« Talk Radio 2: Reflections Of A Sick And Perverse Fellow Traveller Who Defends Mass Murderers Against Her Country | Main | Shameless Begging For Votes »

January 06, 2005

Comments

How young's that Sean Connery, von?

How young's that Sean Connery, von?

A year younger than he was when he appeared in 1962's Dr. No.

Don't want to get personal or anything, but IMO Sean Connery's looks and style have improved with every year he's aged. ;-)

But I thought that the Internet was a magical vehicle that would inexorably lead us to Truth?

Don't want to get personal or anything, but IMO Sean Connery's looks and style have improved with every year he's aged. ;-)

My spouse agrees. Also, everytime she says so, she fixes me with a grim look and implies that guys have it easy because their looks improve with age. I point out that Diana Rigg, Helen Mirren, Ann Margaret, and Sophia Loren are all still hot, and that they're in their sixties and seventies, and get a further cold stare. Then she complains that even though I'm from Glasgow, I don't have that sexy accent that Conney's got. I then point out that when a Scottishism slips into my voice ("tor-toyzz" instead of "tor-tuss", for example, or the occasional mention of a "dustbin" or "swimming costume") that she mocks me unmericifully. She says that it's not the words, it's the soft burr. I explain that he's from Edinburgh, and that the accent is different, and she says that that is just so much crap.

Ahem. I seem to have slipped off the track of the post. Apologies.

what do you put in your frittata?

i start by frying up some peppers and onions until soft, maybe some mushrooms, maybe some breakfast sausage or bacon, lower heat, add eggs, and a mix of cheeses -- cheddar, swiss, emmantaler -- cook until lightly set, sprinkle with parmesan and finish under the broiler until puffy and browned.

consume with a cold fruity white wine, small green salad and crusty french bread.

mmmm. i know what i'm having for sunday brunch.

Francis

Don't want to get personal or anything, but IMO Sean Connery's looks and style have improved with every year he's aged. ;-)

If only I am as lucky. Or good looking, for that matter.

what do you put in your frittata?

Erm, that's a bit of a joke. My "frittatas," such as they are, are really more like scrambled eggs and whatever happens to be lying about (generally, but not exclusively, food). But your recipe sounds excellent -- maybe this Sunday I'll give it a try.

This just in: political blogger believes entire world resolves around politics and/or blogging. Lacks the perspective to realize that the 0.01% of Wikipedia made up of obviously contentious and dubious political entries has no relevance to the rest of the content, where normal people live.

sidereal: excellent point. Wikipedia is awesome, even if short-lived slagfests occasionally break out in minor backwaters.

Lord knows what InstaCracker is complaining about. Seems to me, his Wiki entry is fairly accurate to the point of being generous.

The wingnut remark isn't appropriate. If you look at the revisions, there's a bunch of other stuff as well.

I think Instapundit's may have been changed, it's pretty innocuous now.

Just because Charles Johnson wrote his own doesn't mean it's useless. This, for instance:

"LGF is known for its irreverent spin on hot-button issues, featuring Photoshopped treatments of Rachel Corrie as "Saint Pancake," Yasser Arafat as "Arafish" and jailed Palestinian miltants as Elvis and Bob Dobbs. Johnson is also responsible for coining the slang terms "Idiotarian" and "Oil Ticks."

definitely gives you the idea.

Katherine --

Yeah, I actually found the LGF entry to be fairly accurate. And very telling. Such as:

LGF regulars (the self-proclaimed "Lizardoids") counter negative evaluations of the website by appealing to the clash of civilizations metanarrative. In their view, the war between the Western world and global Islamism is so revolutionary in scope and significance that the neutral point of view can only be understood as a defeatist anachronism. SEE ALSO: Michael Savage, Ann Coulter.

I'm not sure if that's effective at "counter[ing] negative evaluations," but it sure is an impressive use of the fuddy-duddy word "metanarrative."*

von

*As I mentioned in the past, I find LGF offensive mostly because it comibines a reactionary POV with a poor understanding of literary theory -- a unique and rather confused perspective. Oh, yeah, also for the rampant and unrepentent bigotry.

I took a peek over there the other day when memeorandum carried the news that Mohammed was a fast-growing name in Britain (now one of the top twenty). Big mistake on my part: it was ugly. Never mind that Mohammed is the name of one of the (justly) celebrated bloggers at Iraq the Model. As I read the comments, I wondered: what would he think as he was reading that thread?

Shameful.

*coughcough*, speaking of wikis...

Hmmm, Wikipedia as flypaper. Now if some who have recently taken up residence here and defend torture as appropriate could be convinced to move over there.

To clarify, that only refers to commentators, not front page folks.

LGF's entry may have been started by him, which gives it form (and more to the point makes it larger than any other blog entry there is) but it's been edited nearly EVERY DAY since then. Seriously, look at it's history. In fact, It's one of only four or five entries on my watch list. Dragula has been doing yeoman's work on the NPOV, but I still think it's far too large and self-important compared to the other entries.

The real answer, of course, is for me to write a large and self-important article on Obsidian Wings.

…That focuses on my contributions, of course. After all, I invented "commenting."

Now if some who have recently taken up residence here and defend torture as appropriate could be convinced to move over there.

LJ, this is a place where people of different views meet and debate the issues of the day. You can't do that if different views are not represented. Accordingly, we encourage folks of every ideological viewpoint -- with a couple exceptions, e.g., the White Power brigade need not apply -- to show up and debate.

One can defend Gonzales, incidentally, without condoning torture. And one could in good fairth argue that torture is acceptable in certain dire circumstances -- "within the bounds of discussion" and "wrong" are not coextensive groups.

The computer ate my first try

LJ, this is a place where people of different views meet and debate the issues of the day.

Yes, yes, wonderful we are all here in the same room. However, I would suggest that there are some here who are, shall we say, less than helpful? (At least in my overly partisan opinion) This is not about defending Gonzales or suggesting that Chomsky may have a point, this is about the process by which we clarify our discussions. I think that there are some who are (either conciously or unconciously) wee bit willing to divert the discussion rather than let people state their views and just agree to disagree. Just because I might wish that a screaming infant not be at the restaurant table next to me doesn't mean that I hate them or am arguing that they shouldn't be allowed in.

One can defend Gonzales, incidentally, without condoning torture. And one could in good fairth argue that torture is acceptable in certain dire circumstances -- "within the bounds of discussion" and "wrong" are not coextensive groups.

To defend Gonzales, without condoning torture, means one doesn't regard the use of torture as wrong or a matter to be particularly concerned about.

In the abstract, one might argue "torture is acceptable in certain dire circumstances," but that's really a canard that's been repeatedly discredited.

I must take this opportunity to once again plug the LGF quiz.

Otherwise, I agree with Jadegold and second double-plus-ungood's endorsement of sidereal about what in Zeus' and Themis' name Instapundit is complaining about.

Last, but by no means least, I also agree that "torture is acceptable in certain dire circumstances" is really a canard that's been repeatedly discredited

Imagine wanting to take credit for "idiotarian"...

The comments to this entry are closed.