So there we were at a fairly small airport in Long Island, our preferred means of departing the area by air as opposed to the more busier, more hectic JKF or LaGuardia, as casa David prepared for our annual pilgrimage to Florida (followed by my continuation to the San Diego con.)
We encounter a huge line waiting for curbside check-in, but the line inside seems no shorter, so we wait. And wait. We inch forward. After about fifteen minutes of waiting, some guy steps in back of us. Apparently he doesn’t realize that he’s cutting in line, because there’s ten people behind us. It’s just that the woman behind us hadn’t yet moved forward because she had several suitcases to maneuver. Kathleen points out to him that he’s cutting in line and indicates where the actual end is. His response? He starts cursing at her, telling her to go f*** herself.
I immediately round on him and tell him to back the hëll off. He tells me I should mind my own business. I tell him if he starts cursing out my wife, he’s made it my business. Our faces are literally inches apart as, out loud, I’m hurling profanities at him as fast as he’s tossing them at me, and I’m thinking My God, where the hëll are all the cops you always see patrolling the place? Reading the new Harry Potter book? He informs me I have no idea who I’m f***ing with, and then heads to the back of the line. People are looking at me and, looking for a reality check, I say, “Was it me?” And they smile and shake their heads and say, “Noooo…it wasn’t you.”
I’m thinking, “How could this day get off to any worse of a start?”
We finally get to the front of the line and they won’t check in Kathleen. Caroline and I are free to go, but they insist that Kath has to go stand on the line INSIDE the airport and present further ID. I say, “We already waited once; it’s insane that we’d have to wait on ANOTHER line.” They just stare icily at Kath and say they can’t do a thing.
And I’m thinking, It can’t be what I think it is.
After losing another twenty minutes of time, and with our flight set to depart in twenty minutes, we finally learn that it’s exactly what I’d worried it was:
“Kathleen David” is apparently a similar name (not even the same: Similar) to someone who is a suspected terrorist. As a result, Kathleen is on a No-Fly list. A woman who doesn’t have so much as a parking ticket in her history is now being told she has to allow another HOUR of time at airport check ins so that she can stand on long lines and present additional identification to prove she’s not someone else with a similar name who might or might not have done something. The ONLY reason we managed to make our flight was because Caroline was in a stroller and they had a separate, and much shorter, line through security for people with wheelchairs or strollers.
They gave her a piece of paper with a number to call to have herself removed from this list. I am, frankly, less than hopeful that this will be resolved quickly and efficiently. Has anyone else been in this situation? How did it turn out?
PAD
• 
Fine. Then I’ll hire kinkajou then. Make me spend all that extra money.
Fine. Then I’ll hire kinkajou. Make me spend all that extra money.
So much to choose from but what really stands out:
You have sex only with virgins. Good for you if that’s what it takes.
Mike’s insistance that any women who is not a virgin deserves the term “sloppy seconds” is just the latest manifestation of a somewhat disturbing weirdness toward the opposite sex that occasionally pops out of his keyboard. He has no clue how that sounds. He’ll make some lucky girl a great stalker some day.
Jerry–funny stuff, better than mine.
Bill–yeah, yeah, I know. You’re right.
On a serious note, Bill, why does it seem that Bush’s underhanded attacks on others have proven more successful than the attacks from the extreme against him?
Part of it is that Bush has been succesful in appearing to be largely disengaged. For a long while the far left meme was that Bush was a mere puppet while Cheney and Rove and others pulled the strings. That made it easier for him to not get direct blame for any excesses by his campaign.
Another factor was that too many critics were going for the big enchilada, the smoking gun, the knockout punch…when smaller metaphors would have been more effective. The Dan Rather fake letters story was a gift from heaven.
Kashkeshan. Nice.
Is there a Hebrew word for “Rear end in a tophat”?
First off, Micha–lemme teach YOU a word, my friend. You teach Hebrew, I teach Scottish–havering–pretty much the same thing as Kashkeshan. Although, I bet if I say THAT at one of our family parties they’re gonna look at me funny. Er.
