhdar, without naming him.
Two years earlier, the fingers of Akhdar's right hand became paralyzed, and the paralysis gradually spread almost to his whole body. He published the details of his illness in order to explain why he had stopped writing. Akhdar and his supporters are convinced that Sheikh Ghanoushi backed the declaration, even if he did not write it himself, which speaks of divine punishment being inflicted on the "true author" of the book that vilifies the prophet Mohammed.
In response to the declaration, which was construed as a fatwa condemning Akhdar to death, the Arab organization for the Protection of Freedom of Expression and the Press organized a petition "against obscurantist religious extremism," which called for the protection of Akhdar's life and freedom. Within two months, the petition was signed by more than 600 intellectuals and academics, most of them Arabs. Akhdar, who in the meantime regained his capacity for movement thanks to medical treatment (though he is still unable to write, because his fingers remain too stiff), recently contacted the London solicitor Daniel Machover about the possibility of taking legal action against Sheikh Ghanoushi.
Advertisement
It was not by chance that he turned to Machover, an expert in international law who gained fame last year when he tried to bring about the arrest of an Israeli officer, Major General (res.) Doron Almog, who had just landed in London, on suspicion that he had perpetrated war crimes while serving in the Gaza Strip. Akhdar wants Islamic terrorists to get the same treatment as people who have committed crimes against humanity. In October 2004 he was one of three Arab intellectuals who asked the UN secretary-general and the Security Council to establish an international tribunal to try such terrorists, including clerics who issue fatwas for the liquidation of "infidels."
Machover is the son of Prof. Moshe Machover, one of the founders of the radical socialist organization Matzpen, which was active in Israel in the 1960s and 1970s. In the 1970s and 1980s, Akhdar and Moshe Machover were members of a collective of Arab and Israeli revolutionaries who published the journal Khamsin in Paris and afterward in London. Already then, Akhdar had identified the danger inherent in Islamic fundamentalism and assailed the support of many left-wing activists for the "anti-imperialist" Islamic revolution in Iran. In 1981 Hamsin published an article by him entitled "Why the Reversion fo Islamic Archaism?" In the search for an analysis of the motivations and origins of Islamic terrorism following the events of September 11, 2001, the article was republished on several anarchist and left-wing Web sites. The article is signed Lafif Lakhdar, the author's user-friendly name for non-Arabs.
Paul Craig Roberts and the Certifiable Right
By Ben Johnson
FrontPageMagazine
Quick what columnist alleged in an article Thursday that President Bush intends to attack Iran and that he will use every means to bring war about? That Bush has used bribery and coercion to block every effort to bring the dispute to a peaceful end? That in order to gain a pretext for attacking Iran, he and a black opts [sic.] group will orchestrate [an] attack on U.S. soil?
One would never expect to hear the author is chairman of the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute, a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, former contributing editor for National Review, and a former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury under Ronald Reagan. That progressively unhinged man is nationally syndicated columnist Paul Craig Roberts... Roberts was a high profile, heavy hitter in the Reagan administration. As was Pat Buchanan a major Nixon speechwriter and spokesman. What happened? When their belief in the globalist aspect of the Neo-Con ideology collapsed, adoption of a critical conservative-nationalist position did not satisfy their piety lust, and they chose to run with the wild-eyed left. Buchanan has resorted to promoting Justin Raimondo's mean-world spews, and Roberts is predicting a Bush scheme (Plan 9, I assume) to explode a nuke off the Atlantic coast, as a pretext for stomping Iran. Reality dictates: Ha. Ha. Ha.
Posted by: Listen To Dogs ||
03/18/2006 06:11 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Buchanan in particular is a textbook case of the pre-WWII American isolationist. He is a true believer that the US needs to interact with nobody, to include foreign trade, can seal its borders to all outsiders, and probably thinks that it would be good if we jammed all foreign transmissions or other information that might enter our country.
#3
This simply amazes me. I remember Roberts and he was no idiotarian. He may be a capitalist first and foremost, however.
It appears that the money is much better in the Illuminati Idiot Industry than in any legitimate or rational pursuit. Chomsky, et al, are doing a gang-busters business selling amazing whoppers to the lost children. This segment of the west is much larger than I would've guessed offhand.
The slew of turncoats who have been kicked out or have resigned from government over the last 5 years (and I guess the credit for their departures can be blamed on Bush, LOL) and the Clinton era sycophants who were, quite suddenly, left in the lurch when Gore lost... Altogether they certainly seem a powerful force if one only considers their "credentials" and doesn't consider their motives and apparent greed. The mainstream media collaborates with them, of course, even coordinating to hold stories from publication so they will coincide with their book releases and such.
