25 May 2006


Here are some odds and some ends:
  • Follow-up of the week
    Tmcd and Emery both gave very good reasons why they saw no need to mention Hardt and Negri's Empire in the recent debate over at Ffb. Just to clarify: I also think the book is crap for many, many reasons. However, Tmcd notes that the reviews he read led him to believe that it, 'glamorized criminals and terrorists'. I have to say: that's utter nonsense. The book simply does no such thing. Also, while the historical record may be complicated, there seems to be a great deal more evidence to prove that Negri was jailed by his political opponents and very little to prove that he was a terrorist.

  • Quote of the Week
    if I were running the country, I'd probably want to have long talks with The Terrorists about their feelings while forcing everyone to have secular gay abortions after giving each other hand jobs while the Religious Right is taking a nap on the front porch
  • Rhetorical Question of the Week
    Why is this story – about the efforts of a Missouri town to either evict from their homes or fine $500 per day, all unmarried couples with children – a lead article in the Guardian, but utterly impossible to locate (even on the AP wires) in the US MSM?

  • Image of the Week


Transient Gadfly said...

Oh sure, quote me out of context. America hater.

Sam said...

Well, sure, America-hating is fun, but DID YOU SEE the picture!?

Ruth said...

Hmm -- I read the story about the Missouri family in the NYT. But then, as my father was fond of saying (quoting a skeptical audience member at a speech, who'd challenged his sources): "The New York Times. That's a pretty pinko paper, ain't it?" The Times story quotes a court clerk as telling the woman in question that she could see no advantages in living with a man without marrying him.

So that settles it, right?