Jerry, the S-Team hasn’t failed, they’re just letting Myers grow a false sense of security while they store their Horrid Acorns Of Death.
Don’t let the crickets chirping for four hours stop you from referring to a non-existent suspense, Bill.
I don’t know about you, Bill, but I think it’s the view of sex as an entitlement that’s really disturbing, which I have not implied, but you have inferred at your own discretion. Some men are simply turned on by a consenting partner. Go figure.
“Some men are simply turned on by a consenting partner.”
And one day, likely many, many decades from now, Mike may actually find one himself. Don’t you go and give up hope yet you little Kashkeshan. She might actually be out there somewhere.
Stranger things have happened.
I don’t know about you, Bill, but I think it’s the view of sex as an entitlement that’s really disturbing, which I have not implied, but you have inferred at your own discretion. Some men are simply turned on by a consenting partner. Go figure.
Oh I think that BOTH can be disturbing. The difference is that any inference as to my view of sex as an entitlement is strictly in youw own strange mind, while your view that women who are not virgins should be considered “sloppy seconds” is right here in black and white.
What an odd little havering you are.
Ye Gods, is He loose again?
Only the Evil One could turn a thread so completely on it’s fundament.
To paraphrase Mark Twain (with all apologies):
“Say you were a boring egomaniacal twit. Say you were Mike; but I repeat myself.”
Not having a life, I can’t say my fortune is squandered on me. Neglecting your life to interact with someone you consider a Kashkeshan — what’s your excuse?
So a guy admitting to being turned on by a consenting partner disturbs you?
You and Jerry are saying I admitted to being aroused by someone peforming the role of a sloppy second. I literally said no such thing. Since I am not aroused by someone peforming the role of a sloppy second, I know you will literally find no such quote by me. I simply referred to women who were available becaus ethey were sloppy seconds.
When Jerry disparaged his strawman, he seemed to be venting disgust at the prospect of sex with someone performing the sexual role of a sloppy second. The polar opposite of a sloppy second seems to be a virgin, and I responded accordingly.
Building on your strawman, you said “Mike’s insistance that any women who is not a virgin deserves the term ‘sloppy seconds'” which infers a dilution of all of a woman’s roles with her sexual identity that I did not imply. Inferring all interaction with women as sexually-themed — as you’ve done — seems to be based on the view of sex as an entitlement.
This is also true for you saying “women who are not virgins should be considered ‘sloppy seconds’ is right here in black and white.” There is no “should” in anything I’ve said — only in your inference. “Should” denotes entitlement. Consistent with the definition of “consenting partner,” I neither said nor implied a “should” in any of this.
…
I take it height is important to you, since you issue “little” as a disparagement. Perhaps someday you’ll be generous enough to explain how that’s supposed to disqualify anything I say.
Is there something other than doubt stopping you from the ridiculously simple task of citing something by me that qualifies me as a Kashkeshan?
Posted by: Mike at November 11, 2006 11:06 PM
I don’t see how, but thanks for admitting you engage in the coded-speech that shelters racism, my little macaca.
Posted by: Mike at July 31, 2007 11:03 PM
I take it height is important to you, since you issue “little” as a disparagement.
Mike, this is called psychological projection. You’re very good at it. It was a word used without malice on our parts. We can’t help it if your inadequacy issues with the word ‘little’ and the idea of height color how you perceive the comments of others.
Not having a life, I can’t say my fortune is squandered on me. Neglecting your life to interact with someone you consider a Kashkeshan — what’s your excuse?
Perhaps we still have the hope that you can turn it around. You’ve admitted you have no life–that’s the first step. Now try to work on figuring out the personality problems that led you to this destination and how you might change them.
I don’t know about you, Bill, but I think it’s the view of sex as an entitlement that’s really disturbing, which I have not implied, but you have inferred at your own discretion. Some men are simply turned on by a consenting partner. Go figure.
Oh I think that BOTH can be disturbing.
