Posts by Jolisa
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
No worries Damian... just a touch of expat angst, you know, the forgotten family member and all that. Didn't Martin Phillipps write a song about it?
And if you can't remember the launch party it must have been a good one :-)
The social unacceptability of ain't
Oh, bring back ain't! Lovely word, impeccable pedigree. Ain't misbehavin. Ain't I a woman. Ain't no sunshine. Ain't she sweet.
-
Jolisa, aren't I right I thinking you were there JUST after the founding? </pedant>
Yes, you aren't :-) Well, I suppose it depends how pedanty we get about dates and locations. My first post came 2 weeks after yours, you wildly punctual creature. But I was posting from the other side of the dateline, after all, which always makes me a day late.
Russell kicked it off on November 14, and I suspect Chad and Debra were there that first week, too, although their archives have gone all 1984. Rob jumped aboard in January. And we were off.
(Warning - severe nostalgia and/or confusion may result from clicking those links. Five years is a long time!)
-
And to be fair, it's been six years.
Five and a half? Feels like ten, but.
I am, if memory serves, the only remaining founding member of Public Address other than Russell.
[Clears throat significantly]. Although I guess my ninja-like stealth posting gives me that cloak of invisibility. I did get some babes, though. Two of 'em!
-
Aha! That makes total sense. Now I'm picturing you guys floating aforementioned books, instruments and baby gear upriver on a small boat, to save on moving expenses, with Bob-the-baby sculling over the stern like a good little Swallow.
-
I'm struggling with the maths... is Riverton so fearfully pricey that you had to sell that gorgeous house on the Avon in order to pay 3 months' rent?
Or did you secretly buy the entire town, just to facilitate Jen's research?
Or did you guys just get out of the waterfront house business before global warming put you out of the waterfront house business?
Curious in New Haven
-
OK, here is our man Obama having a bet both ways in 2006, when Colorado Republican Senator Wayne Allard was wheeling out the perennial, but so-far ill-fated, Marriage Protection Amendment to the Constitution for the third time (yes, the mother-flippin' US Constitution! Founding document, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, votes for women, civil rights, etc etc -- oh except for gay people).
Said Obama:
"I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been."
As indeed they always have been, except when they've been ruled unconstitutional. Hence the battle over the constitutional amendment, a would-be pre-emptive strike against the gay equivalent of Loving v. Virginia.
Admittedly Obama's statement doesn't seem quite so heinous if you read the entire speech he made opposing the amendment. But that retreat into "states' rights" is an intriguing tactic, especially since it's traditionally been the realm of conservatives who want to preserve dodgy local traditions like, say, segregation.
On the other hand, "states' rights" works fairly well for things like medicinal marijuana, the death penalty, assisted suicide. If by "works fairly well" you mean "makes possible major practical variations while still leaving gaping holes in the question of federal jurisdiction over individuals acting within the laws of their state."
It's all very confusing.
-
That's fascinating, Carolyn. Makes me want to find out where Obama - and his fairly evangelical church -- stands on the GLBT issues.
I wonder if Hillary will get a chance to clear her good name in this area, since the name "Clinton" is attached to two explicitly homophobic pieces of legislation. The horribly titled Defence of Marriage Act was signed into law by a President who wasn't exactly defensive about his own damn marriage. And it was entirely of a (craven, gay-bashing) piece with the "compromise" that created Don't Ask Don't Tell -- aka Don't Get Me Started on the impact on military linguists and translators, among others.
You nailed that one, Craig (are you off the naughty step yet?):
when we're seeing desperately needed Farsi translators being discharged under this policy it's not merely obnoxious, but an active threat to national (and international) security.
More details about that effect here and, somewhat tragicomically, here.
Whoever wins the nomination should repeal both of these embarrassing, divisive, cynical civil rights violations. But they'd have to win the election to do that. And remembering how the mere spectre of (gasp) gay marriage was so effectively deployed as a wedge issue in 2004 and 2006, I can understand their reluctance to discuss these issues at length in the campaign.
I deplore it, but I can understand it.
-
First!
Yikes. "Douchebags" is right. I don't think brownface is any funnier than blackface. [insert hypocritical disparaging remark about New Jersey here]. Or is this some misguided attempt at stylin' ethnic pride, akin to the sunbed girls of Japan and their identification with African American culture? I'm confused!
-
You guys are giving me the EBGBs!
-
You guys are giving me the EBGBs!