caroljane

George, It's plumage. Michael You call it plumage. I call it excess baggage. Foucault, of all people, is mentioned several times. He is one of the most overrated thinkers of the past century, and a favorite of undergraduate name-droppers. Ghs I will fucking name-drop Foucault anytime I want. I have gone to boot camp with him reading all the difficult books he ever wrote and they are difficult. HIs thinking is precise and incredibly powerful. Your statement comes from a read-made sound bit from those who only read about him. He can be criticized but you had better be an expert to do it. I recommend Baudrillard's <b>Forget Foucault</b> for you. He was so great at destroying Foucault that Foucault refused to consider the essay when it was sent to the zine he was the editor of. If was suppressed until Foucault died and not translated into English for 20 years to maintain Foucault's academic predominance. You read him then you come to me to say things like you just said. You are free to drop any names you like. Over the years I've read four books by Foucault (in translation). Of those, only one -- The Order of Knowledge: An Archeology of the Human Sciences-- was worth a damn (I still have a copy), and even that one contains its share of pretentious garbage. As for your claim that I need to be an "expert" on Foucault before I dare criticize him -- well, I don't need to be an expert on manure to know that I burrowing through a pile of manure. If you want to play the game of academic one-upsmanship, be my guest. I've skinned rabbits more formidable than you. Ghs Bring it on, hon. What part of Foucault do you disagree with, as long as you replied in the dialectic, which was your first mistake.Why would I want to discuss the details of a thinker that I regard as a waste of time, for the most part? Moreover, it is difficult to zero-in on the specifics of a thinker who never seems to have formulated a clear idea in his life. I tell you what: You start a thread on Foucault explaining why he was so brilliant, what you regard as his best ideas., etc., and I will be glad to join in. I haven't read Foucault in years, but I would be willing to slog through some of the same swamp over again -- just for your sake, hon. I love debating people who throw around the term "dialectic" with little awareness of what it means. Ghs George, It's plumage. Michael You call it plumage. I call it excess baggage. Foucault, of all people, is mentioned several times. He is one of the most overrated thinkers of the past century, and a favorite of undergraduate name-droppers. Ghs I will fucking name-drop Foucault anytime I want. I have gone to boot camp with him reading all the difficult books he ever wrote and they are difficult. HIs thinking is precise and incredibly powerful. Your statement comes from a read-made sound bit from those who only read about him. He can be criticized but you had better be an expert to do it. I recommend Baudrillard's <b>Forget Foucault</b> for you. He was so great at destroying Foucault that Foucault refused to consider the essay when it was sent to the zine he was the editor of. If was suppressed until Foucault died and not translated into English for 20 years to maintain Foucault's academic predominance. You read him then you come to me to say things like you just said. You are free to drop any names you like. Over the years I've read four books by Foucault (in translation). Of those, only one -- The Order of Knowledge: An Archeology of the Human Sciences-- was worth a damn (I still have a copy), and even that one contains its share of pretentious garbage. As for your claim that I need to be an "expert" on Foucault before I dare criticize him -- well, I don't need to be an expert on manure to know that I burrowing through a pile of manure. If you want to play the game of academic one-upsmanship, be my guest. I've skinned rabbits more formidable than you. Ghs Bring it on, hon. What part of Foucault do you disagree with, as long as you replied in the dialectic, which was your first mistake.Why would I want to discuss the details of a thinker that I regard as a waste of time, for the most part? Moreover, it is difficult to zero-in on the specifics of a thinker who never seems to have formulated a clear idea in his life. I tell you what: You start a thread on Foucault explaining why he was so brilliant, what you regard as his best ideas., etc., and I will be glad to join in. I haven't read Foucault in years, but I would be willing to slog through some of the same swamp over again -- just for your sake, hon. I love debating people who throw around the term "dialectic" with little awareness of what it means. Ghs This looks like a good discussion, of value to those who have not read Foucault at all. Level playing field, you have read him in translation so Seymour should disclose whether she read him in the original or not.

Yeah, you're a cantankerous monomaniac, but you're OUR cantankerous monomaniac, gotta love ya because we can't leave ya. As to piling on I would certainly do it to any newcomer who showed deliberate discourtesy .

