You no doubt know the Levy Haskell family's thoughts and wishes and prayers are with y'all, but I reckon it never hurts to remind you what you know. G-d be with you.
I'm just sad that so few bars these days have good, branded swizzle-sticks. One of my very best bits of table magic years ago (at one of the early Archons in St Louis) was a simple paddle move with a hotel swizzle-stick...
...and a great favorite of all of us here, J. Arthur Rank on gong.
"The fact itself that you establish a distinction between 'racims' and 'other stuff' sorta proves that you are a racist." Um. Really? But if "THERE ARE NO HUMAN RACES" how can somebody be "racist"? I mean, on the one hand you seem to be saying that "racism" =cannot= be a meaningful label because there ain't no such thing as "race"; you then use the term "racist" in a way that causes me to suspect that you believe it to be meaningful after all.
Me, I rather thought the point the writer was making (or trying to make, in any event) was about =terms=, not about substance. As in, "better to choose a more accurate/better/real term to talk about the matter at hand, because 'racism' doesn't apply." As in: pretty much the same point that you appear to me to be making here with a different set of supporting details.
But I'm feeling stupid about my ability to put words together this morning. So I hope you understand my discomfort with your opening paragraphs (but not the rest of your post, which seems accurate and unobjectionable to me). If not, this forum is full of smart people who are good with words--perhaps one of them will be able to ferret out what I'm trying to say and do a better job of saying it. (This here paragraph is not, what?, "sarcastic"? "Clever"? It's straight truth of how I feel/think at the moment, but, again, probably not stated well enough nor to be easily misunderstood.)
Being the alert and on-top-of-it guy that I am, I forgot the crucial part of my post/statement @384, which is: I've come to believe that had we not allowed the Republicans to steal the 2000 Presidential election, the World Trade Center towers would be standing today.
Interesting discussion. Thanks all. And interesting synchronicity: just yesterday afternoon, before I'd read any of this thread, I made this comment in my LiveJournal:
Thinking back about various world events over the last seven years, one almost has to admire the good people of Kenya for taking to the streets in protest over an obviously-rigged election for chief executive.
In related matters, I'll throw in my 25¢* to a query from Steve C. way back at #4 since I only saw one rather cursory reply: So, if N— had not run in 2000, would we be in a war with Iraq? Anyone? Anyone?
I'm rather more inclined to blame election fraud in Florida† than I am to focus on either N— or the EC, but over the years I have indeed come to believe rather firmly that if the guy who the country‡ actually elected in 2000 were to have taken office, no, we would not have gone to war with Iraq. Not because I believe some wild conspiracy theory that posits that, as with Roosevelt and WWII, the President either Knew and Didn't Act or was perhaps an Active Participant [Pooh emphasis added]; rather, becuase I believe a fact-based administration, especially one which would have had a lot of carry-over of and continuity from the previous crew of mostly sharp, involved advisors, would have continued to pay attention to their previous observations and misgivings about Al Qaeda. Further, that administration would not have adopted the rather bizarre illusion which was prevailing in the administration in place at that time—that All Evil In The (Arab) World Comes From And Only From Iraq. They therefore would not have ignored, dismissed, and/or quashed any and all intelligence rumblings concerning other countries and/or organizations that may have been [were] putting together strange, outlandish, and unusual plots that just might [did] work if sufficiently ignored for long enough.
__________
* Inflation, don'tchaknow.
† As I've said before elsewhere, it may be true that Daley and the Democrats stole Illinois and the election for JFK, but at least they tried to be discreet about it. I think the thing that may bug me the most about J.Bush & K.Harris and the Republicans stealing Florida for W* is they were so gosh-darned brazen about it.
‡ Note that I'm not joining friend Will in restricing that to "The People."
* Other than their success at it, of course.
Teresa(65): They can do the "fiction" part just fine; where they're lacking is in the "science" part—you just can't write science fiction when you don't believe in science.
And, come to think of it, is it fiction when you believe your own lies? Maybe they're not doing so well with the "fiction" part either....
And people wonder why I am not totally enamored of my first name. Besides the fact that it seems to be disproportionately used when people are trying to think of a name for their dog or some random body part or an especially dumb character in their book or comic book (think Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers). I mean, it is not just a first name not normally associated with great wit and status, it is, in fact, one carried by all too many people who become infamous for their appalling stupidity. Like this guy. *sigh*
Oh, crap.
As you say, it's an awful shock, even though....
*sigh*
Yit-ga-dal ve'yit-ka-dash sh'mei ra-ba...
Just now read this. By G-d, Teresa, I'm proud I know you and can count you among my friends.
Dave Bell: Thank you. You do me proud.
Larry: Darn you. It's not as if I didn't already spend too much of my money at Amazon. "I'm doing the laundry!"
Teresa: "A crate of clementines is a great thing to have at a party…" Erm… doesn't this violate your "no citrus peels" rule?
Wasn't "The Exploding Shampoo Plot" the name of one of the Goon Show episodes?
Lizzy L: I thought about it. You're right.
DD-B: Yup. Fish are definitely not fuzzy. This explains much.
Hey, I'm a guy who goes to strip clubs and who once got picked up at one by one of the dancers; we, like, totally got with each other for a few months or so. Does this make me a sadsack loser type guy like Cheney or something? Gee, I sure hope not....
And of course you've read W's mummie's comments? "And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this [chuckle]—this is working very well for them."
Welcome to BushWorld. It's not just the boy who's in the bubble …
Heh. After I posted my quotation from Isaiah, I realized it's almost emblematic of much that I say: it's more meaningful if you know the context whence it comes. I don't mean to be obscure, really I don't. It's probably that I assume everybody certainly knows more than I, and will understand all the meaning to which I'm alluding and more.
Neil: The Pirke Avot also says … "You can't do everything. You gotta do something." Just so.
Me, I've been quoting Isaiah 1:23 frequently for the past few years:
Your rulers are rogues
And cronies of thieves,
Every one avid for presents
And greedy for gifts;
They do not judge the case of the orphan,
And the widow's cause never reaches them.
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2008 | 7 |
| 2007 | 1 |
| 2006 | 9 |
| 2005 | 3 |
Total: 20 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Fred A Levy Haskell:
Show all comments by Fred A Levy Haskell.