So a guy admitting to being turned on by a consenting partner disturbs you?
And now Mike’s been reduced to playing stupid to try to pull some dignity out of this. Sad. But ok, I’ll play along; no, Mike, what I found disturbing was A-the view that sex is an entitlement and B-your view that any non-virgin woman should be considered “sloppy seconds”
It’s amusing watching you get the flop sweats trying to deny you said it, or meant it or whatever. But it’s out there, Mike. Too late now. If you want us not to think of you as a creepy guy you’ll have to start thinking before you post creepy things.
Mike on the term “sloppy seconds”
I’m guessing it’s only creepy to couples who have only been intimate with each other. Feel free to abstain from a second marriage if it suits you to do so.
Spin it any way you want, Kashkeshan, pretend that there may still be somebody that hasn’t been convinced by your own words of just what a little man you are.
And by “little” I, of course, don’t mean height. You’re just playing dumb again (I hope!). For all I know you could qualify for a Diane Arbus pictorial. No, by little I refer to another common use of the word–petty, narrow, unimportant. That you combine this with what would otherwise be an almost comical degree of narcissism just makes it sad.
I doubt that any further points need to be made. From the way this thread has gone it’s doubtful that anything I can say can make you look worse than you are doing to yourself. So in that spirit–please help yourself to the last word.
(But I’ll leave with a completely serious word of advice–try not to use the “sloppy seconds” line on any female you might find yourself having a conversation with. Just…don’t.)
Jerry, unless you are saying my use of “little” was not disparaging, I can only thank you for simply confirming my reading of your posts.
Look at you trying to blame me for your presupposing sex as an entitlement, like anyone is going to find a post by you busting me for it before I busted you. When in doubt, use the “I’m rubber, you’re glue” rebuttal.
And no, saying the polar opposite of a sloppy second is a virgin is not the same as saying any non-virgin woman should be considered sloppy seconds. As someone who takes money for passing science onto school children, you should be embarassed for that definitively unscientific bluff.
So how many times do I have to say “sloppy seconds,” Bill, before I’ve stopped denying I’ve said it, or used it in its intended meaning, or whatever? You tell me.
Couples who have only been intimate with each other were, by definition, virgins when they committed to each other. As they are not second to anything, they do not qualify as sloppy seconds.
And now you’re offering my consistency as evidence I’m a Kashkeshan? Whaaateeeveeerrr, Kashkeshan.
Oh. So you didn’t mean little literally, you meant little metaphorically.
How is anyone short supposed to take their size being used as a disparaging metaphor? Are you not well?
With you apparently packing your bags to move in with me, I will never have to say “sloppy seconds” to pick up a chick again.
Jerry, unless you are saying my use of “little” was not disparaging, I can only thank you for simply confirming my reading of your posts.
And I repeat…
Mike, this is called psychological projection. You’re very good at it. It was a word used without malice on our parts. We can’t help it if your inadequacy issues with the word ‘little’ and the idea of height color how you perceive the comments of others.
Note that key sentence up there.
It was a word used without malice on our parts.
While your use of the word may well be disparaging, that does not mean that the use of the word by others is likewise disparaging. Your assumption that a word is disparaging when used by others just because you have chosen to make it disparaging based on your own shortcomings, inadequacies and self doubts is, again, your issue with your constant psychological projection onto others and their words or actions.
I would also point out that your basic inability to read and understand the sentence…
“It was a word used without malice on our parts.”
… seems to greatly underscore as fact a line I merely posted about you in jest before.
“My reading comprehension skills are unbelievable. Did I tell you all that I passed the 2nd Grade admissions test this year? And mom said that I would never get out of 1st Grade English. Or was that diapers?”
A third grader would have gotten that point. Hëll, even a second grader would have. But not our Mike. And yet you still have the delusion in your head that you can make sarcastic comments about Bill being a teacher from some position of intellectual superiority? Oooooooooooooookay. Your delusion and welcome to it.
