I just read some articles on the New York Post web site. That paper is really remarkable, always has been. This is what I read about. A transvestite and a fireman are in court, a sleazeball Satmar who obviously doesn't get enough nooky at home, the Knicks beat the Heat by 20 points, ( I watched it last night), and Bill O' Reilly, opining on the difference between Sean Connery and Daniel Craig as James Bond.
O'Reilly, being the traditionalist that he is, of course went with Sean Connery, an observation I completely agree with. I myself have not seen Skyfall, which is the most recent Bond film. In any event, O' Reilly makes the case that Craig is much too serious, (something I have always said) while Connery is anything but.
Connery smoked, drank, gambled and "womanized". I love that word. Craig, on the other hand, rarely smiles, doesn't seem to be having fun, and from what I remember from one of his Bond films that I actually did see, he just doesn't have that "twinkle" in his eye, that Connery had. Sean Connery played Bond as though he knew that you knew, that this was just a movie. Craig, on the other hand, gave me the impression that he believes that he, really is James Bond.
Today is December 7th. Seventy one years ago, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Come on rabbis. Say something about it tomorrow from the pulpit.
I was just wondering if the Syrians have the WMD's that Saddam Hussein was suspected of having.
I have decided not to discuss or debate Israel with anyone who cannot answer the following questions. What happened in 1947 at the UN, what followed in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973? If they cannot answer any of these questions, there really is no reason to proceed.
No comments:
Post a Comment