Friday, 31 July 2009

In Passing

Why yes, I’ll review that book...

Arbitrary Alice Dept

...want me to recode your site, too?

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 21:54:50 GMT | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.

Wednesday, 29 July 2009


Got questions? Tam has the answers!

  • It's a joke, you simpleton.
  • Dan Rather.
  • An IQ test, and you failed.
  • Your mom.
  • Charles Darwin.
Start here.

(It’s all Robb Allen’s fault!)

Posted by: Old Grouch in Linkage at 15:20:42 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.

In Passing

If you’d wondered where all that bad American business-speak went...

Pure Dilbert Dept.’s alive and well in the British government:
“The Met has a dress code policy which states that only approved corporate badging may be used...”
(That’s a government spokesman.  Talking about the police department.)

Things may get bad here, but I still can’t imagine any of our corporate apparatchiks allowing such buzzword-laden jargon into any public statement.

Pity the report says nothing about the reporters’ reaction.  Hope it was derisive laughter.

Via:  doubleplusundead

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 14:51:58 GMT | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 84 words, total size 1 kb.

In Passing

WTF? design

Remember: Somebody got paid to come up with this Dept.
’97 Taurus Vulcan 123K miles:

Experiencing loss of: power steering assist, all window controls (none are lit up), rear window defrost controls, half of the MFS controls (only Hi, Lo, and turn signals work), and radio only when car is in R, (D), D, and 1.  Everything functions fine when put into P or N.
One component.
Give up?  (Unbelievable!)

Via:  Rittenhouse, who owns one.

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 03:59:54 GMT | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

In Passing

Wrong foot, The, Getting off on...

Today’s example: Jeffrey Michael, quoted by the Chicago Sun-Times:

“We’re a sue first, ask questions later kind of an organization.”

Via:  Gabe at Ace  (who says: “On behalf of lawyers everywhere: Thank you!”)

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 00:54:26 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.

Tuesday, 28 July 2009

In Passing

Nah, didn’t happen...

Lileks on Watchmen:

One exchange stuck out - by which I mean, it made me roll my eyes so hard I almost tipped the couch over.  “What happened to the American Dream?” Owl-guy says to the Comedian, after they’ve dispatched a late-night demonstration demanding more police, instead of masked vigilantes.  “It came true!” grins the Comedian, meaning, all the violence and oppression and fear and war.  The dream was always a nightmare.  It wasn’t about a family and a place of your own and a car and a plot of land where your kids could play; it was really about pedophiliac murderers in filthy apartments and Nixon’s third term and the repression of.alternative energy, and other inevitable consequences of the fascist model masquerading as liberal democracy.

(Links added, 2nd link via IPNote: This post intended more as snarky sideswipe than as great profundity!)

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 17:24:26 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 146 words, total size 2 kb.


Would make me look. Maybe twice.

Posted by: Old Grouch in Linkage at 16:39:22 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.


Spreading the credit

I guess that it’s a good thing that whenever I start to develop that know-it-all attitude I get a reminder that I’m not always up-to-date on the latest web fads.  This particular one reached me late, with no information about its creator.  Now that I know about it, I thought others might like to know, too.

In mid-May I received an e-mail (with the subject line: “FW: Cat Movie!!”) with this animation attached:

It was new to me, but, as it turned out, not new to the net.[1]  (Sissy Willis had written about it a year and one-half ago.)  I blame missing it on the lack of Flash on my system coupled with my creaky dialup, which has encouraged me to discourage my correspondents from sending me enormous files.  But this time someone did, and fortunately for me someone else, somewhere along the line, had WMV-ed it, so I was finally able to view it.

Unfortunately, like a lot of stuff on the web, the version I got came with no information about it.  Fortunately, a couple of days ago (in a post about cats who control their owners), Sissy linked to her earlier one.  So, off I went to find out more.

The cat is called (simply enough) “Simon’s Cat,” and his perpetrator is animator Simon Tofield, who is associated with Tandem Films, London [site requires Flash, unfortunately].  This particular film, Cat Man Do, is the first of (so far) four short Simon’s Cat animations, all of which can be found at the not-so-much-Flash official Simon’s Cat site

There’s also a book, which is due out in October.

So, now you know.


[1]  If it should happen that you are one of the five people on the net who have managed not to see this yet... well, go look (and then come back)!

Posted by: Old Grouch in Linkage at 15:28:10 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 305 words, total size 3 kb.

In Passing

Keep ’em busy

Ilya Somin:

Members of bar exam boards.. and presidents and other high officials of state bar associations should be required to take and pass the bar exam every year by getting the same passing score that they require of ordinary test takers.  Any who fail to pass should be immediately dismissed from their positions, and their failure publicly announced (perhaps at a special press conference by the state attorney general).  And they should be barred from ever holding those positions again until - you guessed it - they take and pass the exam.

After all, if the bar exam covers material that any practicing lawyer should know, then surely the lawyers who lead the state bar and administer the bar exam system itself should be required to know it.  If they don’t, how can they possibly be qualified for the offices they hold?  Surely it’s no excuse to say that they knew it back when they themselves took the test, but have since forgotten.  How could any client rely on a lawyer who is ignorant of basic professional knowledge, even if he may have known it years ago?
Not to mention that with all those lawyers occupied with re-passing the exam, they’d have that much less time for harassing the rest of us.

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 14:50:43 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 214 words, total size 2 kb.

Friday, 24 July 2009

In Passing

“A statistical tie with Sarah Palin”

Instapundit notes that Rasmussen’s 51% disapproval figure for Obama effectively ties (within margin of error) Sarah Palin’s 53%“Doubly astounding given the disparate press treatment[1] they’ve gotten,” he says.  “I doubt the media coverage will emphasize that.”  Me neither.


[1] LATER 090727 21:41: Cynthia sez:
...With the entire mainstream media establishment AND the Democratic Party AND feminists AND the left blogosphere — and way too many backstabbing conservatives whose elitist sense of entitlement means the world no longer makes sense to them when an upstart like Gov. Palin with a state university degree can beat the Ivy League and plutocratic aristocracy — ALL working night and day to destroy Gov. Palin, a -13 percent negative rating is the BEST they could do?


Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 20:53:42 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 128 words, total size 2 kb.

<< Page 1 of 5 >>
92kb generated in CPU 2.2733, elapsed 2.4763 seconds.
54 queries taking 2.3862 seconds, 227 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.