Hey, we agreed to take Obama and the posse already. You never mentioned anything about Pelosi-- who authorized this guy to propose deal-changers anyway? And where have you moved Vinny? He's not returning calls even to his mother! What's going on? Ominously, CANADA

Something tells me the opposite. I think that if our borders were attacked, he would be rabid in employing the military. But his foreign policy stance would see that our approach was more tactful, strategic. I'm reminded of a few shows I've seen recently that wrongly portray the highest echelons of the military as being warmongers, constantly leveraging towards pushing red buttons and pulling triggers. These four-star generals are constantly thinking of one thing... the men and women they might have to put in harm's way. Every decision bears that in mind at the forefront. I would think Ron Paul would mesh well with his common sense approach, personally. ~ Shane Shane, that reminds me of an American general I saw portrayed in a TV movie whose name I have forgotten. It was about the Iraq war leadup from the perspective of British envoys to Washington, very funny. Anyone recognize it? I think Michael Sheen was init. Carol: This might be it...http://en.wikipedia....ship_%28film%29 The Special Relationship is a 2010 American-British political film directed by Richard Loncraine from a screenplay by Peter Morgan. It is the third film in Morgan's informal "Blair trilogy", which dramatizes the political career of British Prime Minister Tony Blair (1997–2007), following The Deal (2003) and The Queen (2006), both directed by Stephen Frears. The first drafts of The Special Relationship dealt with Blair's special relationships with U.S. Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. However, Morgan excluded the Bush scenes from subsequent drafts (thus ending the narrative on January 20, 2001) because he found the Blair/Clinton dynamic more interesting. Morgan intended to make his directorial debut with the film but backed out a month before filming began and was replaced by Loncraine. The film was produced by Rainmark Films and backed by HBO Films and BBC Films. The film stars Michael Sheen reprising his role as Blair, Dennis Quaid as Clinton, Hope Davis as Hillary Clinton, and Helen McCrory as Cherie Blair. Principal photography on locations in and around London, England ran from July 20 to September 4, 2009. The film was broadcast on HBO in the United States and Canada on May 29, 2010, and was broadcast on BBC Two and BBC HD in the United Kingdom on September 18, 2010. That's it! You are brilliant Adam. I remember the general explaining the motiviations of generals, in terms of conserving soldiers' lives.

Phil, you expect people to memorize your every post and then cite them exactly, when they are arguing with you. You seldom return the favour. You know I love you but unless you intend to embrace the meaningless of meaning with seymour, your gander will always be tangily sauced.

Something tells me the opposite. I think that if our borders were attacked, he would be rabid in employing the military. But his foreign policy stance would see that our approach was more tactful, strategic. I'm reminded of a few shows I've seen recently that wrongly portray the highest echelons of the military as being warmongers, constantly leveraging towards pushing red buttons and pulling triggers. These four-star generals are constantly thinking of one thing... the men and women they might have to put in harm's way. Every decision bears that in mind at the forefront. I would think Ron Paul would mesh well with his common sense approach, personally. ~ Shane Shane, that reminds me of an American general I saw portrayed in a TV movie whose name I have forgotten. It was about the Iraq war leadup from the perspective of British envoys to Washington, very funny. Anyone recognize it? I think Michael Sheen was init.

I have taken a dislike to this person because of her social presentation. Maybe it is Nietzscheian to sweep into a party, snub the host, and hold what court is available while cramming the hors d'oeuvres into one's handbag. As to Baudrillard et cie I know nothing nor do I care to learn. I will observe though that if fifty million Frenchman can't be wrong, four or five still can.

The Shafia verdict is in, and the murderers are actually in prison as I write The pathological trio thoughtfully chose a murder venue two hours away from the Kingston Penitentiary Four women died, essentially because they were female: One disposable (barren first wife) and three dangerously ordinary One wanted to be a doctor, one wanted to marry for love, one (age 13) wanted to be like her friends and contradict her parents. Except they were not ordinary, not at all. Trapped in despotism and hatred, they tried in every way they could to live their lives, their own lives, for themselves, and in so trying they were reckless, thoughtless, and unimaginably brave. "They leave the vivid air signed with their honour". -Stephen Spender

I just looked over there - they have displayed her in a swimsuit as "Miss Pomowanker". It's a form of howling I suppose.

SStay tuned for the Witch Trial.

Claude Lemieux! Geez! Lemieux sang "hallelujah" for the music. Damn well too.

