Monday, June 18, 2007

How Many Guinness Can You Balance?

Just a quick pointer today to this Boing Boing piece on a bartender balancing pints of Guinness one on top of the other.

Oh, the crime of wasting all that Guinness... he shoulda stopped at three!

23 comments:

jan said...

I believe I've been in that pub :)

Hey, does your local Irish pub (we have quite a few in our neck of the nation) make the shamrock in the foam for you?

Oh! I saw the "Recent Comments" part! (Bob's comment caught my eye) Very cool, csm.

I repeat, my kroney... you are brilliant.

Hey, since no trolls are here, I think I'm going to use my real name. I have to keep typing "Bev" and I've almost forgotten my name a few times.

Everyone can feel free to call me what you want.
Bev is my take-charge mother-in-law's name.
I think my real name makes me sound too short and too blonde on blogs.
(Yes, I'm short and blonde.)

Ceroill said...

Jan (Bev), which of my comments caught your eye? Here's a link I was sent by a friend. Not truly appropot of anything talked about here so far, but I hope you will all find it of interest. If it works, that is...
http://memepunks.blogspot.com/2006/06/americas-war-on-science.html?dupe=with_honor

Ceroill said...

Ok, trying it again. I'll have to split the link, and you can copy/paste the parts.
http://memepunks.blogspot.com
/2006/06/americas-war-on-science
.html?dupe=with_honor

jan said...

Bob, I noticed your "recent comment" about the recent comments. :)
p.s. I can't get back to the last posts on "Freethinkers" so I didn't see your last one. :(

Since I don't know how to link yet, I'll provide this partial comment by Wm. Rivers Pitt on Truthout.
It's in response to "the anger" directed at The Worst President Ever:

"Why the anger? It can be summed up in one run-on sentence: We have lost two towers in New York, a part of the Pentagon, an important American city called New Orleans, our economic solvency, our global reputation, our moral authority, our children's future, we have lost tens of thousands of American soldiers to death and grievous injury, we must endure the Abramoffs and the Cunninghams and the Libbys, and the whores and the bribes and the utter corruption, we must contemplate the staggering depth of the hole we have been hurled down into, and we expect little to no help from the mainstream DC press, whose lazy go-along-to-get-along cocktail-circuit mentality allowed so much of this to happen because they failed comprehensively to do their job.
"George W. Bush and his pals used September 11th against the American people, used perhaps the most horrific day in our collective history, deliberately and with intent, to foster a war of choice that has killed untold tens of thousands of human beings and basically bankrupted our country. They lied about the threat posed by Iraq. They destroyed the career of a CIA agent who was tasked to keep an eye on Iran's nuclear ambitions, and did so to exact petty political revenge against a critic. They tortured people, and spied on American civilians.
"You cannot fathom anger arising from this?"

derF said...

Back on June 6, coreyd said, “this is for derf!” I think it was really meant for anyone who, like me, was having difficultly posting links. I found it very helpful and certainly quicker than sifting through all the information in the National Library of Congress.

derF said...

As you can see, I’m still learning. What coreyd actually said was, “this is for derf!” I think it was really meant for anyone who, like me, was having difficultly posting links. I found it very helpful and certainly quicker than sifting through all the information in the National Library of Congress.

Ceroill said...

Jan, my last post over there was a comment on fcc putting words into peoples' mouths. Nice bit from Pitt. Did you manage to assemble my link and make it work? If not I'll cut and paste the article.

jan said...

Bob, I haven't gotten to your link yet but I can cut and paste the link, so don't worry about c&p'ing the site itself.
I use to be able to sit and blog while my geometry students were working on problems. Now the site is too interesting to them and I have to sneak it (and there's not much sneaking around adolescents).

I also haven't had a chance to go back to the on-going book you once posted. It was so far, so good, but I never got back to it.

What I wanted to know (we were in the midst of this conversation over at FreeT's) is if you will work on getting your stuff published?

Ceroill said...

Jan, Ongoing book? I recall us chatting about things, and I rambled on about stuff, and you complimented my style. So far I have not done anything about publishing.

jan said...

Bob:
OK, regarding the "on-going" book... It wasn't yours. The guy posted new stuff on Tuesdays? Wednesdays? Sort of Action Hero style?
If that doesn't jolt your memory,and you're still curious, I'll go back to the 400+ pages I have saved from Freethinkers for our stage play entitled "Bawdy Posts."

regarding YOUR book :)... on the other site, I had just wondered if you know how to start getting published, and told you I would be happy to help.
I didn't promise you any money, but I teach writing and have steered many talented students towards many welcoming outlets.