What do we do with such parasites? I think many are much more than simply opportunists and gadflies, I think of them as traitors. What do we do with them? How do we end the constant requirement to refute their twisted arguments and charges? When will Bush get serious about prosecuting the leakers and slanderers?
Carter, Clinton, Wilson, Scheurer, Clark, Tenet... the list is long, indeed. It's a witch's stew of disinformation which has completely unhinged the Democrat Party and left our Republic flying on one wing. Something very wicked this way comes.
#4
Chomsky, et al, are doing a gang-busters business selling amazing whoppers to the lost children.
That's a great line. These guys (left and right) are the trolls of our national discourse. And we're feeding them like crazy.
Posted by: Matt ||
03/18/2006 10:09 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Matt - My son, 13, asked me about a month ago if 9/11 had been a Mossad plot. Up to that moment, I had placed great trust and store in him, honors in math and science (yay!), I thought I had a real winner. My smug complacency vaporized and I realized that, no matter how absurd it was, I would have to very calmly explain it to him - or it would insult him that I didn't take him seriously. He actually thought that he had considered this idea carefully and it made sense. To my relief he hadn't arrived at this independently - he directed me to several websites to show where he had found the "proof" - he had filled in the blanks for himself and was sold on it. Scared the living hell out of me.
I am very careful, now, in making sure he knows I won't ridicule him but will, instead, work through the rationale. Since then, he's brought me several of these whoppers to discuss and a couple of his friends have joined in the "discussions". Thank God the 8 yr old couldn't care less, at the moment. One natural skeptic, and his gang of over actively imaginative buddies, is more than enough to keep me occupied tracking down facts that he can absorb on his own and arrive at the true story without my dictating it. That would terminate his trust in me in a heartbeat. Scary.
#7
Take heart, GS. Your son will learn at an early age that just because it's in writing, it doesn't mean it's fact. Unlike our generation that had nothing but the fake but accurate drum beat of Dan Rather, he will have information from many, many sources.
It's impossible to know where it will lead - but one thing is sure, this generation will learn to think for themselves.
#12
One thing that may be helpful is to point out to your son that there are many rich, unstable, and oppressive countries in the muddle east that are dependent on most of their populations (and a substantial subset of ours) believing such bullshit as "Mossad did 9/11" in order to continue existing, and they have a budget of tens of billions of dollars to push this very necessary (to them, at least) lie.
By comparison, the US propaganda budget is probalby something on the order of a couple hundred thousand dollars.
Posted by: Phil ||
03/18/2006 16:19 Comments ||
Top||
#13
mid 90's Paul C Roberts was a stable guy with solid/smart commentary....WTF happened?
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/18/2006 17:04 Comments ||
Top||
And totally fails to find the bigotry that she obviously expects. Who's the bigot now?
In her normal life, Vincent, a newspaper columnist for the L.A. Times, lives in Greenwich Village, New York, with her wife. She's done fabulously well on the money wheel, and Self-Made Man will surely net her a nice sum, judging by its trajectory on the New York Times bestseller list.
So Vincent does a little weightlifting to pad her unusually tall 5'9" frame and glues fine particles of her hair to her face to create the stubble effect. Add in a few lessons with a voice training coach from Juilliard, and presto: Norah Vincent is Ned.
Ned isn't really "manly" -- he's a metrosexual, a bicoastal twerp you might find blathering in the opinion pages of a major newspaper: David Brooks or Michael Kinsley trying to pour concrete. That's the kind of man Vincent became, not your average Joe.
Ned's life in Manville starts in a blue-collar bowling league with a bunch of construction worker types. Vincent lets us know at the beginning of that chapter that she's aware the obstacles of class difference are going to impede on her epiphanies about what makes men men. Her "proudly self-confessed trailer-trash" friend warns her, "Just remember that the difference between your people and my people is that my people bowl without irony."
Vincent translates that for us in case we didn't get the point: "Hide your bourgeois flag, or you'll get the smugness beaten out of you long before they find out you're a woman." We're on notice that she's on notice.
Yet not three pages later, Vincent is sneering at the playground of the lower class, savaging the bowling alley as only a bourgeois could: "There were the smells; cigarette smoke, varnish, machine oil, leaky toilets, old candy wrappers and accumulated public muck."
