Ogged: Is Jodie Foster really a sex symbol? Or are you saying she's such an excellent actor that you see everything she's in? Neither one makes much sense to me. You've never shot Ronald Reagan, have you?
I thought it was a given that we all think Jodie Foster rocks, which is not quite the same as saying that she's a sex symbol or a great actress (though she might be both).
I guess in a non-Euclidean kind of way. I'm going to go back to smiting men with erectile dysfunction after they dare look upon the mystery of childbirth now. Let me know if you've got another problem you want me to cause.
Bandes was fired from the DTH staff as a result of that article. I have a mental image of Ogged swatting away a latex-covered finger screaming, "I'm Persian, goddammit, PERSIAN!"
Yeah, I've followed the story, it being right here in town and my alma mater's newspaper and all. I suspect she was really fired for being a racist barking loony with the distortion being the nominal story to avoid lawsuits. I'm sure we'll be seeing her as a regular guest on FoxNews, CNN, and MSNBC soon enough.
I simply cannot imagine seeing this new Jodie Foster movie. Maybe I could have before I had a daughter, now it just seems like the kind of thing that would give me nightmares for weeks.
I'm going to go back to smiting men with erectile dysfunction
Is your ablative instrumental or locative? Because, honestly, if you're the one giving men erectile dysfunction after seeing their wives give birth, you should have come forward sooner.
instrumental. sorry for the confusion. right, but then I wouldn't have caused so much blogospheric animosity, which was another one of my aims. Oh, and do you know when the cable guy gives you a six hour window during which you have to be home, but then doesn't show up? I dreamed up that one. Take that, Lizard Breath.
Note to self re 26: The trolling works better when you can enlist them against each other.
You may well be right about 27, and she's already beeno on several talk radio shows, though I didn't know that there was a problem with firing opinion columnists for being racist barking loonies. (Maybe it's different at a public university newspaper, which may be covered under something akin to academic freedom or First Amendment content neutrality or something.)
But I don't think the editor's story is really fishy; take this quote:
"Let them search. It depends on how I'm stopped, but if it is done in a professional manner … "
Outside the column, it sounds as though this is opposed to profiling. He doesn't mind being searched, so long as he has been stopped fairly. But Bandes presents the quote as though it were in support of profiling.
In my opinion, they would have been completely within their rights to fire her for being unable to write her way out of a paper bag. Stupid, racist opinions needn't even enter the deliberations.
It was Hinckley who fuched up, not Jody. She always acted as if she were "a victim" and it all really had nothing to do with her, and she seemed unwilling to accept thanks for her role in the Hinckley-Reagan episode. I understand that for legal reasons she had to do that, but I lost a little respect for her when she did.
According to the story, Bandes quoted everybody accurately. She cherry-picked quotes, but that is what reporters do. She just put the quotes in an article advocating a racist and ignorant position.
41: Then every college paper would be eight pages of blank newsprint.
43: She distinctly said something along the lines of "Arab-American students don't have a problem with racial profiling either" (I am NOT opening that article again to find the exact quote). If the following quotes were not in fact in support of racial profiling then she fucked up. You're allowed to cherry-pick quotes but you're not allowed to make them mean the opposite of what they say. (AFAIK, I am not a journalist, Allah be praised.)
The arab-americans didn't have a problem with racial profiling. They had a problem with their quotes being in an article along with the phrase "I want Arabs to get sexed up like nothing else."
"I'm not comfortable with it, I'm not happy with it, but I can accept it." = "I'm against it, but if it happens it happens," I think, not "don't seem to think that's such a bad idea"; where "that" actually refers to "I want Arabs to get sexed up like nothing else." I mean, the way Bandes wrote it it sounded like the Arab-Americans were actually endorsing the sexing up part.
A bit of a molehill here, because I think that Bandes should've been fired for being a fucking moron, and bringing disgrace on blonde, blue-eyed, Caucasian Jews everywhere.
Also, it would of course be shockingly easy to convert her argument into one against other groups which are statistically likely to bad things. For instance, the vast majority of violent crimes are committed by men. Therefore all men should be incarcerated.
What's weird is, if the editor cocked up that story to give this writer the boot, and it can be demonstrated that he did so, doesn't that leave him even more exposed to litigation than he would have been in the first place? If he'd just fired her for, say, being a bad writer?
I don't know dick about First Amendment and/or employment law, PS.
It's pretty obvious that the problems in this world are all the fault of white women.
