It’s bad enough that the definition of “news” has come to mean stories about bad jokes from shock jocks and paternity tests. That stories which were once the purview of tabloids are now routinely given as much, if not more, play on major news outlets as stories that actually have some worth.
So what’s the latest “news” off the AOL feed?
Kirsten Dunst says she likes to smoke pot.
Aside from the minor name irony of Mary Jane liking Mary Jane, an LA actress says she likes to smoke pot? My God, how is this REMOTELY news? Tell me a staunch anti-drug advocate is found stoned, and that’s a story, but an LA actress? You’re kidding, right? What next? Jerry Seinfeld announces he likes jokes? Or, as another poster commented on the Imus thread, this just in: Water is wet.
PAD
• 
Didn’t Douglas Adams write about a character who was a weather God but didn’t know it and the clouds were always paying homage to him by rining on him but all he knew was that the weather was always gloomy wherever he was?
Not taht I’, saying that’s the case here. If I could control the weather I’d have it snow wherever Al Gore showed up to lecture on Global Warming…oh, wait.
Micha:
“This could be because according to Jewish religious law (for those who care about it) Judaism is passed by the mother.”
Bill Mulligan:
“Duh, yes of course, it makes perfect sense.”
Micha:
How could you know? anyway, I’m not sure that’s the reason. People who oppose intermarriage of Jews with non Jews are usually quite unhappy even if it’s daughters.
Rex Hondo:
Besides, I’ve always had the impression that Palpatine was always far too overconfident and in love with his own plots and machinations.
Bill Mulligan:
Yeah, he did have that fatal James Bond villain complex going there.
Micha:
I don’t know. Palpatine kept himself safe until Return of the Jedi. And that plan was pretty clever. His plans in the prequels were over complicated. But they have the advantage of being considered successes no matter what happened.
Bill Myers:
A friend of mine got me in to see “Revenge of the Sith” for free.
Micha:
some would say you were overcharged.
Bill Myers:
Anyway, cutting to the chase, after the closing credits began to roll, my friend turned to me and jokingly asked, “What do you Episode IV is going to be about?”
“I’m thinking either a romantic comedy or a musical,” I replied.
Micha:
Actually it wouldn’t take much effort to imagine revenge of the Sith (and perhaps the other movies too) as a musical. They seem to have a very musical-like quality to them. Imagine Anakin and Obi-Wan singing while they duel in their final battle. I always refer to the scene of Anakin and Padme froliking in the mountains of Naboo in Attack of the Clones as the ‘Sounds of Silence’ scene.
Posted by: Bill Myers at April 15, 2007 08:52 AM:
“Anyway, cutting to the chase, after the closing credits began to roll, my friend turned to me and jokingly asked, “What do you Episode IV is going to be about?”
We are probably going to find out the Maggie Simpson is the real master of the Sith.
“I always assumed you were Bill Mulligan’s apprentice.”
So, apparently in this backward region of the Sagittarian Arm of the Galaxy where digital watches are still considered a pretty neat idea, “Bill” is substituted for “Darth.”
Frighteningly, Bill Engvall suddenly makes perfect sense.
I learn from interacting here because it facilitates me in chasing down my unconscious reactions to what’s said here, allowing me to present my disagreements with less and less ambiguity — this is how convention is challenged and is perhaps the first virtue of extending free speech to all.
But my tie to this site is not so strong that I won’t address your accusation with this offer: If Peter says he reviewed my 2 posts in the Q&A thread and agrees that, as it appears to him, my reaction made no sense to the poster, then I will take responsibility for misjudging the fan outcry to rescue the All Star Squadron, and, except to respond to references to me, stop posting here.
So you say Slaughterhouse 5 is great because Vonnegut says its great? Taking your word literally, my referring to my posts as great should ease your parsing of them.
In a post about the prominence of non-news in the news, you cite as news the death of a man whose political views were more severe than views you’ve characterized as heinous. I am still curious as to what what you have in mind that allowed you to tolerate those views in him. If you can’t reply, don’t.
Your “actual quote” and your exclusion of your use of “again” prompted me to overlook that you were quoting yourself. Please disregard my reply and let me rephrase the comment you are replying to:
You say he hasn’t written anything as great since then, but almost all of his books afterward seemed more engaging than it.
You say he hasn’t written anything as great since then, but almost all of his books afterward seemed more engaging than it.
There is an easy explanation for this. Get ready:
We disagree.
You like some of his other books better. I like Slaughterhouse 5 best. A simple matter of opinion. No mystery. Move along. Nothing to see. Was that so hard.
