Jump to content

Rich Kennedy

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rich Kennedy

  1. I just found out on Mediaite. They linked a scene from Knocked Up. Rogan announces he's going to be a father. It just made me bawl. In the end, the man had soul that I never saw on screen. Maybe as a director. Other than the fact he's less than a decade older than me, why am I so broken up over this. Gonna miss the guy.
  2. He was known as John Paul. Like someone above said of Pope Francis. Since Benedict was chosen, my faith and theological reflection have gone from thinking I was an Anglo-Catholic because of the parish I belong to, to an understanding that I am clearly a high church Protestant. And yet this is the first papal elevation in which I have felt somewhat invested from the outside (of course). A few of these have happened in my lifetime. I was, heh, 3 when John XXIII became pope. Two things have developed that make my consciousness of this more compelling: The proliferation of really good religion reporting over the last few decades. Real Clear Religion has not only brought articls from NCR, RNS, and Janet Daily of the Telegraph,but also Patheos, and IRD (with Juicy Ecumenism). Most religion sites have been covering this and the "touts" extensively. The last few years have created an interesting divide between nones and people of faith. To that end I've become yet more aware of the fact that Christians of various hues should stick together as much as possible. Given these two factors, I couldn't help but have almost a rooting interest this time.
  3. I've made cream liqueur too. Commercial ones are way too sweet. I've used rum, brandy, or whisky as a base. Have you tasted Tia Maria? I've always preferred it to Kahlua. How does your coffee liqueur differ? I LOVE all things coffee.
  4. OK, I even prefer gin in a Bloody Mary. I don't do vodka much except to sometimes sip the two Kennidovs (potato base and Mohawk) in the freezer. What lqueurs do you make? I have attempted and failed so far at aquavite. This summer my batch was aversion therapy for cilantro (too much cilantro flower too long).
  5. Sorry, J.D. I don't consider that busted. Of course, I have a dim view of "neutral grain spirits". I prefer potato vodka to begin with. As a whisky man. And gin. I don't consider it busted because I'm also a more dash than cash kind of guy and filtered coming so close to top shelf in THAT experiment, plus the impressed responses I've gotten from discerning pallettes tell me that top shelf and second shelf is not worth the money. Um. I confess to drinking more vodka these days. I have a friend who once was a chef (makes more money per hour doing landscaping, he's a real father now) who filters Sky five or six times while I still do cheap stuff 10 times. He feels that starting on a higher rung works best. He and his wife are vodka folks. I'm just trying to keep a respectable bar on minimal investment. My fave whiskies: BOURBON: Elijah Craig 12 year small batch. best value Traverse City Bourbon ( Michigan's own. Excellent. From Michigan wine country where distilleries are cropping up everywhere). Kirkland (Costco house brand) 8 -10 year Bourbon Old Weller 107 good, solid wheated bourbon Old Grand Dad 114 Ezra Brooks 90 proof. Good bottom shelf. SCOTCH: MacAllan 10 year. aged in sherry casks, tastes almost like scotch MacAllan 12 year. Tastes almost like cognac. same casks. tie Johnnie Walker Black Ballantine 12 year old. much cheaper and almost as good Teacher's I'm a sort of son of the Caribbean. I've been dabbling in aged rums. I like Venezualan rum which when aged is like a dry, sharp coffee liquer. Also, Appleton XO 12 year from Jamaica, though it is hard to ruin well aged rum.
  6. You guys spend way too much on vodka. Eric Felton once had a spirits column in WSJ where he posed the proposition that the difference between bottom and top shelf is filtering. Therefore, Britta could make crap taste like $30. I put it to the test when my store got a liquor license. It works. Running Mohawk (the best super cheap vodka I've tried this on in Detroit) 4 times presents a nice result. 10 times? I call it "Kennidov". Impresses the hell out of anyone who's tried it. I've done the same with Luksisskova (sp?), a low priced potato vodka. Same result. My first attempt was with Heaven Hill and it worked with that too, but Mohawk here is better. Kamchattka, Five O'clock, whatever. It'll work. Heh, I store the stuff in an Old Grandad 114 bottle.
  7. I saw all but the last installment, which I'missed but later recorded on DVR (I don't know why I'm saving it, espicially now that it is renewed). I concur with all that has been said. I am impressed with their sympathetic portrayal of Islam. Impressed that it is not simplistic and PC "sympathy". Islam as a plausible, if subtley duplicitous way of life as depicted here. Islam has a big presence here in Detroit. I have many Moslem acquaintances and some friends. I'm saying they do Islam "right" without a sales pitch, or totally in the tank for or against.
  8. WOW. The difference is startling. Of the first two paintings, side by side. The author's point is obvious before I even read the text. I suppose that my only reservation on the old stuff is, why the infernal 19th c., or early 20? Or is that just a way to demonstrate the point? On the San Fransisco theme, the newer painting does the streetcar as a cartoon.
