ellauri036.html on line 1950: The incident was ridiculed both within the United States and abroad, with a number of commentators opining that it was a planned publicity stunt. Some American commentators viewed it as a sign of decreasing morality in American culture, while others considered the incident harmless and argued that it received undue attention and backlash. The increased regulation of broadcasting raised concerns regarding censorship and free speech in the United States.
ellauri072.html on line 206: What has gone mainly unnoticed in the various discussions of the problem is something that has puzzled me for some time. Why does Dante treat the homosexual Florentines in Inf. 16 with greater respect than any other infernal figures except those in Limbo? I do not have an answer to that question, but would like to bring it forward. Let me begin with Purg. 26. We have probably not been surprised enough at Dante's insistence that roughly half of those who sinned in lust, repented, and were saved (and are now on their way to that salvation) were homosexual. It would have been easy for him to have left the homosexuals out of Purgatory, and it is hard to imagine an early (or a later) commentator who would have objected to the omission, especially since, in Hell, homosexuality is treated, not as a sin of the flesh, but as one of violence against nature. However, for a unique instance of a commentator who is aware of Dante's unusual gesture see Trifon Gabriele on Inf. 15.46: "Non e' dubbio che 'l Poeta vuol applaudere a questo vitio quanto egli puo'. Puopa hyvinkin. Ecco, gli fa parlare di belle cose e gli fa tutti grand'uomini nelle lettere e nell'arme e nella religione, e finalmente non e' peccato ne l'Inferno o Purgatorio che egli men danni con le parole sue che questo; anzi lo polisce quanto puo' con suoi versi".
ellauri089.html on line 172: July 20, 1969, is probably the most important day in human history - the day men from Earth first set foot on another planet, Earth's moon. Robert Heinlein was a guest commentator (along with Arthur C. Clarke) with Walter Cronkite on this historic occasion.
ellauri096.html on line 177: The (K-0) argument stinks of the liar paradox. Subsequent commentators sloppily switch the negation sign in the formal presentations of the reasoning from K∼p
ellauri096.html on line 199: Several commentators on the surprise test paradox object that interpreting surprise as unprovability changes the topic. Instead of posing the surprise test paradox, it poses a variation of the liar paradox. Other concepts can be blended with the liar. For instance, mixing in alethic notions generates the possible liar: Is ‘This statement is possibly false’ true? (Post 1970) (If it is false, then it is false that it is possibly false. What cannot possibly be false is necessarily true. But if it is necessarily true, then it cannot be possibly false.) Since the semantic concept of validity involves the notion of possibility, one can also derive validity liars such as Pseudo-Scotus’ paradox: ‘Squares are squares, therefore, this argument is invalid’ (Read 1979). Suppose Pseudo-Scotus’ argument is valid. Since the premise is necessarily true, the conclusion would be necessarily true. But the conclusion contradicts the supposition that argument is valid. Therefore, by reductio, the argument is necessarily invalid. Wait! The argument can be invalid only if it is possible for the premise to be true and the conclusion to be false. But we have already proved that the conclusion of ‘Squares are squares, therefore, this argument is invalid’ is necessarily true. There is no consistent judgment of the argument’s validity. A similar predicament follows from ‘The test is on Friday but this prediction cannot be soundly deduced from this announcement’.
ellauri132.html on line 138: The widespread take on E T. is - as one commentator points out - E.T. offers a "contemporary synthesis of Eastern spiritual teachings" and another reviewer wrote, "Tolle's clear writing and the obvious depth of his experience and insight set it apart" (what, WHAT?!).