Hopefully, none of us will ever get close enough to you in real life to determine whether or not you would also prove the diaper portion of that line to be accurate as well.
Oh, and I missed this line of Mike’s before while just skimming his previous verbal diarrhea…
“Posted by: Mike at July 31, 2007 09:29 AM
Observe how Jerry’s account of another’s state of mind trumps that person’s state of mind:
Yes, do please go to Mike’s link and observe it. Make Mike happy. He’s only pasted that thing three or four times now. And once there, feel free to notice what Mike left out to create his usual out of context quotation for whatever fantasy world accusation he needs to make to make himself feel delusions of being better, bigger, etc.
Then feel free to move on and read the entire thread. Maybe that will cause this thread to shift to a more interesting debate topic then whack-a-mole and Mike’s projection issues over his own inadequacies and difficulties with the opposite sex. I mean, fun is fun, but Mike debates, like yesterdays dirty laundry, begin to stink a bit when they get old.
Which you demonstrated…. by cited an example of its use as a disparagement.
Then what was the virtue of you introducing evidence whose only relevance is to confirm what I say?
I’m ready to hear you cite where you ruled out publicly posting my contact info whenever you’re ready to post it.
I literally never claimed to have made a sarcastic comment about Bill being a teacher. If you want to deny I’ve done so, I have no reservation against agreeing with you.
By all means, everyone go look at how Jerry reversed his “spazzed” evaluation, and acknowledged the authenticity of the offense others had taken from what he said. Shame on me for not including that. Bad New Jersey public school education. Bad, bad New Jersey public school education.
I think we’ve hit rock bottom when we started discussing Mike’s sex-life. In fact I would suggest not discussing any aspect of Mike’s private life even if we are sometimes tempted to enter into discussion involving things Mike said or did on this thread.
The best of course would be to shift to a different subject. Sometimes subjects that are part of a Mike-discussion are also worthy of a serious discussion if we are willing to extract it from its Mikeiness. Surely most people here who are not Mike are capable of holding serious discussions or at least entertaining ones.
Fortunatly at present I’m immune to Mike for the simple reason that I’m too tired to read his posts. The endless strings of quotes + the tortured sentences and twisted reasoning are tiring my eyes, so I stopped reading them.
Well, here’s a question for anyone out there–is there asny reason why my new laptop won’t let me get on this page if I use firefox but has no problem if I use internet explorer?
It’s windows vista, if that matters. My other computer (xp) can access the page just fine with firefox.
Thus far I’ve had no problem with xp but I have yet to load some of the critical programs i need to work with, so time will tell.
I was supposed to read all that stuff? Ðámņ.
Bill,
In the words of 5 friends of mine who are going through all sorts of computer hëll…
Vista sucks.
They’re having no end of problems like yours as well as boatloads of other headaches. I’m so happy I’m on a tighter budget thanks to Ian. I decided not to upgrade a few months back and am so happy about that these days.
So many people are prefering XP to vista that microsoft is doing the expected thing–threatening to stop selling XP.
The best ringing endorsement of Vista I’ve read so far was somebody referring to it as ME 2.0.
If you’re referring to my posts, my imposition on the reader is very small. I accommodate the reader’s intuition by making my points in the left-most-justified text. At a casual glance, this text comprises from as little as a small fraction of a post to perhaps half of it.
Of course, if the reader’s intuition is flabby — because he’s put nurturing the esteem others have in him above accommodating his own intuition — he is simply challenged in skipping the indented text I include to support my points.
This seems to be why my posts antagonize so many people who are simply unable to disqualify what I say — you apparently cannot stand what is referred to as the real deal.
Mike, thank you for obsessively reading my blog in an attempt to find fault with me and my friends. Clearly, you can’t get enough of us. I’m afraid I don’t have a similar interest in you, however, and can’t be bothered to peruse your site. Because, y’know, you’re quite vapid and boring.
“Mike, thank you for obsessively reading my blog in an attempt to find fault with me and my friends.”
What are you refering to Bill?