http://www.furious.c...ect/kdlang.html Performing Desire and 'Recording Consciousness' on Facebook and YouTube by Babette Babich (October 2011) The Hallelujah Effect on the Internet The initial focus of this essay, apart from important preliminary references to Leonard Cohen is on kd lang, not as composer (although she is one) but musical performer and not as guitarist (although she is one) but as a singer and although her live performances have to make all the difference, very specifically, for the sake of any analysis, specifically as her singing is available in video format on YouTube. Of course there are many readings of kd lang and popular music, and of course most of them focus on the way she dresses, others look at her sexuality,1 and here, just for a bit, I consider her musicality. Radio Physiognomy, Facebook Contexts, YouTube Poker I first heard Leonard Cohen's "Hallelujah" -- rather improbably, given the sheer number of recording artists who have interpreted his song -- as 'sung' by Cohen himself, not in person of course, but and this will be the point and the heart of what follows especially as it bears on musical practice, on the radio. And with referring to radio, as we shall see, I am already referring to Adorno's notion of radio physiognomics as indeed to the sociology of music practice as well as philosophical aesthetics, just because hearing anything on the radio is always a matter of acoustics and often the reproduction of a reproduction, listening to a recording. Thus radio transmits music as we "consume" music today in the age of mechanical, electronic, virtual reproduction, so many species of digital dissemination. Given the sheer coverage of the song, Leonard Cohen's "Hallelujah" manifestly captivates singers but it's fair to say that I couldn't have guessed that from that first acquaintance and not being too much of a fan of Cohen or much pop music in general (apart that is from listening to the radio), I could, as we say, take it or leave it. That was until what I call 'dueling video-posts' on Facebook. bich (October 2011) The Hallelujah Effect on the Internet The initial focus of this essay, apart from important preliminary references to Leonard Cohen is on kd lang, not as composer (although she is one) but musical performer and not as guitarist (although she is one) but as a singer and although her live performances have to make all the difference, very specifically, for the sake of any analysis, specifically as her singing is available in video format on YouTube. Of course there are many readings of kd lang and popular music, and of course most of them focus on the way she dresses, others look at her sexuality,1 and here, just for a bit, I consider her musicality. Radio Physiognomy, Facebook Contexts, YouTube Poker I first heard Leonard Cohen's "Hallelujah" -- rather improbably, given the sheer number of recording artists who have interpreted his song -- as 'sung' by Cohen himself, not in person of course, but and this will be the point and the heart of what follows especially as it bears on musical practice, on the radio. And with referring to radio, as we shall see, I am already referring to Adorno's notion of radio physiognomics as indeed to the sociology of music practice as well as philosophical aesthetics, just because hearing anything on the radio is always a matter of acoustics and often the reproduction of a reproduction, listening to a recording. Thus radio transmits music as we "consume" music today in the age of mechanical, electronic, virtual reproduction, so many species of digital dissemination. Given the sheer coverage of the song, Leonard Cohen's "Hallelujah" manifestly captivates singers but it's fair to say that I couldn't have guessed that from that first acquaintance and not being too much of a fan of Cohen or much pop music in general (apart that is from listening to the radio), I could, as we say, take it or leave it. That was until what I call 'dueling video-posts' on Facebook. I guess we can say that the "Bich" is back! She left out the transcendent performance of Shae Lynn Bourne and her partner on Battle of the Blades! this was the most postmodern crashcultural of all. I'm not kidding. And isn't it significant that Cohen and lang are both Canadians? Does Babich address this?

And sorta like Roark. Wanna shoot some hoops? My arms are too short to box with you. --Brant that's ok, my only basketball skill was Standing on Guard anyway. When guards were required to shoot at the basket I was toast.

Yes, Seymour is sorta like Phil.

No, one day she'll learn. She seems to have been practicing a long time, one day she'll get it right.

And sorta like Roark. Wanna shoot some hoops?

But Adam, defend him from what? We've talked about the newsletters before - I said they would torpedo him.

I'm just getting out of that stage in life. It seems to me that kicking yourself over any of that is like crying over spilled milk. One think I'm concerned of though is whether you imply that there is no such thing as joyous productivity? I hope not , because I hope to one day be happy at work. No, of course I don't imply that. At that time I believed that whatever I decided to do, I should persevere, succeed and glory in, whether I was suited or qualified or ready to do it at all. I was wrong Later I was joyously productive and happy at work, and I still am today. So will you be too.

"The Leith police dismisseth us".

LOLOLOL... Now that was worth all the BS behind getting this thread going. Dayaamm! Michael My 19 yo self. --Brant embarrassed My 19 yo self read AS and for a while kicked herself around for not ever being able to be joyously productive, proudly self-sufficient, and for not wanting to live in Galts Gulch, and for being generally a non-human being. We all grew up -- and here we all are.

Post evey few paragraphs with the message, preceeding, "editing." Avoid using the spell checker until last. -Brant That's "preceding" Brant. A rare chance for me to bitterly enjoy a minor skill which modern tech has rendered useless. Carol lifelong superb speller

Then you are visiting the sins of the fathers on the heads of the sons; "early on" is not later on, and some of your imaginary enemies are actually friends oe puzzled acquaintances.I know how important and still vital the early history of Objectivism is, and how you and others here have personally shared it. But to others it is both fascinating old gossip,, and "old, unhappy, far-off things, and battles long ago."

A writer is a writer. I am surprised that an anarchist would circumscribe himself in this way. If you found the time or inclination to write a novel I think it would be a pleasure to read. The passage you posted would make a perfect opener.

and progressivist view of history, also obvious.

Love that show One of my fave moments was Ramsey encountering two sous-chefs skulking near the freezer, close to opening time, "So, what are you guys cooking?"...."Uh....nothin" with upward inflection they mutter. Great hijinks ensue.