Saturday: Hili dialogue

December 16, 2017 • 7:11 am

by Grania

Good morning and welcome to Saturday. Jerry has arrived safely in India after an epic flight.

I’m off to see the new Star Wars movie. It had better be good, but I’m hopeful.

In the mean time, here’s an amazing photograph of a frog swallowing a snake, and the full story of the photo in NatGeo.

Over in Poland, Hili is reflecting on the long, dark teatime of the soul.

Hili: The darkness of the Middle Ages.
A: Where?
Hili: Outside the window.

 

In Polish:

Hili: Mroki średniowiecza.
Ja: Gdzie?
Hili: Za oknem.

26 thoughts on “Saturday: Hili dialogue”

  1. Re: Star Wars

    The critics love it. But early word from audiences is decidedly mixed. Of course, this won’t affect the opening weekend box office.

    1. I saw it last night. I would say it was good in parts. The curtain raiser space battle was nice as long as you didn’t try to over analyse it. Then there was a flabby tedious sub plot that ended up going nowhere whose only point seemed to be to provide something to break up the sequences of Rey and Luke.

      The final act, however, was pretty gripping and there were some pretty interesting plot twists about which I’ll say no more because one of them was ruined for me by reading an article about the development of one of the characters.

      1. I’m heartened that fellow readers are taking Star Wars exactly as it’s supposed to be taken – let’s leave it at that.

        Wondering if any movie places play old movies like Star Wars? I know a great movie house – plays Close Encounters, Blade Runner, – but never see Star Wars there…

    1. Good idea to note, when you link to the Washington post, unless you subscribe you don’t see it.

      1. Well, it’s “reportedly”, with the WaPo article at the bottom. Here’s the words :

        vulnerable
        entitlement
        diversity
        transgender
        fetus
        evidence-based
        science-based

        … I guess it’ll take time for this to get out in the open.

        1. There is a small silver lining – the CDC will not be able to warn Boss Tweet that his hamburger consumption makes him vulnerable to a stroke or heart attaci.

      2. Articles in the Washington Post aren’t behind a paywall. I don’t subscribe and have never had any trouble accessing their articles; and unlike the NYT and some other media outlets, there isn’t even a limit on free access. Perhaps you mean the Wall Street Journal — one can’t access any articles there without a subscription. Curses on the WSJ.

        1. Ah, yes, they are. You can get around it, though, by opening it up in a private or incognito window.

          If you never get blocked, you may be going through some sort of service that provides equivalent protection.

    2. @ThyroidPlanet That WashPO article doesn’t claim that “Trump just banned some words”

      And it it looks like the story may be wrong anyway. Here’s a link to a NYT article [paywalled I think]: which quotes two unnamed sources who say it was just internal advice on how to get budget approval from conservative Republicans. Or as I would put it, don’t use trigger words such as “fetus”, “diversity” or “trans-” when wanting money from conservative, fundamentalist, Christian loons.

      QUOTES:

      A former federal official:

      They are not saying to not use the words in reports or articles or scientific publications or anything else the C.D.C. does. […] “They’re saying not to use it in your request for money because it will hurt you. It’s not about censoring what C.D.C. can say to the American public. It’s about a budget strategy to get funded”

      A former C.D.C. official:

      “I don’t know exactly who said what in the meeting, but I have to assume this came from H.H.S. people, because they’re the ones who have to make the budget. […] I’ve also heard that some of the words might have been a little misconstrued. ‘Science-based’ and ‘evidence-based’ might not have been considered as unusable as the others”

      1. Ok thanks – sorry for the inaccurate statement

        I was following the story today – it’s looking less Orwellian –

        1. 🙂 The most interesting example today of poor reporting is the uncritical one doing the rounds about… Sample Headline “The Pentagon’s Secret Search for UFOs” wherein we read about USN aviators in 2004, encountering a craft with unearthly flying characteristics.

          I looked around & found a POLITICO report with an interesting snippet buried halfway down the page: “… Mellon and his colleagues rolled out their new private effort [called To The Stars], which is now seeking investors with a minimum purchase of $200 in common stock shares. Its website claims 2,142 investors, who have purchased slightly more than $2 million worth of shares.”

          So now it’s clear what’s behind the story! But I haven’t seen a report anywhere yet that makes the above connection explicit & shouts “scam”

  5. Since PCC posting will be light, does any one else think that the only part of the Omarosa sideshow that is even remotely interesting is the question WTF was she doing in the White House in the first place?

    1. Yes

      But

      WTH are any of them doing there

      And

      The analogy of a show is, well, I think it is literally a show – the last, final reality TV show of Trump’s career, laughing all the way to the bank.

      1. Meaning it is the next level of reality TV – never before seen, unprecedented – again, literally.

        1. Part of me is almost looking forward to the sheer idiocy that will inevitably accompany his post presidential attention-whoring.

      1. I’ll make an effort to get a few hundred more up in the coming days. Or weeks.

        So on the phony lake picture (it was just some logging slash mirrored in PS), you think cropping some off the bottom would improve it – a la the juiced up image of the alder trees on the same page? I can see where it would certainly give it better balance, but part of the appeal for me was the flagrant mirrorishness of the thing.

Comments are closed.