A personal Leslie West riff/tone clinic. Very nice to imagine.

It's one thing to push a loved one off the cliff. On the other hand, if the loved one is coherent and/or has prior instructions to end their life in certain circumstances (like dementia, ALS etc.), who am I to stop them. I don't see it as that different from a DNR. I do agree with you that without such prior written authorization, it is too likely to be abused. Furthermore, I'm firmly in the Do resuscitate camp and can't quite picture being the one to call it for a loved one; even though I'm sure that ugly decision will cross my path at some point.

Comparing DC to Baltimore is a decades old sport, maybe like comparing LA to SF. It made it into one John Waters film where a DC couple who moved to Baltimore for less expensive housing but commuted by train to work in DC were pictured as yuppies wearing sweaters over their shoulders. I was in Savannah on vacation when I heard the Key bridge had collapsed. I of course assumed it was DC's Key bridge that I drive over weekly and walk over monthly, connecting DC to Arlington, VA. I didn't know you had a Key bridge...

Ha. You'll have to ask the editor who inserted that contraction. I have, I mean I've, been known to use contractions at Splice Today because they seem to fit the style, but this one wasn't me.

Totally OT, but seeing "that're" in print makes me wonder how one would contract "that were."

Yes, as in Gaullism, Peronism, Trumpism. It does seem a persistent tendency.

RE: conservatism vis a vis radicalism. Yes, that is a definition, not attribute; probably the only constant one across time. But when I referred to the long tested means of organization it was NOT about left-right dichotomy, but rather the ephemeral personality-based groupings that have persisted across time in all places, although less in the Anglosphere.

I was in Vegas last weekend. Surprisingly didn't bet a dime since I was there primarily for a daughter's volleyball tournament. The big news on local tv was the upcoming demolition of the Tropicana. Later, I found out it will be the future home for Vegas A's. Of all sports, I thought baseball would hold out on a Vegas team considering its history.

Gambling will only get bigger.

Not to mention the idiocy of calling this attack a prison break, when it was planned for so long with help from Iran. It's pathetic to spend so many paragraphs on a sex offender who got away with it, and then defend much worse sex offenders who actually killed women, paraded their bodies around to cheering crowds, and then boasted about it with a video.

This piece is poorly-composed, shoddy, and dishonest in so many ways, Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Gaza is actually a concentration camp, in which case another Muslim government, Egypt, would be complicit in this form of twisted imprisonment. And isn't it odd that not one other Muslim nation in the Middle East wants any Gazans within their boundaries. But, really, how clueless do you have to be to think that men who have been in a "concentration camp" for so many years would break out of it, and the first thing on their mind was to rape and kill women? It sounds to me like CJ Stone, who has no idea what a concentration camp does to somebody, is covering for Hamas, just like all the Brit media covered for Jimmy Saville. How ironic.

I was mostly with you for a lot of this article, but you lost me at "Israel often claims that Hamas uses human shields..." The went and basically said, "But what else are they supposed to do?" Have you ever been to Gaza? Because there's plenty of room there to not use human shields

Panels, not labels.

>> The law should bar elective abortions at any stage in a pregnancy. Exceptions should exist for rape, incest, the life of the mother, severe health complications for the mother, certain severe disabilities, or to protect the life of an unborn child (selective reduction).<< How would this work in practice? Would there be labels of judges and doctors on standby deciding if a particular pregnancy qualifies? Appointed by whom? Would they be empowered to decide, say, there was a rape regardless of whether anyone's been indicted, let alone convicted? Would these decision-making entities monitor a case ongoing to determine if there's a threat to the mother's health, severe disability etc and respond rapidly to what could be thousands, or more, cases on the docket?

Gore Vidal’s feud with Truman Capote stemmed largely from literary envy as his book The City and the Pillar got him blacklisted while Capote’s book Other Voices, Other Rooms which also dealt with gay themes made the best seller lists. Gore Vidal had a mean spirited vindictiveness towards those he loathed which was a long list of people and the spiteful grudges he held were eternal even after his enemies death with the “best career move” comment after Capote’s death and the “RIP WFB-in hell” after William F. Buckley’s death as examples. He even insulted WFB son Cristopher Buckley calling him “creepy” and “brain dead’. I guess for Gore Vidal being the son of your deceased enemy also makes you fair game for trashing...That being said it should be noted that Gore Vidal was an exceptional writer.. Perhaps my favorite book he wrote was 1876 which covered in descriptive detail one of the most interesting Presidential elections in U.S history between Rutherford B. Hayes and Samuel J. Tilden. A very intriguing read... Gore Vidal is a prime example of the complete disconnect between talent, [Gore Vidal’s talent as a writer was tremendous] and basic human decency which in the case of Gore Vidal was in woefully short supply.

