When would an Express greeter have the occasion to use "piece," meaning "gun"? "Can I hold your piece while you're trying on those phat pants, B.?"
On 10 Things I Believed When I Was A Little Kid In Order Of How Embarrassing They Still Are When I Remember Them Today
I shared your feelings about Mama's Family, but also: I did not realize that Vicki Lawrence was not actually an elderly woman until I was in high school. In other words, I was a frequent Mama's Family viewer who did not get the central conceit of the show.
@sixlocal: But confusingly, also: a taxi service, for black people.
How dare the Norwegians apply their Norwegian standards of law and justice to this person who killed lots of other Norwegians? Now these Europeans can't even be trusted to react appropriately to their own domestic tragedies. What about OUR outrage??
Don't think your reaction to non-Henson Kermit is weird at all. I have that uncanny-valley recoil response to post-Henson Muppet projects. Seen Sesame Street lately? Not-Ernie and Not-Big-Bird and Not-Grover have the same problems as Not-Kermit -- the voice is almost right, but the personality isn't there. It's creepy and cheap and totally lacking in spontaneity, and it makes me sad. I recently got a DVD of The Muppet Show, and being greeted by Not-Animal on the menu screen made me want to turn it off.
The letter and updated story make the "credibility problems" a lot clearer. But I still want to know, what's the alternative version of events? If the evidence that there was actual sexual contact is still reliable, what's the new and more credible story about how that came to pass? Does it involve the five different phone companies?
I for one can't wait for next week's Newsweek cover story: "Princess Kate: How She Might Die."
Thank you for this. I got to the end of that article and wanted to go back and outline it myself, to figure out what exactly they were saying. Because...we already knew that DSK had a team looking to dig up dirt and discredit the witness, right? But the NYT says "Still, it was the prosecutor’s investigators who found the information about the woman." So how come it still reads like a smear campaign? And are we really going to find out that this woman intentionally lured the rich guy in the luxury suite into having consensual assault-y sex with her so that she could sue him and make money for her shady contacts in the marijuana business?
By the way, I can't decide how I feel about the fact that the Daily News front page still refers to DSK as "Le Perv."
David Mamet has always been a provocateur, and when he's writing something other than a screenplay he's a disingenuous provocateur. I'm not sure he ever actually means what he says. He just thinks it's fun to say it. Sometimes that contrary-for-the-fun-of-it impulse makes for very good drama. But even in his plays/scripts certain "controversial" elements, like the misogyny, feel like a put-on. Oleanna -- it's not like he didn't know "Bitches always be using their so-called vulnerability to destroy men, amirite?" was going to sit kind of funny with audiences. This latest spate of nonsense from him feels like more of the same to me.
The italics make it look like everyone is whispering.