ellauri100.html on line 331: I have noticed that a leftist will accuse you of “hate” just for saying something contrary to the left-wing orthodoxy of the day. If you disagree with what I have to say here, but prefer to spew invective instead of offering a reasoned response, don’t bother to submit a comment — at least not until your rage has passed or your medication has taken effect. (My medication is working fine. It is curious how small the distance is between considered opinion and gobbledygook madness.) As it says in the sidebar, I will not publish incoherent, off-point, offensive, or abusive comments except my own. Nor will I lose any sleep for having denied you an outlet for your incoherence, irrelevance, offensiveness, or abusiveness. You can post it on your own blog or on any of the myriad, hate-filled, left-wing blogs that view murder as “choice,” government dictates as “liberty,” self-defense as a “war crime” (when it’s practiced by the U.S. or Israel), and the Constitution as a vehicle for implementing current left-wing orthodoxy.
ellauri109.html on line 272: In the late 1980s, Searle, along with other landlords, petitioned Berkeley's rental board to raise the limits on how much he could charge tenants under the city's 1980 rent-stabilization ordinance. The rental board refused to consider Searle's petition and Searle filed suit, charging a violation of due process. In 1990, in what came to be known as the "Searle Decision", the California Supreme Court upheld Searle's argument in part and Berkeley changed its rent-control policy, leading to large rent-increases between 1991 and 1994. Searle was reported to see the issue as one of fundamental rights, being quoted as saying "The treatment of landlords in Berkeley is comparable to the treatment of blacks in the South ... our rights have been massively violated and we are here to correct that injustice." The court described the debate as a "morass of political invective, ad hominem attack, and policy argument".
ellauri145.html on line 699: Là-bas did strike a serious blow to the public’s conception of Naturalism. The novel, which opens with a two-page invective against Naturalism, was serialized in L’Echo de Paris, beginning on February 16, 1891. Huysmans’s protagonist, Durtal, feebly defends himself against his friend, Des Hermies, who maligns Naturalism as “du cloportisme” (siiramaisuudesta) while accusing it of having sold out: “Il a vanté l’américanisme nouveau des moeurs, abouti à l’éloge de la force brutale, à l’apothéose du coffre-fort. Par un prodige d’humilité, il a révéré le goût nauséeux des foules, et, par cela même, il a répudié le style, rejeté toute pensée altière, tout élan vers le surnaturel et l’au-delà...” (XII, 1, 6-7).
ellauri368.html on line 296: Evidently, his satire lacks that subtle irony which made Profiat Duraii's Epistle so powerful, and at the same time gained for it such great popularity. Undoubtedly, it is due to this directness and plainness of speech, that this parody has never yet seen the light of day. About as humorous as this invective against J.N. somewhat earlier:
xxx/ellauri127.html on line 519: He returns to Venice with Bassanio on his mission to rescue Antonio, and gives his tongue free rein during the trial, spitting out invective against Shylock, and then mercilessly mocking him once the carpet is pulled out from under
xxx/ellauri157.html on line 345: In treating Jacob Frank, the most nihilistic of these late Sabbatians, Scholem strikes a curious note. He starts his essay by criticizing all others who had written on Sabbatianism for their lack of objectivity, often expressed in pejorative language. Yet, when he arrives at Jacob Frank, he suddenly sheds his objective tone and launches into an invective-filled description of Frank as a tyrannical and corrupt imposter. How to understand this jarring shift?
xxx/ellauri356.html on line 274: Ja taas on halveksittava nainen, jolla on synkkä, rypistävä luonne ja tuottelias puheissa; nainen, joka on sekaisin suhteissaan miehiin tai kiistanalainen, tai joka pitää kiukuttelusta eikä pysty pitämään miehensä salaisuuksia tai on pahantahtoinen. Luonteeltaan ilkeä nainen puhuu vain valehdellakseen; jos hiän antaa lupauksen, hiän tekee sen vain rikkoakseen sen, ja jos joku uskoo hiäneen, hiän pettää hänet; hän on irstautunut, varas, moitittava, karkea ja väkivaltainen; hiän ei voi antaa hyviä neuvoja; hiän on aina huolissaan muiden ihmisten asioista ja sellaisista, jotka aiheuttavat vahinkoa, ja hoän on aina tarkkailemassa turhia uutisia; hiän rakastaa lepoa, mutta ei työtä; hiän käyttää sopimattomia sanoja puhuessaan mussulimiehelle, jopa aviomiehelleen; invectives ovat aina hänen kielensä päässä; hiän hengittää ulos pahaa hajua, joka saastuttaa sinut ja tarttuu sinuun senkin jälkeen, kun olet jättänyt hiänet.
xxx/ellauri356.html on line 377: Wasf on arabien runogenre, alongside 'the boast (fakhr), the invective (hijaa’), and the elegy (marthiya)'. In waṣf love poems, each part of a lover's body is described and praised in turn, often using exotic, extravagant, or even far-fetched metaphors. The Song of Solomon is a prominent example of such a poem, and other examples can be found in Thousand and One Nights. The images given in this type of poetry are not literally descriptive. Instead, they convey the delight of the lover for the beloved, where the lover finds freshness and splendor in the body as a reflected image in the world. Hilvik ei perustanut metaforista, se käytti vertauxia mieluummin.
8