  9. Yes! I read the Wolfe piece. At the risk of sounding like an shill for our sponsering institution, I must say that I was impressed by the subtle technique of making clear disagreement and negative judgement of the subject's work without slamming the (dead) subject. If only I were capable of such eulogizing. I wish I still had the link, but I found a hedious AP report of kinkades death last weekend that essentially slammed Kincaide by sharkily talking down to his fans as a way of explaining Kincaide's appeal and success. What a contrast between Wolfe and that AP bird. Having skimmed some of the way earlier posts, some have expressed delight in Kincaide's early work. Are their links to such stuff?
  10. The easy way to view SoM is as a template for political action. I would recommend extreme avoidance of political analysis and lessons from this project. I like your angle of working for individual response and application within the group. Or at least that's what I grasped from your opening explanation. Good. EXCELLENT. I would like to point out that peace making in SoM doesn't begin with individual consciousness, for example. It sorts begins and ends with one's response before God and one's conscience. Advocating, for example, is not mentioned in SoM. Doing, believing, and responding is. Working for a policy is not. Actual mourning, for example, is. The more one is forced to apply this inwardly and then confess one's gleanings, the more one might grasp what it is that God wants. The more one compares SoM with, say national policy, the greater temptation there can be to intellectualize the process and be satisfied to leave it at that. Or worse, join some cause and think that one is doing the SoM. Try not to systemitize this, or systemitize some sort of response. Direct response is preferred over sending a check. Feeding is better than marching or "sitting/occupying". That's what I'm getting at.
  11. We've been getting a lot of Elmore Leonard press around here because he lives here. He's saying all the right things about this season, but I wonder what he really thinks. I just finished Riding the Rap last week. I was impressed at how slow and relaxed the plot was compared with other Leonard novels and Justified.
  12. I'm seeing a pattern here. The background seems to be a crime of the season. Show hidden text Season One: Meth labs and Race War. Season Two: Weed and control of Harlan. Three: Oxey and control of Harlan And yes, McDonnough is a great addition. Loved his cheesey smile last week as Raylan leaves. Heh, I've got my wife hooked again. I'd saved the entire Season Two for her. We finally saw it together the last weekend of January, her birthday weekend (that's how we celebrate it. the whole weekend). She's even caught up this season. Ready for tonight. Boyd is the great anti-hero of contemporary TV, Cable or network. I don't care. But I want more Rachel. That's some partner. And more Art. He owned the second episode.
  13. I think that your second statement hits the nail on the head. Often, atheists just insult and presume. Hitchens always seemed to bring his best game. Hitchens loved discussion and contention. It always bugged me that he was known as a "controversialist". That seems a slight. He passionately believed and passionately advocated what he believed. Hitchens walked that fine line between disdain for the propositions he attempted to defeat and disdain for their advocates. Most on his side of the God debate openly disdain those they contend against. Hitchens loved the contact. He loved the back and forth mostly. He loved the fight. Big difference. Getting your clock cleaned by a worthy opponent can be exhilarating though humbling. Having to contend against one who dismisses you as nothing is tedious and miserable even when you mop the floor with him or her. As I think about it, theists usually win these things to the extent that one can win them. Hitchens was unique in his breadth of knowledge, his retention of same, extemporizing at length, and on and on. He was a wonder to watch and to listen to. I wouldn't be a bit surprized that some of his aversaries were mesmerized by the sheer weight and beauty of it all. Judging by the testimony of his close friends, he wasn't the sort to put on a show or razzle-dazzle for the sake of razzle-dazzle. Not that he wasn't proud of his abilities EDIT: Ach! The portal for this thrread failed to show me all that I hadn't read. Seems that the above is rehashing much of what Steven and Greg have said. And thanks as well to Steven for bringing up the Doug Wilson debates (yes, plural and by all accounts a convivial stalemate). It is hard for me to keep track of all of the CT Wilsons these days, let alone extended families.
  14. Oh, I don't "commend him to light perpetual". It would be presumptuous to do so at the very best. It would be presumptuous of me to do so for anyone. Only God knows the heart. To say "rest in peace" is really the only graceful and/or loving option. Besides, there is nothing wrong with wishing or praying that God would or has granted him mercy and eternal rest. He was a worthy adversary on these matters. Even though I am "a man of the right" and he of the left, there were many issues on which we agreed and I cheered him on. His eternal soul was an issue between him and God, between him and his conception of eternity. I have many friends who might lean more in his direction than mine on matters of faith. I wish that they would come to know the Lord, King of All Creation. Failing that, I at least wish that God would grant them mercy. Sometimes merely for the reason that I love these friends so. Why would Hitchens not be accorded the same courtesy? By me at least?