ellauri141.html on line 305: In Epode 11, the iambist regretfully recalls to his friend Pettius his infatuation with a girl named Inachia. The latter name does not occur elsewhere in extant Latin or Greek except in the very next poem in the Gedichtbuch, where the iambist’s older (ex-)lover complains of his sexual endurance with Inachia in contrast to his impotence with her (12.14-6). The name may suggest an ethnically Greek or Argive woman, or the Greek noms de lit regularly adopted by Italian meretrices. Yet, as some (but by no means all) commentators have noted, the name also evokes Io, the daughter of Inachus, jota Zeus bylsi härän hahmossa. Eli kyllä tässäkin yhden kynäilijän mielestä on jotain impotenssin käryä.
ellauri145.html on line 406: After the trial, Kenealy instigated a popular radical reform movement, the Magna Charta Association, which championed the claimant´s cause for some years. Kenealy was elected to Parliament in 1875 as a radical independent but was not an effective parliamentarian. The movement was in decline when the claimant was released in 1884, and he had no dealings with it. In 1895, he confessed to being Orton, only to recant almost immediately. He lived generally in poverty for the rest of his life and was destitute at the time of his death in 1898. Although most commentators have accepted the court´s view that the claimant was Orton, some analysts believe that an element of doubt remains as to his true identity and that, conceivably, he was Roger Tichborne. Or not.
ellauri162.html on line 825: In 2010, the Christian apologetics website True Free Thinker wrote: "Scienceblogger Chad Orzel described the commentators on PZ Myers ' Scienceblogs.com site Pharyngula, and other Scienceblogs.com commentators, as 'screechy monkeys'."
ellauri163.html on line 398: The older Jewish versions and commentators (e.g., Septuagint, Targums, Saadyah, and RASHI) read this word without the letter - yod, as if written - sheloh, the archaic form for - shelo, his; or, as if it were a poetic form for - shalvah, peace. (Sama sana varmaan kuin ähläm sähläm, tai shaloom.)
ellauri163.html on line 400: One translation, "until that which is his shall come.", is derived from the Septuagint. Its meaning is: 'The scepter shall not depart from Judah till all that is reserved for him shall have been fulfilled.' Another translation, "Till he come whose it (the kingdom) is.", is based on the Onkelos and Jerusalem Targums, Saadya Ga´on, RASHI, and other Jewish commentators. A modern Jewish commentator, M. Friedlander, renders this as "Till peace cometh.".
ellauri164.html on line 502: Another thing we see from Moses during his time spent in Midian is that, when God finally did call him into service, Moses was resistant. The man of action early in his life, Moses, now 80 years old, became overly timid. When called to speak for God, Moses said he was “slow of speech and tongue” (Exodus 4:10). Some commentators believe that Moses may have had a speech impediment. Perhaps, but then it would be odd for Stephen to say Moses was “mighty in words and deeds” (Acts 7:22). Perhaps Moses just didn’t want to go back into Egypt and fail again. This isn’t an uncommon feeling. How many of us have tried to do something (whether or not it was for God) and failed, and then been hesitant to try again? There are two things Moses seemed to have overlooked. One was the obvious change that had occurred in his own life in the intervening 40 years. The other, and more important, change was that God would be with him. Moses failed at first not so much because he acted impulsively, but because he acted without God. Therefore, the lesson to be learned here is that when you discern a clear call from God, step forward in faith, knowing that God goes with you! Do not be timid, but be strong in the Lord and in the power of his might (Ephesians 6:10).
ellauri164.html on line 873: We would expect the pattern to repeat here. The people have rebelled, so the next part would be God’s wrath and threats of destruction. Instead, however, God merely grants their request for water. No mention of sin or possible annihilation, just grace in providing for Israel’s needs. The fact that this cycle we’ve come to expect changes is designed to highlight an important event; the oddity of the text “awakens us from our narrative slumber,” as one commentator puts it, and forces us to pay attention closely to what’s occurring. Why would God not threaten destruction? To answer that, we have to remember a key aspect of God’s character: He does not change. Hebrews 13:8 says He is the same yesterday and today and forever, “without variation or shifting shadow,” (James 1:17). The purpose of the threats of destruction, and Moses/Aaron’s intercession, was not to actually change God’s mind. God knew exactly what was going to happen in all these instances. God’s threats on Israel are spoken to Moses so that Moses will intercede. They are tests of Moses’ (and Aaron’s) character, just as God’s conversation with Abraham over the fates of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18) was about testing Abraham’s character rather than the doomed cities. Yet here, in Numbers 20, God does not follow the pattern. Why?