I'm not saying you need me; I'm just saying I hope you will pursue your writing.

Also, I sincerely hope, bawdy (if you read this) that you will pursue your writing talent as well.
Cheers!

Ceroill said...

jan, ok, right, I recall. Oh, one thing you may find mildly interesting is that fcc apparently doesn't like the atmosphere on this page.

jan said...

Bob, I find it wonderfully REFRESHING that fcc doesn't like the atmosphere here.

See how much nicer I am when I don't have to deal with Loyal Bushie liars? *grin*

(Or "fucking idiots" as csm likes to say)

Bob, you've been a good influnece on me. I'm consciously trying to add this sentence to my vocabulary:
"Of course, I could be wrong."

It's a bit of a foreign language for me. ;)

csm said...

There is an outstanding open invitation for all the folks on the old Freethinker site to come on over and play... but, I agree, Jan, the water is nice and clear over here without some of them.

jan said...

It's just so nice to actually be able to "discuss" without having to dispell (sp?) the frigging talking points.
I swear, I could talk to my dittohead brother at 10 a.m. in Texas and tell you the exact words fcc was going to use to argue with me at noon in Virginia.

Hey, everyone --
Have a nice sunset-sunrise-sunset in nature this weekend, if possible.
Cheers!

Ceroill said...

jan, glad to be a good influence. I try never to present myself as absolutely right about anything unless it's basic physical law or essential mathematics (2+2=4 and such). The word is 'dispel'.

As to 'dittoheads' and such (also includes fans of Coulter), can someone help me understand something about that mindset? On the one hand they claim it's all 'just humor' and 'in good fun', and if you (that is a non dittohead)don't laugh at, it then you have no sense of humor. However, if you (the non dittohead) DO laugh it off as just humor, suddenly they defend it as hugely insightful political gospel. As much as I like to think I can see both sides of almost any situation, this one eludes me.

BAWDYSCOT said...

Yeah, the same talking points you(Jan)accuse me of espousing. I am beginning to feel as though I am being substituted for fcc and Mike and Gene because of my more "conservative" bent. I berate Republicans as much as the Democrats because in the end I find very little difference between the two for a veriaety of reasons, but mainly because they want the whole pie for themselves and I like pie.

jan said...

Well, bawdy, from my view, you summarize Democrats as simply wanting to just give us all a bunch of unnecessary warm fuzzies.

To me, that sounds like a big-time GOP talking point. The Parties each have a platform. If you check them out, I don't see the Democrats listing "a bunch of warm fuzzies" to give away.

I get it.
You want less government.

So do I. I just want less of some different parts of government than others want less of some different parts of government.

For me, 20% of the budget each -- establishing justice, insure peace at home, providing defense abroad, promoting the welfare of those who need it, and insuring liberty for the next generation.
Peacetime budget.
War tax to pay for war.
That's not Big Government.

Democrats have pay-go.
Democrats have balanced budgets.
Those policies both tend to limit government.

You got yourself less government with Bill Clinton than you got with George Bush, and they had virtually the same Congress for six years each.

I'll remind you again that csm is a liberal. The name has the same root as the word liberty.
Do you think you could compromise your ideals with fcc more than you could compromise them with that damn idiot liberal csm?
Not me.

And if you're not going to compromise, as it looks like you won't, then we have our own little 5-person flustercluck, instead of our government's 535-person flusterclunk.
Oh. Joy.

BAWDYSCOT said...

First off, when in my last few posts have I used the word liberal? I have been using "Democrats". If you want to make that connection that is your doing. Classical liberalism is another name for libertarianism, so I really don't know where you are going with that one.

Second, when your government ends up describing it's budget in the trillions of dollars(which I know isn't only the fault of Democrats, but they have their hand in it)that is Big Givernment in my book.

csm said...

I like the word "flusterclunk"!

csm said...

And Bawdy, you could never be mistaken for fcc or Gene... too much reason rambling around that old cranium of yours for that to happen IMHO.

Ceroill said...

Isn't that 'properly' spelled 'fustercluck'? And Jan, is that a spoonerism or a malapropism?

BAWDYSCOT said...

A related word is "blustercock" of which our current President is a prime example.

Ceroill said...

That's a good one, Bawdy!