Which is why it's vitally important we know where they're all at.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 11:58 AM
Dysentery, that was me.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 11:59 AM
Hah, you call that a disease? Leprosy, ebola, and necrotizing fasciitis. And that was just on Monday.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:01 PM
(which we'll all see, even if we know if sucks, just because Jodie Foster is in it)
Speak for yourself, Arab.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:02 PM
I'm going to make you go, Ben.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:03 PM
How do you purpose to do that?
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:04 PM
I hadn't contemplated purposing.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:05 PM
Ogged: Is Jodie Foster really a sex symbol? Or are you saying she's such an excellent actor that you see everything she's in? Neither one makes much sense to me. You've never shot Ronald Reagan, have you?
Posted by tom | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:06 PM
I thought it was a given that we all think Jodie Foster rocks, which is not quite the same as saying that she's a sex symbol or a great actress (though she might be both).
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:08 PM
You've never shot Ronald Reagan, have you?
Come on, like you haven't.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:09 PM
I don't know that she's a sex symbol, but she's certainly quite beautiful.
And I do think that she rocks.
Posted by silvana | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:10 PM
Why is she doing nothing but trapped-in-a-metal-cylinder movies these days? What ever happened to the Jodie Foster of Nell?
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:12 PM
That was her twin.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:14 PM
What other metal cylinders? Panic room was a box.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:14 PM
Let me guess: they subsequently trapped her twin in a metal cylinder, which drove Jodie into her present monomania.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:16 PM
Panic room was a box.
Sure, but it was kind of round.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:17 PM
Sex symbol and great actress. Tom, your priorities are so messed up it's no wonder you're a Cowboys fan.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:18 PM
I find it hard to believe that the latest Jodie-in-a-box movie will be much worse than Nell.
Posted by Duvall | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:20 PM
Little Man Tate?
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:21 PM
What? Cowboys? No no no. I'm a Redskins fan. You're thinking of Armsmasher.
As for Jodie Foster: I still fail to see the appeal on either front. She seems serviceable, but that's all.
Posted by tom | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:21 PM
Sure, but it was kind of round.
I guess in a non-Euclidean kind of way. I'm going to go back to smiting men with erectile dysfunction after they dare look upon the mystery of childbirth now. Let me know if you've got another problem you want me to cause.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:22 PM
OK, the box may have been square, but it was thinking round thoughts. I bet you.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:23 PM
You've never shot Ronald Reagan, have you?
And that's not a euphemism.
Posted by Anonymous | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:31 PM
Bandes was fired from the DTH staff as a result of that article. I have a mental image of Ogged swatting away a latex-covered finger screaming, "I'm Persian, goddammit, PERSIAN!"
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:37 PM
Armsmasher? The Aggie?
Apostropher, Bandes was fired because of the article, but not because she's a racist barking loony--she lied to the people she was interviewing and distorted their quotes. And she's learned a valuable lesson; it doesn't matter what journalistic sins you commit, if you express politically correct (= right-wing) views you'll be defended by supposedly reputable journalists.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:44 PM
Armsmasher? The Aggie?
Yes, that's the one.
Posted by tom | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:46 PM
Yeah, I've followed the story, it being right here in town and my alma mater's newspaper and all. I suspect she was really fired for being a racist barking loony with the distortion being the nominal story to avoid lawsuits. I'm sure we'll be seeing her as a regular guest on FoxNews, CNN, and MSNBC soon enough.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:49 PM
after they dare look upon the mystery of childbirth
Seeing the baby come out of my first wife's metal cylindrical box destroyed that marriage.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:51 PM
I simply cannot imagine seeing this new Jodie Foster movie. Maybe I could have before I had a daughter, now it just seems like the kind of thing that would give me nightmares for weeks.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 12:58 PM
You've never shot Ronald Reagan, have you?
Is that what you young folks are calling it these days?
Posted by Tripp | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 1:00 PM
(which we'll all see, even if we know if sucks, just because Jodie Foster is in it)
I think people may have misread ogged's command as a prediction.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 1:09 PM
That reminds me: I still haven't received my matching jumpsuit. Should I be calling UPS?
Posted by tom | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 1:15 PM
I'm going to go back to smiting men with erectile dysfunction
Is your ablative instrumental or locative? Because, honestly, if you're the one giving men erectile dysfunction after seeing their wives give birth, you should have come forward sooner.