ellauri164.html on line 875: This gets us back to the question of what, exactly, Moses’ sin was. Many commentators focus on the physical actions that Moses took in verses 9-11. Some say Moses sin was striking the rock rather than speaking to it, but Moses was told to take the staff of God. Exodus 17:5-6 had Moses striking the rock to cause water to come out of the rock (in fact, it’s actually the same rock of Meribah!), so it’s possible to read an inference that the staff was to be used to strike the rock. Some commentators see Moses’ harsh words for Israel as the sin, or perhaps that he speaks to the people rather than speaking to the rock. Regardless of which of these views, they don’t account for what the text itself says: Numbers 20:12 makes it clear that the sin of Moses and Aaron was “…you have not believed Me, to treat Me as holy in the sight of the sons of Israel.” Indeed, focusing on Moses’ actions of striking the rock or speaking harshly makes it seem doubly unfair to Aaron, who had neither spoken nor struck the rock.
ellauri171.html on line 992: The next time we hear of Jezebel is during the ploy to obtain Naboth’s vineyard for her husband, who is unable to secure the transaction. She sends letters, with the stamp of the king, to the elders in Naboth’s town, commanding them to lie against Naboth, and then stone him. The elders do so, and after Naboth’s death, the vineyard is claimed for Ahab. Few bible commentators acknowledge the bizarre betrayal of Naboth by his neighbors. If, as is suggested, Naboth’s neighbors had known him since birth and patronized him, how could they turn so quickly? Some scholars argue that this incident highlights Jezebel’s keen understanding of Israelite men. It is perhaps, also, one of the impetus for her modern connotation as manipulator-supreme.
ellauri171.html on line 1012: The medieval commentators differ on whether Jezebel converted to Judaism in a halachically acceptable manner. R. Levi ben Gershom (Ralbag, 1288-1344) is of the view that Jezebel did not fully embrace Judaism and was not a halachic Jewess. This would mean that her two sons, Ahazia and Jehoram, also lacked Jewish credentials. But his assumption is challenged by the fact that there are indications throughout rabbinic works that Ahazia and Jehoram were regarded as bona-fide halachic Jews. Indeed, this is the position taken by a number of halachic authorities. Some contemporary authors argue instead that Jehoram was the son of another of Ahab’s 100% Jewish wives.
ellauri184.html on line 348: In Matthew 9:1 the town is referred to only as "his own city", and the narrative in Matthew 9:2–7 does not mention the paralytic being lowered through the roof. Most traditional biblical commentators (e.g. Bengel, Benson and the Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary) assume that in Matthew 9:1–7 "his own city" means Capernaum, because of the details that are common to the three synoptic gospels.
ellauri192.html on line 109: The selection of Sully Prudhomme as the first winner of the literature prize was not met with great enthusiasm by the press. As Gunnar Ahlstrom records, a commentator for a popular Swedish daily wrote:
ellauri194.html on line 99: William Penn Adair Rogers (November 4, 1879 – August 15, 1935) was an American vaudeville performer, actor, and humorous social commentator. He was born as a citizen of the Cherokee Nation, in the Indian Territory (now part of Oklahoma), and was known as "Oklahoma's Favorite Son". As an entertainer and humorist, he traveled around the world three times, made 71 films (50 silent films and 21 "talkies"), and wrote more than 4,000 nationally syndicated newspaper columns. By the mid-1930s, Rogers was hugely popular in the United States for his leading political wit and was the highest paid of Hollywood film stars. He died in 1935 with aviator Wiley Post when their small airplane crashed in northern Alaska. Never met a man I didn't like. The only good Injun is a dead Injun.