That's before she meets the guys who have agreed to let her join their league. When she does meet them, out again comes the smugness. Here's part of her account of meeting Jim, one of the most sympathetic and interesting guys in Vincent's book: "His face was permanently flushed and pocked with open pores; a cigarette-, alcohol- and occupation-induced complexion " His job, his Marlboro, his bottle of beer -- that's Jim's "masculinity," and his face is stained with it.
When it comes to the expected gay bashing, chauvinist, racist, etc., behavior of the guys in her league -- the painfully obvious objective of Ned's first gender-bending expedition -- Vincent has disappointing news for the readers back in New York. These trailer-park beer guzzlers are among the most enlightened and tolerant Americans ever born. They "never spoke disrespectfully of black people." "Gay people and their affairs didn't much interest them." Outrageous jokes are introduced with an "appropriate caveat." Even as these men slip out to the occasional titty bar, they "cherished their wives" and spoke about them with "absolute reverence."
Most of all, they reward Ned's appalling bowling scores with grace and aplomb, even offering a face-saving joke as he brings down the whole team. This surprises Vincent: "I had expected these guys to be filled with virulent hatred for anyone who wasn't like them."
It turns out their only consistent prejudice is against "comparatively wealthy clients for whom they'd done construction, plumbing or carpentry work[.]" People just like Norah Vincent.
#1
Quite a wake-up, wasn't it Ned. You see, investigative, immersion journalism is about finding the truth of a story and then reporting it.
It is not about seeking "proof" of an ill-founded opinion for bucks.
Looks good on her. The only one who learned anything was her.
I learned long ago that the red-neck construction worker types down at my local watering hole are more accepting of this gay old lady and all others - more open to discussion and rational arguement and truly committed to equality of all (no matter how different or strange) - than the howling extreme liberals and socialists that pop by for a pint at the same place.
#2
Just like all those shows with the slim beautiful model types dressing up in fat suits and going into up-scale shops in "trendy" neighborhoods and getting dissed and scorned.
Never see them doing the same in a rural blue state Wal-Mart. If they did, they'd find themselves treated just fine.
Posted by: Steve ||
03/18/2006 10:28 Comments ||
Top||
#3
re: "Never see them doing the same in a rural blue state Wal-Mart. If they did, they'd find themselves treated just fine."
Steve, you meant to say red-state, yes? Your point is well taken, I just wanted to be sure of the coloring involved. :-)
#4
So Vincent does a little weightlifting to pad her unusually tall 5'9" frame and glues fine particles of her hair to her face to create the stubble effect.
#5
"So, Norah - figured out the asshole is you yet?"
Umm, yes, she did, actually. I think that you need to actually read the book. The chapter where she dates women as Ned is hilariously tragic. On one date, she winds up with a resentful "feminist" jargon-spouter and comes yeah close to ripping off her stubble and telling her to stick the Dworkin where the sun don't shine.
"Ya know, this thread's a lot better without pics."
Don't worry Raj, you're eyes would be safe. (G)
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
03/18/2006 16:56 Comments ||
Top||
#6
She may have BDS politically, but, when it comes to gender issues, Vincent has more in common with Tammy Bruce than Andrea Dworkin, guys.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
03/18/2006 17:02 Comments ||
Top||
#7
If I were lesbian (deep inside, I am) - Tammy'd be my first shot. Hot. Smart. Confident.
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/18/2006 17:12 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Her "proudly self-confessed trailer-trash" friend warns her, "Just remember that the difference between your people and my people is that my people bowl without irony."
Vincent translates that for us in case we didn't get the point: "Hide your bourgeois flag, or you'll get the smugness beaten out of you long before they find out you're a woman." We're on notice that she's on notice.
She completely missed the point of his comment. Bowling is considered kitsch by the bobos, it's a joke to them; it's a sport for him and his friends, they take it seriously. No doubt she was confused by his correct use of the word "irony".
Most of all, they reward Ned's appalling bowling scores with grace and aplomb, even offering a face-saving joke as he brings down the whole team. This surprises Vincent: "I had expected these guys to be filled with virulent hatred for anyone who wasn't like them."
This is shocking only to people who never leave the bobo enclave, who buy into what they're told by the other people who never leave the bobo enclave.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
03/18/2006 18:13 Comments ||
Top||
#9
or who've never seen Big Lebowski, dude?
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/18/2006 18:41 Comments ||
Top||
#10
his correct use of the word "irony".
It's a synonym for "metallic", right?
Listening to this gal on NPR, what made the bowling story even funnier for me was that not only was "she" a terrible bowler, but her teamates figured she was gay and they were *still* nice to her. I guess men are people too, eh?
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Paul Craig Roberts and the Certifiable Right 
