Comments on: BY FAR the Best Commentary on the Foley Scandal

By: madjoey

madjoey — Mon, 09 Oct 2006 20:10:02 +0000

wrt/divinity – yeah, the God’n'Jeebus part is retarded, but there’s a part of divinity study that has to do with how we mortals might lead more “Christlike” lives with other human beings. How to be a good person. Morality. Stuff like that. Pity that religiosity tangles it all up and renders it useless or unpalatable.

By: Colonel Cathcart

Colonel Cathcart — Sun, 08 Oct 2006 02:36:00 +0000

Let me take you down, ’cause I’m going to Swank Dreamfields.
Nothing is real and nothing to get hung about.
Swank Dreamfields forever.

Always know sometimes think it’s me, but you know I know when it’s a dream
-field. I think a “No” will mean a “Yes,” but it’s all WRONG.
That is I think I disagree.

By: Zython

Zython — Sun, 08 Oct 2006 01:53:08 +0000

Huh, AA hasn’t posted again here. Maybe she got lost in her dreamfield.

By: herr doktor bimler

herr doktor bimler — Sat, 07 Oct 2006 10:18:24 +0000

Don’t get me started on QDFT (Quantum dreamfield theory). SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1), and all that.

By: Marq

Marq — Sat, 07 Oct 2006 08:29:37 +0000

Truth is a woman. You want her, you need her, and yet you donâ€™t believe her.

He don't know me vewwy well, do he? [yeah, yeah, it's schtick, but I do it so well!]

By: mikey

mikey — Sat, 07 Oct 2006 01:09:50 +0000

I can’t resist jumping on Patkin’s post, which does not appear to contain even .01mg of snark.

Well, unlike going to school to learn political science (made up bullshit), philosophy (made up bullshit), high-level mathematics (made up bullshit) or any of those other intellectually stimulating but entirely manufactured educational tracks.

And donâ€™t even get me started one linguistics majors.

The big difference here is not in the conclusions. Yes, their value and accuracy can be debated. It’s in the method. All of YOUR “made up bullshit” at least have data based on observable events and facts. You can look at those events and facts and disagree with the conclusions. But there is NO data in “divinity”. I can’t look at your data, because it is…

…wait for it…

…made up bullshit….

mikey

By: W. Kiernan

W. Kiernan — Sat, 07 Oct 2006 01:06:54 +0000

Marq No, no, no. Pastor Swank, have you forgotten so soon?! Marriage = 1 man + 1 woman. The truth doesnâ€™t enter into it at all!

Truth is a woman. You want her, you need her, and yet you don’t believe her. Or as Francicso de Quevedo put it:

“What an awful life! Nobody has a worse time than madmen who earn their living from other madmen.”

By: Smiling Mortician

Smiling Mortician — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 22:11:08 +0000

Assuming patkin’s post was snark-free, I think the essential difference between the discipline of divinity and the other “made-up bullshit” disciplines mentioned is that political science, mathematics, and even the hated study of linguistics are theoretical approaches to observable artifacts, whereas divinity, as an academic discipline, begins with the premise that literature is literal and then theorizes from there about that which is inherently unobservable.

By: a different brad

a different brad — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 21:40:13 +0000

Oops. That may have been snark, ifso, my bad. If not, the comment stands.

By: a different brad

a different brad — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 21:37:15 +0000

Y’know, patkin, your cogent and well argued dismissal of roughly half of academia might go down better if you proofread it, first. I know it’s petty to pick at a typo, but I couldn’t help but giggle, considering the word whut followed.
Btw, if you’re going to say that only certain sciences aren’t “made up bullshit”, you might want to reconsider on philosophy. Descartes kinda started the modern model of science with….. wait for it….. his philosophical writings.
Or, if you’re a Jebushumper, well, shit. Half your cosmology comes from neo-Platonism via St. Augustine.
I know it’s fun being a reactionary nihilist, but if you keep it up past the age of about 15-16, yer an idiot.

By: Anne Laurie

Anne Laurie — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 21:33:09 +0000

annieangel : â€œI think the parents should be ashamed of themselves for not donig anything.â€?

g said, Youâ€™re full of shit. For one thing, you arenâ€™t a parent so you have no fucking idea of the tight-rope one walks regarding teenagers. You should just shut the fuck up until you have the experience to open your yap. For another thing, the parents DID try to do something. They went to the fucking Congress of the United States of America. What the fuck else do you think they should have done? Called their local Block Watch Association? The Better Business Bureau?

G, I think one of the homeschoolers’ parents must have mentioned enrolling her in the Congressional Page program as a resume-booster. You’d be mad at your parents too, if you were twelve and they were trying to separate you from your BFF for like *months* and besides you thought it was safe to mess around with the grownups’ heads because the two of you had been trolling on Sadly,No and never had anything worse happen than being called dumb names! Because the homeschooolers believe everything they’ve been told about Evil Demon Baby-Murdering Pervert Liberals, the poor kids didn’t have the experience to understand that in reality us moonbats are committed to non-violence and consensual sex, while the icons of the Holy Right Reich are… not so much.

As for what the parents were supposed to do about it, the NRA just told us: They were supposed to grab their extensive gun collection, buy some rope and nails, and go kill them a Congersscritter! Or at least a handful of little Amish schoolgirls… *sigh*

By: Ron Mexico

Ron Mexico — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 19:33:00 +0000

“Titillating dreamfields”???

Did he find Hunter S. Thompson’s stash? He should leave that stuff to the pros.

By: Anna in Portland (formerly Cairo)

Anna in Portland (formerly Cairo) — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 19:27:03 +0000

As one of the Muzlamic Murderers Global, I am so happy to see a Swank column at Sadly, No! today. His version of English is so great. It’s its own little language. This one is full of great gems. My favorite sentence of today’s article was:

“Married to truth allows one to run lifeâ€™s race with untold satisfactions that are real.”

Well, actually it was tied with:

“[W]hy was this tolerated when known about?”

Maybe Rumsfeld reads Swank columns? Or maybe Swank listens to Rumsfeld speeches? Because I see some definite cross-pollenation here.

By: Dr. Squid

Dr. Squid — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:54:55 +0000

Aren’t dreamfields where the womb babies play?

By: Kathleen

Kathleen — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:42:12 +0000

I know I am late to the game, with 60+ comments already, but I just have to say. The whole “dreamfield” thing is so uber-awesome, I can’t even explain. The guy makes up his own language. I love it.

By: D. Sidhe

D. Sidhe — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 16:41:42 +0000

At this point, the only thing I really like about Swank is that he inspires some *excellent* freeform poetry from the commenters here.

The thing about dreamcows is going up on my fridge, btw.

By: R. V. Dump

R. V. Dump — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 16:26:10 +0000

Even though I am married (to truth) my wife allows me to run lifeâ€™s race through my dreamfields and play with my hooded weasel which brings untold satisfactions that are real.

By: 100years

100years — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:51:48 +0000

GlenGarry Glen Dreamfields: “First prize is you go to heaven. You know what the second prize is? Set of steak knives. Third prize is eternal damnation.”

By: TC

TC — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:02:49 +0000

Dreamfields? WTF?

What am I doing wrong? I dreamt of Chicago last night.

By: Smiling Mortician

Smiling Mortician — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 13:42:43 +0000

I feel your pain, GoatBoy. Well, no, not really. I mean, uh, maybe you should try closing your eyes and going to your dreamfield?