Peter Oborne in conversation with director Richard Sanders, who made the AlJazeera film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4vqO-Y70Mk&t=1s

Here is Hajo Meyer, holocaust survivor, talking about the dehumanising effects of Israeli indoctrination: https://twitter.com/DoubleDownNews/status/1776275359773634569

I'm glad that you watched the doc Ken and that you recommend it to other readers. I think that it doesn't challenge your picture of what happened because you are a pretty informed guy and know what's happening. Not everyone is. The question remains: why hasn't any other news network done this? I suspect that they have covered the Hostage issue in other programmes, probably -- this being a pro-Palestinian news network -- in relation to the thousands of Palestinian prisoners being kept in Israeli jails, often without charge.

interpolatingblur, I'm not trying to win any arguments here. It's a debate and I welcome your input. The point about this article is to highlight the propaganda aspects of this war. The focus on Hamas as the "bad guys" in the narrative is precisely a propaganda trope that I'm trying to get passed, but it's worth reading Hamas's 2017 charter, as opposed to its 1988 charter (which is the one everyone quotes) to show how they have moved in this debate. You do know that Israel actively supported Hamas don't you? Less than a month before October 7 the the head of Mossad went to Qatar and urged them to continue funding Hamas. Israel supported Hamas as a counterbalance to Fatah, in order to stop the formation of a Palestinian state. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-qatar-money-prop-up-hamas.html

I've now watched the Al Jazeera documentary, and my main reaction is surprise that it doesn't challenge my picture 9f what happened as much I thought it would. It acknowledges widespread atrocities by Hamas (and other groups and Palestinian civilians enabled by Hamas' fence breach). It points out Israeli complacency that enabled this to happen, argues plausibly that some atrocities were deliberate falsehoods (including by rescue workers, abd amplified by Netanyahu, Blinken etc,) and makes a claim (that I can't judge) that the IDF pursued a "Hannibal doctrine" of willingness to kill Israelis alongside those taking them hostage. There is no substantial discussion of the hostages who are being held, which is a significant omission. There is a claim that rapes and sexual abuse occurred on Oct 7 but weren't necessarily "systematic" (which is cold comfort). The film rightly points to the horrible destruction in Gaza, but then closes with some Hamas spokespeople or sympathizers saying such things are worth it as the price of liberation. I recommend people watch the film and judge for themselves.

Christopher, just my opinion, but I think you are never going to win the "who has more atrocious behavior" battle. Hamas does not have a problem with Israel's behavior - they have a problem with Israel's existence. No amount of change in Israel's behavior can ever make a difference to Hamas. And no brief lull in Hamas' behavior will ever make a difference to Israel either.

No, what I mean is the Haaretz story backs up some of the claims in the Al Jazeera doc, not that they are linked in any way. And these are not just "reports": they were stories that went around the world, lies-to-camera that, like the British Belgium report, or the Nayirah testimony in previous wars, had a galvanizing effect on public opinion and serve to justify the current slaughter. You'll find people repeating these lies to this day.

Really dumb article accusing people of things they didn't say, extrapolating to fill ideological predispositions, and engaging in the same behavior others are accused of. Whether DEI contributed or didn't it is still an abomination on American ideals & must be abolished. Ahh but "racism" is everywhere to tap for convenient pontification.

The Haaretz piece doesn't mention Al Jazeera, and is from January whereas Al Jazeera's documentary apparently ran in March, so any relationship between the two accounts would need some delving into. More generally, I don't find it hard to imagine that some reports of Hamas atrocities were false and some were real. That was certainly the case with Iraq.

Decades ago, I was at a party in my uncle's Manhattan high-rise apartment when the building suddenly filled with smoke and we had to evacuate down the stairs. My uncle grabbed a Picasso lithograph, and I grabbed a big tray of roast beef.

Great pic of Riverrun. Really miss that place!

In college I had a bartending job at Steak and Ale. Tips were good so I always had a couple hundred bucks in my wallet. It felt good to be a student and be able to walk into any restaurant that I felt like dining at. I rarely did that, but it was still a good feeling to know that I could.

As former Friendly's waitress of the year, Friendly's is always a yes. Wattamelon roll FTW

Loved Friendly's growing up in NJ. Fribble, hot-dog on toasted buttered roll, and fries was a great way to go. I also miss the diners with jukeboxes. After a night of drinking, your party could get anything from breakfast to a hot open-faced turkey sandwich at one place at 2 AM. Diners are considered a theme restaurant here in Texas and a poor facsimile at that. I like Five guys fries but they obviously don't compare to Nathan's fries. I always thought Roy Rodgers was best quality of those chains but haven't seen one in decades and good riddance to Arthur Treachers! If you're going with fried food, why choose fish? Last time I had Ritz crackers was when my girls were young, and they would suck/drool them soggy while in their car seats. Good cracker though, when dry

Oh I see it's Booker. Is that another child? How big is your tribe?

Is this you Russ? Were you cute in your 20s too?

I must be seeing things, not for the first time. I see from searching that Elvis didn't have that look yet in 64.

I think the "grub" has faces on it. There is an Elvis-looking face (with sideburns and shades) at the top of the grub (to the left in the photo) and there might be a side-view of a female face in the middle-left of the grub (towards the bottom in the photo). I dig the mid-century staircase.

Bowie and Bing "Drummer Boy" has long been my favorite Christmas song/rendition.

Loved it. Tilda can suck my blood anytime...

Great painting! I'm sad to say that the Paul Rudd birth year clue was the giveaway to me. (only because my wife regularly asks why I don't look as good at same age).