Colonel Sanders — T Clark

Was a closet red, yes. Originally, Comrade Sanders, his catchphrase "Kentucky For Communism" somehow got misinterpreted and he ended up selling chicken to fat people.

Did you know that the chubby girl in the red jumper is Keir Starmer's mum?

It is in the national anthem -- "does that star-spangled banner yet wave". It's a reference to the white stars/blue field on the US flag. The author, Francis Scott Key, was referencing the British bombardment of Fort McHenry in Baltimore during the War of 1812.

"Spangled" isn't much used any more; it appeared in print much more commonly in the 19th century. One could say, "star-spangled sky" when describing what the Milky Way looks like. Maybe one could say "star spangled ceremony" to describe the Academy Awards show.

Was a closet red, yes. Originally, Comrade Sanders, his catchphrase "Kentucky For Communism" somehow got misinterpreted and he ended up selling chicken to fat people. — Baden

Another factoid. If you come to the US (and please don't), you should buy University of Kentucky hats and shirts because they say UK on them, which when you're back home will make people think you support the UK. If some guy beats the shit out of you at an Irish bar, laugh at their stupidity for not knowing you're just a Wildcat fan and don't give a fuck about the queen.

Got a bit chicken chubby in his later years but clearly the same person. :up:



People beat the shit out of me everywhere I go. Hence my self-banishment to the internets.

Now that the Shoutbox is pinned to the front page, maybe it's worth putting in some gentle reminders. Such as, please stay on-topic. — Baden

What is the topic? Seriously. Not a point, a question. Honestly, I see about a million topics. Which one is the officially sanctioned topic?

I don't claim to understand the Shoutbox concept, but from reading it appears to be a kind of almost anything goes stream of consciousness water cooler conversation place. This isn't a complaint, I can see value in having such a feature. I just haven't figured it out yet.

That's a site wide request. The Shoutbox indeed has no topic.

It's been reported that a particularly offensive well known political figure eats tons of Kentucky Fried Chicken. It's my wishful thinking prediction that this will be the source of his demise.

Ah, ok, thank you for the clarification.

As for the rest of the site, I do hear what you're saying. The topic has to be defined somehow, and the OP is as good a definition as any. To the degree this is a problem, it tends to limit threads to the level of insight of the original poster. As example, and not meaning to belabor the point....

Imho, I made at least a credible case that the Gaza thread is not really about Gaza. I provided ample evidence, repeatedly. I grant that members thought the thread was about Gaza, and want it to be, and that majority rule is a reasonable procedure. So ok, no problem, case closed.

But the price tag is that that thread will now roll on endlessly discussing a topic that really only one member of the thread is actually sincerely interested in, the fellow who knows people in the region. But ok, it's just a thread, and this is just a forum, so this is not an existential crisis, and life goes on.

But the price tag is that that thread will now roll on endlessly discussing a topic that really only one member of the thread is actually sincerely interested in, — Foghorn

It's just odd that you could write this not realizing how weird it sounds to a readership that knows you can't read minds. Without overt evidence of trolling, we just presume here that posters enter threads they're interested in. We don't presume the ability to look into their souls and judge their deepest motivations. That would make us pretentious wankers.

And just on the balance of averages, the chances of everyone on that thread except the dude you like being a troll are too slim to bother considering.

the fellow who knows people in the region. — Foghorn

The idea that you can't legitimately discuss the politics of places where you don't "know people in the region" is straight up nuts btw.

It's just odd that you could write this not realizing how weird it sounds to a readership that knows you can't read minds. Without overt evidence of trolling, we just presume here that posters enter threads they're interested in. We don't presume the ability to look into their souls and judge their deepest motivations. That would make us pretentious wankers. — Baden

Ok, then I'm a pretentious wanker. I accept the award, and would like to thank my mom and the academy. :-)

I'm not a mind reader. I examined the evidence I could find, and reported it. The claim I made was clearly debatable, and I was entirely willing to have it challenged.

In the case of the Gaza thread, I agree that posters sincerely believed themselves to be interested in innocent victims of war in the Middle East. But that's not what the evidence points to, imho, as already stated too many times.

However, I would agree such posters are not yet ready to look any deeper than the propaganda they wish to chant, and that there's nothing I can do about that. So, ending an investigation that members aren't ready for is agreeable here.

The idea that you can't legitimately discuss politics of places where you don't "know people in the region" is straight up nuts btw. — Baden

Which is why I didn't make that claim.