ellauri194.html on line 319: Queer is noun and verb, and relational not binary. It is strange, queer in fact. Sedgwick said when appalled conservative commentators rejected her queer reading of literary greats: "Read any Sonnets lately? You dip into the Phaedrus often? To invoke the utopian bedroom scene of Chuck Berry's immortal aubade: Roll over, Beethoven, and tell Tchaikovsky the news."
ellauri197.html on line 176: Clifton's three books of poetry were published by Duckworth. The first was Dielma and Other Poems in 1932 and then followed Flight in 1934. One commentator has said that “Clifton was particularly adroit at poems honouring – and marvelling at – women” and the Times Literary Supplement stated that “His lyrics are a gracious tribute to the beauty of women”. These were fairly conventional poems unlike his final work Gleams Britain's Day published in 1942. The Spectator described it as “expressing in a sort of prophetic certitude opinions upon religion, patriotism, love, art, war and peace, which he puts in unconventional verse”. The reviewer stated that the book was “the product of a curious, whimsical mind, full of energy, squandering it on half-digested ideas”. W B Yates dedicated his poem, Lapis Lazuli, to Clifton who had given him a valuable Chinese lapis lazuli carving.
ellauri262.html on line 311: The presence of sexuality in The Lord of the Rings, a bestselling fantasy novel by J. R. R. Tolkien, has been debated, as it is somewhat unobtrusive. However, love and marriage appear in the form of the warm relationship between the hobbits Sam Gamgee and Rosie Cotton; the unreturned feelings of Éowyn for Aragorn, followed by her falling in love with Faramir, and marrying him; and Aragorn's love for Arwen, described in an appendix rather than in the main text, as "The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen". Multiple scholars have noted the symbolism of the monstrous female spider Shelob. Interest has been concentrated, too, on the officer-batman-inspired same-sex relationship of Frodo and his gardener Sam as they travel together on the dangerous quest to destroy the Ring. Scholars and commentators have interpreted the relationship in different ways, from close but not necessarily homosexual to plainly homoerotic, or as an idealised heroic friendship.
ellauri264.html on line 122: Gionet attempted to promote his rap career by producing several professionally-made videos, which failed to become viral. From 2015 to 2016, Gionet worked for BuzzFeed as a social media strategist, and later commentator. He first managed BuzzFeed's Vine account, then took over one of its Twitter accounts. Pidin Timin laulusta jossa se haukkui somealustoja. Olin kaikesta sen kanssa samaa mieltä. He commented in 2017, "BuzzFeed turned me into a monster". In May 2016, Gionet was introduced to then-candidate Donald Trump, and Trump signed Gionet's arm next to where he had Trump's face tattooed.
ellauri264.html on line 138: The Groyper movement has been described as white nationalist, homophobic, nativist, fascist, sexist, antisemitic, and an attempt to rebrand the declining alt-right movement. Presently,[when?] Groypers are a loosely defined group of followers and fans of Nick Fuentes, a white nationalist, far-right political commentator and livestreamer. After Fuentes, there is no clear second in the Groyper hierarchy.
ellauri271.html on line 130: Ken on tuo apina jota tuolla kuopataan? Se on Vedenjapina, Marija, Jyrkin äisky. Minkä ikäisenä kuoli äiti Borjalta? The family claimed descent on the paternal line from Isaac Abarbanel, the famous 15th-century Sephardic Jewish philosopher, Bible commentator, and treasurer of Portugal. Ei ilmeisesti poikasena. Taivaanrannan maalari-isä hipsi pakoon komukoita Berliiniin 1921 ja nazeja Lontooseen 1938. Heippalander perheelle.