The link Mike keeps posting as an example of how Jerry believes his “account of another’s state of mind trumps that person’s [own account of his] state of mind” takes you to my blog. Apparently Mike goes there from time-to-time to dig up dirt on us.
My blog amounts to a public forum, however, and my regular posters and I are aware of that. I believe I speak for them as well as myself when I say that we’re unashamed of what we’ve written and are confident that our words can and will withstand public scrutiny.
Personally, I think it would make sense to focus on things written in Peter’s blog when having discussions with other posters in Peter’s blog. But that’s just me. If Mike wants to keep publicizing my blog, well, God bless ‘im.
Mike, I’m taking a Time Out from my ignoring you to comment on the “clarity” of your posting style. Were you to provide credit/identification for each indent you put forward, you’d be making a lot more sense. As it is, your indents…which can run through several comments, and inlcude many different commentors, including yourself, are not at all intuitive to follow in any sense. They are dense, difficult to follow, and at times lacks a clear connection to your new comment. Instead of indenting and embedding each comment, you’d be better served attaching an ID tag to each comment.
“The best ringing endorsement of Vista I’ve read so far was somebody referring to it as ME 2.0.”
Oh yeah. My wife is a computer nerd from a family of computer geeks. She can do just about anything she wants to with a computer in more computer languages then I can remember the names of.
Wanna hear her cuss enough to make even me blush? Put her in front of a computer running on ME and tell her to fix a problem on it. She hates ME. And the things I keep hearing about Vista are from friends, co-workers and the computer geeks at VITA is that it’s at least slightly more annoying then ME.
Jerry Chandler: “She hates ME.”
Why? What did you do? 😉
I got her knocked up and put her through just about eight months of major back aches and pains with a baby with GIANT feet kicking the crap out of her and then stood by as some masked men drugged her up and cut her open.
I’ve since been working to get back in good graces with regular foot rubs, back massages, gifts from For the Love of Chocolate and by not beating her cats senseless with a pool noodle. I also let her read Deathly Hallows before me, but it’s finally mine and I’m down to the last couple of hundred pages!!!! ~8?)
Bill Myers: “My blog amounts to a public forum, however, and my regular posters and I are aware of that. I believe I speak for them as well as myself when I say that we’re unashamed of what we’ve written and are confident that our words can and will withstand public scrutiny.”
Of course. If we start worrying about how Mike can twist our words, and what disturbing conclusions he might derive from them we will all be forced to take a vow of silence. Mike’s ability to twist words to fit his own delusional perceptions is already a matter of public record and nobody takes him seriously. Since Mike attributes his own meaning and/or attaches his own distorted perceptions to any written words, whenever he reads something (in our posts or elsewhere) he is basically talking to himself. There is no communication. And what you do or don’t say to him, here or elsewhere, matters little. For him it is only like planks stolen from a construxction site and used as scafolding to construct another annex to his own delusions.
“Instead of indenting and embedding each comment, you’d be better served attaching an ID tag to each comment.”
Or just simply say what he wants to say in a straight forward way.
Jerry, Jerry, Jerry…now your problem is clear. You’re supposed to play with a pool CUE, not a pool noodle. I can see it now…”Seven ball covered in sauce in the corner pocket….” Although, if you’re trying to beat the cats, try to keep them off the table, they might inadvertantly move one of the balls while chasing the pasta.
I kinda like one of Micha’s ideas, so from here on in, all my posts will be YouTube links, where I shall post videos of myself doing interpretive dance in response to whatever our host or anybody else posts. Cover your eyes, and keep your feet away from mine!
Even if you can’t be bothered to highlight the text you want to source in the very same page, hit Control-C, hit Control-F, hit Control-V, then hit Enter — what is stopping you from evaluating any given quote on its own merits? Do you need each quote labeled by messenger to make exercising your biases easier in evaluating them? Don’t you know “wrong” without knowing who it is that’s being wrong?
I differentiate each voice with their own level of indentation. Quotes from posts of mine with embedded quotes lead into the embedded quotes with sentences ending in a colon.