In a post about the prominence of non-news in the news, you cite as news the death of a man whose political views were more severe than views you’ve characterized as heinous. I am still curious as to what what you have in mind that allowed you to tolerate those views in him. If you can’t reply, don’t.
I have replied. You can’t read it, appaenrently or you can’t accept it or whatever. Assumming your characterization of Mr Vonnegut’s views is accurate–an assumption I would not make given your poor performance regarding other people–it still has zero (none) (zip) revelance to me in calling him a great writer.
If Rosie O’Donnel writes a book as great and as influential as Slaughterhouse 5 I will have no problem aknowledging her, even if I think her politics are often nonsensical.
Similarly, my enjoyment of Wagner’s work is not reduced by his anti-semitism. As Bill Myers and Micha have alluded to, if one had to disregard the art of people who believed in things contrary to one’s own views there would be little left to enjoy.
None of this seems as surprising to me as you seem to find it.
The challenged to criticize the book was yours.
The challenged to criticize the book was yours.
Um…well, no, actually I was just telling you that the only way you could get me to reverse my high opinion of Vonnegut as a writer would be to convince me that he was not a good writer. I didn’t think you could or would actually try and, I should point out, claiming that the book I find as best evidence of his greatness is actually inferior to his other works would only mean that I have underestimated him. So…
I think it’s time one of us put this discussion out of its misery.
“I think it’s time one of us put this discussion out of its misery.”
I think that time came long before this. I’m surprised it went this far. I’m quite convinced that Mike is mentally ill. That’s not a joke or an insult… I mean it literally. No one’s doing him any favors by indulging him. I just hope he gets or is getting the psychiatric help he needs. Unless, of course, he’s happy living in his Bizarro world where logic doesn’t exist and the only books ever written are The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, The Divine Comedy, and the works of Kurt Vonnegut and Ambrose Bierce (okay, THAT part may have been intended as an insult).
“I think that time came long before this. I’m surprised it went this far. I’m quite convinced that Mike is mentally ill. That’s not a joke or an insult… I mean it literally.”
I’ve had similar suspicions. But I must admit that I am often tempted to respond directly or indirectly to Mike’s posts. Do you think ignoring him is the better course of action from a mental health standpoint? I don’t want to cause anybody harm just to indulge my impulse to respond to something of interest.
Hmm…An out for Kirsten…
“I meant smoking pot in Amsterdam. Where it’s legal. I would never willfully break the law here.”
Oh – PAD to answer your question as to why it’s even remotely news:
It moves paper. And that’s the only explanation.
One of my favorite papers is the Wall Street Journal. It’s biased, sure, but toward its readers, which happen to be people involved in moving money. Therefore, it seems to be the paper least fettered with tabloid matters, since that won’t sell a Wall Street Journal. However, an article about the economic effect of Tom Cruise jumping on a couch (which did actually effect the film business and had it take a hard look at its star system) does make it to the paper once in awhile.
And I hate business.
This sounds like a backpedal.
You are free to not reply.
Are you the author of the “robert’s Journal” page you link to?
Even if you’re linking to that page arbitrarily, please excuse me if your diagnosis doesn’t carry any weight with me.
Posted by: Skywalker Scullion at April 15, 2007 01:22 PM
“I always assumed you were Bill Mulligan’s apprentice.”
So, apparently in this backward region of the Sagittarian Arm of the Galaxy where digital watches are still considered a pretty neat idea, “Bill” is substituted for “Darth.”
Frighteningly, Bill Engvall suddenly makes perfect sense.
And that’s not all.
Bill the Cat? Obviously Sith alchemy gone horribly wrong, probably due to experiments perfomed by Bill Nye the Science Guy, greatly misinterpreting the orders of Bill Clinton to create the ultimate Sith pussy.
-Rex Hondo-
How did I miss that one? HOW? I’m so disappointed in myself. But, think of it, get Bills Clinton and Gates together in a secret society somewhere, and what do you have?
First one to say the Buffalo Bills gets hit with a meatball.
No, you get…the Billuminati!
No, you get…the Billuminati!
Now we have to kill him. Ðámņ. I liked Sean.
As we all just love free speech here, just what is anyone’s standing for saying such a “news report” is unacceptable? It’s surprising that Ms. Dunst fell into the trap, of course, but I am rather concerned that posters here refer to “responsible marijuana use.” The last I heard, the responsibility of committing a misdemeanor (or a violation, in a few localities) was a matter of some controversy. I don’t find it very responsible to flout the law and risk jail time or a fine. Changing a bad law is responsible; Violating a standing one is not.