ellauri346.html on line 274: General David Petraeus, former CIA Director and supreme commander of the coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, has expressed disappointment with the West's response to the conflict in Ukraine. He believes that Vladimir Putin might escape accountability for the invasion, and could even win the war, due to the hesitant actions of allies in Kyiv. General David Petraeus, a prominent U.S. Army commander for many years, made significant decision points with Bad Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan. He later led the CIA (from 2011 to 2012), and currently works as a military commentator.
ellauri370.html on line 80: Several scholars and commentators have characterized the wars of extermination as genocide. Scholar Pekka Pitkanen asserts that Deuteronomy involves "demonization of the opponent", which is typical of genocide, and he asserts that the genocide of the Canaanites was due to unique circumstances, and that "the biblical material should not be read as giving license for repeating it." But he is just a Finn so fuck him.
ellauri370.html on line 107: provided by Rabbinic commentators, and others
xxx/ellauri086.html on line 906: The essay states Poe's conviction that a work of fiction should be written only after the author has decided how it is to end and which emotional response, or "effect", he wishes to create, commonly known as the "unity of effect". Once this effect has been determined, the writer should decide all other matters pertaining to the composition of the work, including tone, theme, setting, characters, conflict, and plot. In this case, Poe logically decides on "the death... of a beautiful woman" as it "is unquestionably the most poetical topic in the world, and equally is it beyond doubt that the lips best suited for such topic are those of a bereaved lover." Some commentators have taken this to imply that pure poetry can only be attained by the eradication of female beauty. Biographers and critics have often suggested that Poe's obsession with this theme stems from the repeated loss of women throughout his life, including his mother Eliza Poe, his foster mother Frances Allan and, later, his wife Virginia.
xxx/ellauri114.html on line 375: Isaiah’s descriptive language calls up images of hell itself and has led more than one commentator to suggest Edom as the location of the Lake of Fire, where the unbelievers of all ages will spend eternity in torment.
xxx/ellauri122.html on line 181:
xxx/ellauri166.html on line 399: . Rashi's commentary, drawing on his knowledge of the entire contents of the Talmud, attempts to provide a full explanation of the words and of the logical structure of each Talmudic passage. Unlike other commentators, Rashi does not paraphrase or exclude any part of the text, but elucidates phrase by phrase. Often he provides punctuation in the unpunctuated text, explaining, for example, "This is a question"; "He says this in surprise", "He repeats this in agreement", etc.
xxx/ellauri166.html on line 419: Up to and including Rashi, the Talmudic commentators occupied themselves only with the plain meaning ("peshaṭ") of the text; but after the beginning of the twelfth century the spirit of criticism took possession of the teachers of the Talmud. Thus some of Rashi's continuators, as his sons-in-law and his grandson Samuel ben Meïr (RaSHBaM), while they wrote commentaries on the Talmud after the manner of Rashi's, wrote also glosses on it in a style peculiar to themselves.
xxx/ellauri179.html on line 655: After leaving office, Bryan retained some of his influence within the Democratic Party, but he increasingly devoted himself to religious matters and anti-evolution activism. He opposed Darwinism on religious and humanitarian grounds, most famously in the 1925 Daytona monkey case, aka Scopes Trial. Since his death in 1925, Bryan has elicited mixed reactions from various commentators, but he is widely considered to have been one of the most influential figures of the anthropocenic era.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 186: Economist Susan Dynarski wrote that Siegel is not typical of student loan defaulters both in that the typical student-loan recipient attends a public university and in that only two percent of those borrowing to fund a graduate degree default on their loans. Conservative political commentator Kevin D. Williamson, writing in National Review, called it "theft," saying that "an Ivy League degree or three is every much an item of conspicuous consumption and a status symbol as a Lamborghini." Senior Business and Economics Correspondent for Slate Jordan Weissman called it "deeply irresponsible" to suggest that students should consider defaulting on their loans and said that The New York Times should apologize for the piece. Siegel's original article was also criticized in Business Insider and MarketWatch.Siegel appeared to further discuss the article on Yahoo! Finance.
