21 October 2011

Dead Moammar

The death of Qaddafi is a good thing, and I'll even concede that publicizing pictures of his corpse is a good thing. But I am getting a little sick of seeing Dead Moammar popping up an on every link a I click.

18 comments:

Hey Skipper said...

But I am getting a little sick of seeing Dead Moammar popping up an every link a click.

Not to mention typographically disturbed.

David said...

Whoops.

erp said...

You guys think the dead man in those pictures is 90 years old?

Hey Skipper said...

Still disturbed.

erp said...

Disturbed?

Susan's Husband said...

Our dear host is suffering typenheimers and Skipper is messing with him. There were at least two grammatical errors in the original post.

erp said...

Well the word, corpse (corps), was spelled wrong, but I was too polite to mention it as for the others, they were slips of the fingers on a probably-too-small-for-his-big-hand keyboard. Although the 'I' is pretty far away from the 'a' -- 'n' and 't' ditto. ;-}

Are we critiquing the verb tenses as well?

You guys are sounding like bunch of old editors at lunch.

What I want to know is do you really think that corps was 90 years old?

David said...

Sheesh.

David said...

Is erp secretly President Obama?

erp said...

No, by every possible measurement. Why do you ask?

Hey Skipper said...

I can't recall ever having seen a typo in a Secret Blog post, so having this many in such close proximity was objective evidence for Dead Qaddafi Syndrome.

David said...

erp: Because both(?) of you have issues with corps/corpse.

Also, I'm not sure why you're asking whether the corpse looked to be 90? Qaddafi was 69.

erp said...

Got it. Delayed, but not dead yet.

erp said...

Are you sure about Q's age? I read he was 90. It seems he's been around since I was a kid.

David said...

I wouldn't swear to it, but that's what Wikipedia and the NYT say.

Harry Eagar said...

Well, it does distract from the exceedingly strange volte-face of the Republicans, whose presidential hopefuls all (except Paul) seem to be calling for a permanent occupation of a country belonging to a distant people of whom we (or, at any rate, they) know nothing.

This certainly is not the Republican Party I grew up with. What the hell's going on?

David said...

So our permanent occupation of Germany and Japan (not to mention England) is all down to the Democrats?

Harry Eagar said...

Democrats plus Arthur Vandenburg. It was a biiig deal when he accepted it.