"with Felicity Kendall, who was a big favorite of mine as Barbara Good in the television series The Good Life."

I remember that show from it being played on PBS (as "Good Neighbors"), along with this version of Sherlock Homes, Dr. Who, Blake's 7, and Are You Being Served?

"Besides... it hurts his feefees
and that's what makes it funny..."

Anybody who actually believes this is too incompetent and too impotent to breathe.

People like him feel vindicated every time someone makes an ode to him, whether it's done earnestly or sarcastically.

There's no such thing as bad press for this type of person.

The only thing that would hurt him is if no one ever gave him any attention again.

I get why people use satire to cope with absurd situations, but I don't understand why many people are so addicted to impressions of Trump, whether its SNL, or talk show hosts, or Youtubers. It stopped being funny a long ago.

Sad that nobody here seems to care about Watson.

One day, Alexander Graham Bell will call all of the rest of us.

I don't believe for a second that the double entendre in the headline is a coincidence.

"Republicans destroyed journalism."

The 24-hour news cycle and the shift to digital is what destroyed journalism.

"MAGAts are generally not okay with people darker than Navajo White on their pocket color charts having the vote."

Empirical evidence doesn't back this up. From what I've seen, they're perfectly OK with anyone who wears the red hat being able to vote, even if many wouldn't associate with them personally. Perceived money and power are often overriding factors to other prejudices.

"Israel competes cheats in Eurovision"

"Soft power and marketing is the same is cheating" is the exact same premise that Russia has been using to 'justify' their supposed victimhood and behavior related to it.

And the most confusing headline of the year goes to...

"Obama was a lousy president but wasn't as damaging as W."

The most damaging thing Obama ever did was inadvertently helping Trump get elected, twice. Apart from that, I'd describe him as a relatively above average president, given what he had to work with, even though I disagreed with him about some things.

"Amerenia"

*Armenia

"WTF is Israel doing in a Euro competition in the first place?"

Israel competes in Eurovision because the contest is organized by the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), not the European Union or any geographical body. Participation is open to any active member broadcaster in good standing within the European Broadcasting Area.

This is why Amerenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijian are also in Eurovision, even though they are geographically Asian. In the past, Morrocco and Australia have also participated in it.

"a fresh call for a federal data analytics centre"

And how much will be misspent on the design and implementation of that?

It actually wouldn't surprise me if Matt has privileges here.

"The are the potential consequences of getting serious cooties from that poster whenever addressing him."

Many have speculated that that poster is someone with admin privileges on this site. I've also seen some people speculate the same thing about yourself...

"Can a person be racist against their own race?"

Of course you can.

Bill:
"You're talking as though every ICE operation is simple and risk-free when you really don't know what they deal with."

You're sounding like the type of person who made excuses for and objected to any criticisms of the military in the wake of the Abu Ghraib scandal. But I'm guessing you probably didn't have any problem with federal law enforcement being attacked as "jack-booted thugs" under different presidents. (I remember G Gordon Liddy and others using that phrase under Clinton in the '90s.)

Laura:
"No actually it isn't racist. Oopsie Daisy"

You're not any more credible than Bill here. We all know the person who said it was being racist, just like certain posters here regularly troll with antisemitic stuff and least one other regularly uses a anti-Chinese slur without consequence.

"I don't know about you, but I don't base my behavior on the poor behavior of others."

You must be very different IRL than you are on here, then. >:-)

(Granted, most of us probably are.)

Roots by Alex Haley is highly controversial because the author marketed it as a meticulously researched, non-fiction genealogy, but it was later revealed to contain extensive fabrications, historical inaccuracies, and plagiarism.

The controversy stems from several major issues:

Plagiarism: Haley was sued by author Harold Courlander for lifting significant portions of his 1967 novel, The African. Haley settled out of court for $650,000 and admitted to using passages from the book.

Fabricated Genealogy: Investigations revealed that Haley's reported ancestral link to the village of Juffureh and his famous ancestor, Kunta Kinte, lacked documentary evidence. The oral traditions he relied on were largely debunked as inaccurate or tailored to what Haley wanted to hear.

Historical Inaccuracies: Historians and genealogists, such as Elizabeth Shown Mills and Gary B. Mills, found numerous geographical, historical, and factual inconsistencies throughout the timeline of his family's saga.

Blurred Genre Lines: Although the book was originally presented as absolute fact, experts realized it was closer to an autobiographical novel. Haley himself coined the term "faction" (fact plus fiction) to describe it, but this did not stop critics from condemning the deception.

Despite the controversy, Roots is still widely recognized for its cultural impact and for bringing the brutal realities of the transatlantic slave trade into mainstream American consciousness.

Yes, garlic does repel mosquitoes. I ate some raw garlic and also crushed some in our tent when camping recently. Never got bit. Garlic is really good for the immune system too.

"Time to revolt."

Are you revolting?

"Intellectually honest people look at the bigger picture and give more weight to the popular vote as a metric of how liked/disliked a candidate is."

Intellectually honest people who are pragmatic will give at least as much weight to how capable a candidate is at winning elections. If you're ignoring a candidate's ability to pull in a majority in 30 states, accounting for almost 60% of the electoral vote, then you're living in lala land.

As I've said, I never voted for him and never would.

"I disagree. They should have to rationalize why they did it............but they don't actually have to."

They have to rationalize it to themselves, at least. Like pretending that Biden or Harris were worse.

"based on your skin tone."

That's the only thing you see when looking at people, apparently.

A cynic would say "The voters get the government they deserve."