xxx/ellauri208.html on line 1027: The commentator Ibn Ishaq narrated that he was the first man to write with a penis and that he was born when Adam still had 308 years of his life to live. In his commentary on the Quranic verses 19:56-57, the commentator Ibn Kathir narrated "During the Night Journey, the Prophet passed by him in fourth heaven. In a hadith, Ibn Abbas asked Ka’b what was meant by the part of the verse which says, ”And We raised him to a high station.” Ka’b explained: Allah revealed to Idris: ‘I would raise for you every day the same amount of the deeds of all Adam’s children’ – perhaps meaning of his time only. So Idris wanted to increase his deeds and devotion. A friend of his from the angels visited and Idris said to him: ‘Allah has revealed to me such and such, so could you please speak to the angel of death, so I could increase my deeds.’ The angel carried him on his wings and went up into the heavens. When they reached the fourth heaven, they met the angel of death who was descending down towards earth. The angel spoke to him about what Idris had spoken to him before. The angel of death said: ‘But where is Idris?’ He replied, ‘He is upon my back.’ The angel of death said: ‘How astonishing! I was sent and told to seize his soul in the fourth heaven. I kept thinking how I could seize it in the fourth heaven when he was on the earth?’ Then he took his soul out of his body, and that is what is meant by the verse: ‘And We raised him to a high station.’"
xxx/ellauri208.html on line 1029: Many Qur´anic commentators, such as al-Tabari and Qadi Baydawi, identified Idris with Enoch. Baizawi said, "Idris was of the posterity of Seth and a forefather of Noah, and his name was Enoch (Ar. Akhnukh)". With this identification, Idris´s father becomes Yarid (يريد), his mother Barkanah, and his wife Aadanah. Idris´s son Methuselah would eventually be the grandfather of Nuh (Noah). Hence Idris is identified as the great-grandfather of Noah.
xxx/ellauri233.html on line 432: Jewish and Muslim commentators cite studies by the Vilna Gaon and Rebbe Schlemiel that show shechita is humane and that criticism is at least partially motivated by antisemitism. A Knesset committee announced (January, 2012) that it would call on European parliaments and the European Union to put a stop to attempts to outlaw kosher slaughter. "The pretext [for this legislation] is preventing cruelty to animals or animal rights—but there is an obvious element of anti-Semitism and a badly hidden message that Jews are cruel to animals," said Committee Chair MK Danny Danon (Likud).
xxx/ellauri250.html on line 103: Many commentators are loath to describe the falls in life expectancy as actual falls or to ascribe blame to the political situation in the UK. Overall, Britain’s NHS is reflective of the failure of socialized medicine: longer waiting times, rationing, poor quality of care and unnecessary deaths. Socialized medicine, the Holy Grail of leftism, is a nightmare. The U.S. should take note of the NHS’s major shortcomings, as that is where the country is headed if we fail to repeal Obamacare! Don't believe the commies! Rather follow Aaron Bandler to Hell on Twitter!
xxx/ellauri268.html on line 289: Jon Stewart on kutsunut Harry Potterin peikkoja, joita on esiintynyt runsaasti sekä kirjoissa että elokuvissa, antisemitistiseksi karikatyyriksi podcastissaan The Problem with Jon Stewart. Jon Stewart (born Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz; November 28, 1962) is an American comedian, political commentator, actor, director and television host. He hosted The Daily Show , a satirical news program on Comedy Central , from 1999 to 2015 and now hosts The Problem with Jon Stewart , which premiered September 2021 on Apple TV+ . Stewart sanoi:
xxx/ellauri337.html on line 506: There are three dominant views regarding the famous Genesis 6 passage about the “Sons of God.” Most Bible interpreters and commentators state that the godly children of Seth are the Sons of God marrying outside the faith, or that fallen angels mated with human women to produce giant offspring. The scientific explanation of these events is still in the works. See also album 114.
41