  15. Thanks Tyler. I've been avoiding reading that one. It went contrary to my expectations, being about the deceased and pretty much only the deceased with gracious comments about close relatives there at the end. As Hitchens' best friend, I would say that McEwan demonstrates a most profound point in our little discussion here about how to treat the dead. He could have been ungraciously triumphalist in attacking those of us who prayed for Hitchens, delivered backhanded insults toward his adversaries, used Hitchen's final days as a gang tackle of theism. He focused on the man's way of dying as how he lived. He was even gracious to Hitchens' adversaries on the Iraq War and couched the God Wars in a breif and subtle summary of Hitchen's case against Chesterton. Judging from the memoria I've read from Hitchens' friends, I imagine this has been a subject of long and animated late night conversation since Hitchens has had long late night conversations and the author is well acquainted with Hitchens' arguments against Chesterton. Thank you Mr. McEwan. That's how to do it.
  16. This won't be as succinct and elegant as Steve's explanation. However, I did start the thread. I am always hardpressed to come up with a different term than "rest in peace". It is not for me to consign anyone to rest or otherwise. What comes next after life is always vaguely and variously defined outside of the fires of Hell and eternal paradise. Details, sequence, and, timing are a real challenge to nail down. Hope is always a large component and I certainly hope that such a friend of mine on the page would now be at rest. I also shudder to think of the appearance and attitude of, say RIT (rest in torment, so to speak). Imagine the salt on the wound for his immediate family. Imagine the appearance of gratuitous vengeance or sour grapes of such a hardassed position upon the death of a philosophical adversary not so gifted and creative. I cannot square something like that at all with patient and loving expression of the faith that is within me. I can't at all. Finally, we sometimes think and speak of these things casually. Sometimes. However, is it not at least hubris and arrogance to assume someone's eternal reward publicly based solely on one's public behavior and output? Dare I say that it might come close to blasphemy to aggressively assert the path of another after death. All of that is in God's hands. Speaking for God is always a delicate and careful undertaking in the most simple of circumstances. Someone's death is never one of those circumstances. And I raise a glass to Hitch, wherever he is, for sparking this discussion as well as so many others. Christopher Buckley has a moving memoriam of an unlikely 30 year friendship. Very moving and generous.
  17. I saw the memoriam at Vanity Fair linked at Realclearpolitics just now. I admired his tenacity in argumentation and his employment of the language to his purposes. I must say that even his ad hominem, even when directed at me and our kind here was a joy to read. We differed on faith matters like opposites. However, I could do well to emulate his style, good nature, and command of English in my own argumentation. I pray that he is handled mercifully.
  18. There was a bit of the required "guys are dumb and clueless". However, I totally bought into guys advising a girl on breakup/love life. The unreality, I guess, is that she actually listens. In my experience, when women have gotten themselves into such situations, the 'Y' chromosome resists all input from anything male. So, it turned this sort of thing on its head. Further, there are varieties of cluelessness on matters of the heart. Deschannel's character is not unlike women I've hung around with in the past. For me (who finds little in the early hype this season to hang onto), the absurdity of that huge apartment is mitigated by the odd chemistry and the social ugly duckling aspects of the lead. Question: Are there examples I don't know about of a non-standard network sit-com. At what point do you avoid any number of staple sit-com charateristics at the expense of the thing not being a sit-com?
  19. Wow. Now that's a comedy! I can't believe what I just saw. What I mean is, I've never experienced such delayed laughter in my life, having to process the confirmation that I had just seen or heard what I saw and heard. I never would have expected this sort of thing of network TV. Way lot of fun.
  20. Yes indeed. Early in my real, brewed coffee days, I began to notice a burned quality in much of instant and freeze dried coffee (oh, jeez. I can't say "freeze dried" without summoning Peter Falk in the original The Inlaws). And also in any attempt to re-warm coffee including double boilers. And right now, Starbucks French Roast is my usual cup. There's a difference.
  21. Oh, I'm sorry. I wasn't referring to pro leagues. I should have been more clear. Go Gamecocks (I can't believe I'm rooting for an SC team, but there you go).
  22. Just asking, but in today's intellectual climate, shouldn't the defacing include: Defending The Faith. Engaging The Culture ? Can you slink back in there soon?
  23. But that's why you play these guys ahead of the rest of the league. You ask me, Toledo helped work some of the cobwebs out for a new coach who was sort of thrust into the job, Three more weeks and you get four good guys back. I really wish that rankings would start in October. You get a better picture then which is not clouded by earlier assumptions not yet disproven. Oooh. Ouch and double ouch. Kelly did great everywhere he's been. If ND is as bad as you suspect, he will be in an ICU before Thanksgiving. This Saturday will not be pretty. However, I cannot conceive of a Kelly team screwing up for very long. What plagued them the last few weeks is fixable.
  24. Oh, I suspect that The Week and The Game will be good. As I see it, you will have to give it four more weeks at least to get a feel for what might yet be. For us, it will be continued negotiations on the field between Hoke and #16 and becoming accustomed to Matison's system on defense.
  25. Um. I've seen this before as a Wolverine fan. They cream Notre Dame and run through the rest of the "pre-season" only to fall flat in the Big Ten. But WOW. Never saw anything like that before. And with the whole stadium singing along to that White Stripes riff, it was like the playoffs in Hockeytown, but with six times the crowd.
  • Create New...