If you check the date of the post I cite, you will see that it was posted during the Thanksgiving weekend you spent systematically venting your disgust in the thread Peter was forced to shut down. Your posts in that thread, like all your posts, link to your site. It was at a time I was still baffled by your behavior, so I visited your site, and found the quote.
When it was time to demonstrate Jerry’s pattern of arbitrarily dismissing others’ accounts of what they’re experiencing when his own account of what they are experiencing is more convenient to him, it was no hardship to find it in that holiday weekend you devoted to venting disgust on a human being who couldn’t get a cop, who was also venting disgust on him, to rule out the option of posting the personal contact info of the recipient of his disgust.
The only virtue of you portraying what I’ve just recounted as obsessive on my part seems also to qualify as an arbitrary, however preemptive, dismissal of my own account of my own experiences. Doing so seems to be your only hope in disqualifying anything I say.
If you’re open to any constructive criticism, I also saw a page you intended to be the splash page of a comic book story, with a seated newscaster in the foreground, and an active costumed figure framed in a telescreen in the background. If you are still considering this as your splash, I think you should consider at least switching their prominence, with the costumed figure looming large, and the newscaster diminished in the foreground. As a montage, you can fit in more panels in sequence, making the splash more active.
Setting aside your unbroken tradition on not citing an example: how does what you accuse me of — arbitrarily imposing interpretations of what others say according to what conveniences me — not qualify as straightforward? If what I say isn’t straightforward, then how do you know it’s wrong?
Engaging Mike-to-English™ programming. Text translation enabled. “In A Nutshell” programing engaged.
________________________________________________________
Posted by: Mike at August 2, 2007 09:39 PM
I like stringing lots of big words together. Look at the pretty words. Ohhhhhhhhh. Uhm, have I taken my meds today?
Posted by: Mike at August 2, 2007 10:20 PM
I can’t find my meds. Can you find them for me? No? Oh well, I’ll just have to get by without them. No one should be able to tell the dif… Do I smell pie? Is that pie? I like pie. Uhm… What was I doing again?
Sean Scullion: “I kinda like one of Micha’s ideas, so from here on in, all my posts will be YouTube links, where I shall post videos of myself doing interpretive dance in response to whatever our host or anybody else posts. Cover your eyes, and keep your feet away from mine!”
If we cover our eyes, how do we see the interpretive dance to try and figure out what you’re saying to us? Or are you gong to be doing interpretive tap-dance and using yout feet to tap out Morse code blog posts? I haven’t brushed up on my Morse since high school.
Micha: “For him it is only like planks stolen from a construxction site and used as scafolding to construct another annex to his own delusions.”
Ohhh… I like that. I’m swiping that one from you for my own later use one day down the road.
Thank you for confirming my observation by responding with the exact behavior I was referring to. You’re so willing to indulge in what I simply observe you doing, it’s a wonder anything I say antagonizes you.
Hey, Jerry, trust me, man, you don’t wanna SEE this Celt dance. Take my word for it. You wanna risk blindness asd reading Dr. Seuss to Ian in Braile, hey, look all you want. I’m just thinking of you. And I don’t want Jenn coming after me for turning you into Jerry LaForge.
Numfar! Do the dance of joy!
Numfar, numthin’, I mean, nothin’, I do the Balki Bartakamous Mypos dance of joy! Now, who wants to stand in for Cousin Larry? Get outta town!
Yeah, I do have a head full of useless TV knowledge. But maybe someday I’ll get on Millionaire or Jeopardy or the entire internet community will get together a fund to make me shut up.
Sean: “I kinda like one of Micha’s ideas, so from here on in, all my posts will be YouTube links, where I shall post videos of myself doing interpretive dance in response to whatever our host or anybody else posts.”
Did you ever watch ‘The Actor’s Studio’? When I read your post I had an image from the chapter when they had Robin Williams, and he did a dance bit. Although in your case I think it’s going to be more like Riverdance.