Posted by Sam K | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 1:27 PM
what you young folks are calling it
Only the lame ones. That's so late August. The hip crowd raises a knowing eyebrow when you announce that you have to "go put Hinckley in solitary."
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 1:28 PM
> I suspect she was really fired for being a racist barking loony with the distortion being the nominal story to avoid lawsuits.
I think so too. The editor's story is fishy.
Posted by Joe O | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 1:36 PM
What makes you say that? (That is, I don't know that it isn't but I don't see what leads you to that conclusion at the link.)
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 1:58 PM
Is your ablative instrumental or locative?
instrumental. sorry for the confusion. right, but then I wouldn't have caused so much blogospheric animosity, which was another one of my aims. Oh, and do you know when the cable guy gives you a six hour window during which you have to be home, but then doesn't show up? I dreamed up that one. Take that, Lizard Breath.
Now let's talk about anal sex with Ogged.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:00 PM
Note to self re 26: The trolling works better when you can enlist them against each other.
You may well be right about 27, and she's already beeno on several talk radio shows, though I didn't know that there was a problem with firing opinion columnists for being racist barking loonies. (Maybe it's different at a public university newspaper, which may be covered under something akin to academic freedom or First Amendment content neutrality or something.)
But I don't think the editor's story is really fishy; take this quote:
"Let them search. It depends on how I'm stopped, but if it is done in a professional manner … "
Outside the column, it sounds as though this is opposed to profiling. He doesn't mind being searched, so long as he has been stopped fairly. But Bandes presents the quote as though it were in support of profiling.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:01 PM
Al-beeno!
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:02 PM
That just made my top 5 non-sequiters.
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:04 PM
In my opinion, they would have been completely within their rights to fire her for being unable to write her way out of a paper bag. Stupid, racist opinions needn't even enter the deliberations.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:11 PM
It was Hinckley who fuched up, not Jody. She always acted as if she were "a victim" and it all really had nothing to do with her, and she seemed unwilling to accept thanks for her role in the Hinckley-Reagan episode. I understand that for legal reasons she had to do that, but I lost a little respect for her when she did.
Posted by John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:14 PM
According to the story, Bandes quoted everybody accurately. She cherry-picked quotes, but that is what reporters do. She just put the quotes in an article advocating a racist and ignorant position.
Posted by Joe O | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:16 PM
You can cherry pick quotes, but not to leave the impression that the speaker believes the opposite of what he believes.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:19 PM
41: Then every college paper would be eight pages of blank newsprint.
43: She distinctly said something along the lines of "Arab-American students don't have a problem with racial profiling either" (I am NOT opening that article again to find the exact quote). If the following quotes were not in fact in support of racial profiling then she fucked up. You're allowed to cherry-pick quotes but you're not allowed to make them mean the opposite of what they say. (AFAIK, I am not a journalist, Allah be praised.)
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:21 PM
The arab-americans didn't have a problem with racial profiling. They had a problem with their quotes being in an article along with the phrase "I want Arabs to get sexed up like nothing else."
Posted by Joe O | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:27 PM
Huh, Joe might be right. I don't see anything here that proves she manipulated the quotes to say the opposite of what the people intended.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:43 PM
"I'm not comfortable with it, I'm not happy with it, but I can accept it." = "I'm against it, but if it happens it happens," I think, not "don't seem to think that's such a bad idea"; where "that" actually refers to "I want Arabs to get sexed up like nothing else." I mean, the way Bandes wrote it it sounded like the Arab-Americans were actually endorsing the sexing up part.
A bit of a molehill here, because I think that Bandes should've been fired for being a fucking moron, and bringing disgrace on blonde, blue-eyed, Caucasian Jews everywhere.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:49 PM
Can we get back to the evil that white women do? Or is it the Jews?
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:50 PM
Also, it would of course be shockingly easy to convert her argument into one against other groups which are statistically likely to bad things. For instance, the vast majority of violent crimes are committed by men. Therefore all men should be incarcerated.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:52 PM
At the Mineshaft!
Three squares a day, IYKWIM, and I think James Dobson does.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:54 PM
Do we actually know that Helen Hall is white?
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:55 PM
What's weird is, if the editor cocked up that story to give this writer the boot, and it can be demonstrated that he did so, doesn't that leave him even more exposed to litigation than he would have been in the first place? If he'd just fired her for, say, being a bad writer?
I don't know dick about First Amendment and/or employment law, PS.
Posted by Joe Drymala | Link to this comment | 09-23-05 2:56 PM