| ok, here are some of my other complaints. can we come up with some shorthand to refer to the disaster? ive seen "bloody tuesday" but thats a bit gruesome. "9-11" might have some staying power as it is the code for emergency. so where were you for 9-11? also, can we finish canonizing rudy? about the only job i havent heard him considered for -- pope. where was pope john paul 2 during this crisis? now is not a time for prayer but for action. guiliani only looks good because the shrub is such a mumbling bumbler. i say, thank god for colin powell, he seems like the only reasonable person in that administration. meanwhile, was i the only person mildly disturbed by bush speaking from the pulpit to the assembled dignitaries (and the viewing audience) at the national cathedral for his day of remembrance. maybe it would have been alright had the speech he gave not been so politically oriented. it seemed like an intentional effort to blur the line between church and state when those lines should be drawn all the more starkly. lastly, what is up with NOrmalcy? i was taught that it was properly "normality" but the only instance ive seen it used as such of late was in slate. thank you jacob weisberg. (i later found an economist article that also used "normality".) i think merriam webster listed the first instance of "normalcy" for 1857 or so. one of the do-nothing presidents, i think harding (return to normalcy), may have popularized its use. i was wondering what the oed says about it. jim? |
return to: /treehouse |
"... treehouse - ... ive seen "bloody tuesday" but thats a bit gruesome. "9-11" might have some staying power as it is the code for emergency. so where were you for 9-11? ... ..." |