Posts by Kracklite
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Oh yes, I'd forgotten those trifling details...
Morgan Freeman it is then.
OK, really putting my geek on here, but it has to be said that Eick and Moore have done a splendid job in creating a series whose overall message is clearly opposed to that of the Bush presidency's aims and methods and yet shows intelligent, aware people making Bush-like decisions and still gaining the audience's sympathy.
-
Indeed, but surely we'd both vote for Roslin?
-
ertainly take sides if your loyalties require Russell.
i mean whatever suits you.
even after you post, I'm still getting digs like"Everyone's so mean to me! Nobody knows what it's like, nobody understands what it's like being a teenager now! I'm going to paint my bedroom black!"
-
I'm sure shrew wasn't the worst thing you've ever been called
Well, what a charming apology that isn't!
When I get drunk (as I am now, in fact), I'm very amorous and sentimental.
At least I assume Mr Taslov is drunk - that is the most charitable interpretation I can put on his... almost Dadaist ramblings. "Zang tumb tumb" anyone? A game of Exquisite Corpse perhaps or maybe a Burroughsean cut-up?
-
That article is a treasure, BTW. Most of the UK hates Arsenal enough
Well, according to a Londoner I knew, there is this joke:
Q: Name three football clubs with swear words in their names.
A: Arsenal, Scunthorpe and Fucking Man U.
-
... or should it be "KHAAAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!!!"?
Sorry.
-
Khan! Damnit! No relation of Herman.
-
tub-thumping about the hopeless Clydesdale paper
DuFresne has, as they say, "issues". I remember him throwing a tanty over astronomers not providing him with a spectacular enough meteor shower.
His oh-so-noble defence of Clydesdale's right to be heard of course disingenuously reduces the debate to ONLY the right to be heard and discards anything like peer review or accountability - and he shows his dishonesty by repeatedly complaining that people who are "left wing" in his estimation (seemingly everyone from Genghiz Kahn to William Morris) are given undeserved exposure by the liberal media.
I love Kim Hill's interviews because they're with people who have achieved something, who have made discoveries, who tell me what I don't know about the world. DuFresne just wants ideological reassurance and bugger the quality. McInterviews with McVicar perhaps?
What a vindictive, small-minded mediocrity of intellect he has!
Still, he has one outstanding quality - the amazing psychic ability to discern people's motives and thoughts without any visible evidence, which he frequently displays in his tirades. Maybe he shouldn't be on the Media 7 panel, but Sensing Murder instead?
-
Alas, voting Green is something I might do with gritted teeth to ensure that the environment gets due attention in the next parliament, considering that National thinks that any problem can be erased with the most cursory greenwash (because of course climate change is a hoax, or benign or... hell, the next generation's problem) and Labour... thinks the same with slightly more earnest spin.
Certainly SK reminds me of the Greens' worst aspects: their doctrinaire Luddism and sanctimony in particular. "Inside every revolutionary there is a policeman", I think Flaubert wrote and that attitude seems to permeate the party as a whole. Unfortunately I do not want to eat cold organic lentils in the dark. I WANT my GE lentils in my nuclear power lit apartment if that's the least worst way to avoid climate change thank you.
The problem with the Greens for me is their absolute intellectual rigidity, their failure to acknowledge that the choices are between the worst worst and the least worst, not Heaven and Hell.
On an aside or a digression, characterising them as "religious" is right or wrong depending on what you mean by religion - religions of the Judeo-Christian-Muslim tradition are of what I'd call an apocalyptic/transcendentalist mold and are prone to "revelation" and bullying fundamentalism whereas religions in most cultures, and as far as we can tell from the archaeology of vanished cultures, are more of the animist mold, using ritual as a relatively pragmatic means of establishing a kind of narrative integrity between oneself, society and the world. It is the latter kind that could be seen as proto-scientific in the pragmatic epistemology, whereas the former is a structure for totalitarianism. Oh dear, I'm slipping into academic mode... blah blah, subvert the dominant paradigm by deconstructive intertsubjectivity, or as Deleuze writes... ah, excuse me while I take my pill.
Right then, where was I?
And Helen Clark's never had her face all over a puff piece in her career. Give me a bloody break. And while it might be disappointing that John Key doesn't beat his wife,
(Twirls hair and blows bubble) Like, what-ever!!
There's argument, there's discussion and there's point scoring. Craig, It think you're brilliant and witty, but sometimes you can be a political Trekkie and I like neither Kirk nor Picard (Adama on the other hand...).
-
"The Prime Minister says this will be an election about who you can trust - she is right. United Future, as the voice of the silent majority, will keep the next government on track, allowing it to earn that trust."
The evil of banality. (Hat tip to John Ralston Saul who likewise tips Arendt.)
If anyone's in the vicinity, could you be a dear and pop down and throttle him for me?
As John Cooper Clark put it in a rant with a four-letter title beginning and ending in "T", "I'd consider killing you I thought you were alive."
He showed up at some wine and cheese thing at my student hostel back in the eighties and he looked like a washed-out monochrome photo of himself even then. Grey suit, grey tie, grey.... shoes ... The horror, the horror.