Bill Mulligan: “Numfar! Do the dance of joy!”
I remember the Dance of Joy. But who or what is Numfar?
I used to watch the show with Balki Bartakamous (Perfect Strangers?) on Jordanian TV back in the late 80’s. But when I lived a year in the US my perception of the show changed since I realised I was Balki, or at least that’s what people thought of me because of my accent (very strange).
Jerry: “Ohhh… I like that. I’m swiping that one from you for my own later use one day down the road.”
Thanks, sure, go ahead. No copyright sign on these words.
“Although in your case I think it’s going to be more like Riverdance.”
Well of course, Micha! It’ll be a (wait for it…)streaming video!
You know what I was thinking last night? The foulmouthed line cutter from the PAD’s original post told him that he had no idea who he was dealing with. On the contrary, the twit in question had no idea. Where PAD will be deposited into what is surely an ever-increasing list of people who’d shown him up, this guy runs the risk of being portrayed in a future printed work as the Prime Master of Mouthing Off Who Gets His Just Desserts And Is Swallowed By A Large Monster Or Some Other Example Of Poetic Justice.
I remember the Dance of Joy. But who or what is Numfar?
Numfar was Lorne’s brother (this si all from Angel, for anyone who didn’t watch the show…which is now on DVD, there’s no longer an excuse). He was played by…Joss Whedon!
Oh heck, here’s the scene: http://youtube.com/watch?v=IBUghm8I2zM
“Numfar was Lorne’s brother (this si all from Angel, for anyone who didn’t watch the show…which is now on DVD, there’s no longer an excuse). He was played by…Joss Whedon!”
Oh! how embarassing. I should have remembered that. The name did sound familiar. I didn’t know it was Joss Whedon. Whedon also had a guest appearance in Veronica Mars.
Was he also doused in green makep in Veronica Mars?
I keed, I know he wasn’t, although that would also have been amusing. I’m going to have to go check my DVD collection now. I can’t believe I missed that he cast himself as a dancing fool.
Sean wrote, “On the contrary, the twit in question had no idea…. this guy runs the risk of being portrayed in a future printed work as the Prime Master of Mouthing Off Who Gets His Just Desserts And Is Swallowed By A Large Monster Or Some Other Example Of Poetic Justice.”
Good point. I’ve not made a comment on this thread as yet, since I don’t have any airport stories to share; but as a writer who agrees with JMS’s statement that you should never pìšš øff a writer, I’d encourage PAD to put this person in one of his stories and have the Fates use him as the ball in a handball competition.
I recently had a run in with a, shall we say, miscreant who inspired me to write a murder mystery short story. Miss Creant’s doppleganger plays the corpse of honor.
Rick
P.S. On another note, Fallen Angel came out last week, and after my store failed to get two consecutive issues- despite the fact that it’s on my pull list- they had it this time. Will there be a discussion thread about the issue, PAD?
I’d like to know what happened to british horror film writer Milton Subotsky that made him hat the name Maitland so much. Watch any Amicus horror movie and if there’s a character named maitland, don’t get emotionally attached to him–The Skull, The Vault of Horror, Tales from the Crypt, probably others. I’ll bet little Dickie maitland truly regrets all those wedgies he gave the Subotsky kid way back when.
Then again, DEEP RISING has a character named mulligan eaten, digested and vomited up by a giant squid so who knows who I pìššëd øff.
I saw a “Look Back” type of thing done on The Skull some years back when they where showing it on cable for the Halloween season. They mentioned the Maitland name curse thing and went into how nobody had any idea what caused him to seem to hate that name like he did. They even showed a clip with Subotsky’s son, Dimitri, and even he didn’t know the reason why.
Watch the ‘Maitland’ connection. Cushing’s character is named Christopher Maitland – the name is a death sentence in an Amicus film. The use of the name was the product of Milton Subotsky’s mind but no one knows if there was ever a real Maitland to inspire such a curse on a name. I had the opportunity to chat with Subotsky’s son, Dimitri, and even he did not know the true reason.