Why Mention Him?

By -
For some reason, at the end of her halftime show, Madonna put up Ron Artest's new name in big lights! Maybe they're going out or something.

Comments

  1. gcallah9:07 PM

    Joseph, you really made me laugh, but... I think I'm NOT going to put that one out. You understand, right?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous9:42 PM

    Yup! It was more for your own amusement than anything else.

    Since you don't have any other means of contact, I will often post comments (for your approval) that don't necessarily need to be posted. It's your blog so you are the final arbiter of that, however, I think that it is usually pretty clear which posts of mine are meant for general display and which are not.

    As for that last one, yeah. That one can sit on the sideline. After all, I would not want to tarnish my otherwise exemplary record of (ahem) top-notch comments. LOL

    ReplyDelete
  3. gcallah11:46 PM

    Joseph, it certainly did amuse me. But, should you ever need to contact me, my email address is trivial to find via Google.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous12:32 AM

    I'm too busy bugging the hell out of Murphy. Ha!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more