The Wikipedia entry is wrong:

"Parmi nos articles de quincaillerie par essence paresseuse, nous recommandons le robinet qui s'arrête de couler quand on ne l'écoute pas."

Frame at 5:30 states paresseuse, meaning lazy, not par essence.

which translates loosely to:

Among our articles of lazy kitchenware, we recommend the faucet that stops leaking when nobody listens to it.



>> ^oritteropo:

From Jimbo's big bag'o'trivia, the text is:

• "Bains de gros thé pour grains de beauté sans trop de bengué."
  
• "L'enfant qui tète est un souffleur de chair chaude et n'aime pas le chou-fleur de serre-chaude."
  
• "Si je te donne un sou, me donneras-tu une paire de ciseaux?"
  
• "On demande des moustiques domestiques (demi-stock) pour la cure d'azote sur la côte d'azur."
  
• "Inceste ou passion de famille, à coups trop tirés."
  
• "Esquivons les ecchymoses des Esquimaux aux mots exquis."
  
• "Avez-vous déjà mis la moëlle de l'épée dans le poêle de l'aimée?"
  
• "Parmi nos articles de quincaillerie par essence, nous recommandons le robinet qui s'arrête de couler quand on ne l'écoute pas."
  
• "L'aspirant habite Javel et moi j'avais l'habite en spirale."
  

I really do like the melody of this song and moreover the lyrics are a perfect fit. Seven Devils being what I would assume to be the seven deadly sins. It's great wordplay and it shows that their is a strong sense of despair in the air--maybe this person has lost their battle (with these Devils--but, very much will make sure they burn--if that's the last thing they do) and like it says tonight/today they'll die by their own hand or perhaps someone wanting revenge. Ultimately this is someone expecting the worse, but no matter what they seek redemption in some form I think.

From Jimbo's big bag'o'trivia, the text is:

• "Bains de gros thé pour grains de beauté sans trop de bengué."
  
• "L'enfant qui tète est un souffleur de chair chaude et n'aime pas le chou-fleur de serre-chaude."
  
• "Si je te donne un sou, me donneras-tu une paire de ciseaux?"
  
• "On demande des moustiques domestiques (demi-stock) pour la cure d'azote sur la côte d'azur."
  
• "Inceste ou passion de famille, à coups trop tirés."
  
• "Esquivons les ecchymoses des Esquimaux aux mots exquis."
  
• "Avez-vous déjà mis la moëlle de l'épée dans le poêle de l'aimée?"
  
• "Parmi nos articles de quincaillerie par essence, nous recommandons le robinet qui s'arrête de couler quand on ne l'écoute pas."
  
• "L'aspirant habite Javel et moi j'avais l'habite en spirale."
  

I love how they call scientists and subscribers to reason "followers of the big bang theory". Trying to paint scientific theory as a cult/religion, trying to bring them down to their level

So very manipulative, i love how devious it is. Such underhand tactics are the only evidence i need that they don't know what they're talking about... if they did, they wouldn't need to resort to tactical wordplay and spin. I guess religion is to science what politicians are to public service.

I'm not a big fan of your link in the comments though, it explains the paradox but not the solution when it's a fairly simple one. It comes down to a few things such as the universe is not infinitely old so there will be certain stars that are too far away for the light to have reached us yet (if it ever can), a star's lifetime is finite, stars (and we) are not fixed points, etc. For the paradox to make sense we'd need an infinite universe, infinitely old, that never moves and stars that are permanent fixtures.

I think he is engaging in a little witty wordplay:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wabi-sabi

>> ^SDGundamX:

I suppose this is funny if your only exposure to Japanese people is through movies like the Karate Kid. This guy's fake accent is pretty terrible--and no Japanese person would pronounce "wa-sa-bi" wrong since it's a native Japanese-language word.
I don't find it offensive or anything, just pretty terrible.

Just one nitpicky thing: it's Mock the Week (a wordplay on mocking the weak), not Mock of the Week.

Misogynistic? He says very specifically and repeatedly "She liked to gang bang all the time". Who are we to judge her sexual habits? Are we the morality police now? Nazi!>> ^budzos:
Sorry but I hate this fucking song. It is so witless and misogynistic. Wordplay for sub-moronic lotharios. Downvote.

This is like a teacher's report... Yes, he's cute - but also:
Talented - not Talanted
Comme Ca Ism (I think it's wordplay rather than a misspelling as Comme Ca is a brand)

What is that wordplay at the end? Just random words said like you're talking to a baby?

I love her eyes.

^Solution: Just say equal rights for everyone. I don't see the real reason for wordplay. Words change their meaning all the time, often prompted by media spin/distortion. If enough people think that "feminism" means "women above all else" then it sort of actually does mean that. That's what I meant with "They're all right depending on who you ask". This is certainly a bad thing, I can agree to that, but these semantic arguments are what makes it difficult. It's the same when someone like Glenn Beck say socialism, he doesn't really mean actual socialism, he means a particular type of fascism, orwellian society. This is a problem, but that doesn't change what it is.

Just because you stomp your feet and say "It doesn't mean that!" won't change the meaning in many peoples heads. That's why, to avoid confusion, I would rather say equal rights for everyone. A rose by any other name, eh?

Sorry but I hate this fucking song. It is so witless and misogynistic. Wordplay for sub-moronic lotharios. Downvote.

not really twisted. it's just a little wordplay and body humor... it's really not that subversive at all.

As an atheist though, it is a matter of disbelief, not essentially "belief", persay. I don't believe in any gods. It is not as though I believe there are no gods. I can't say such a thing, because that is a matter of certainty which I can't have without evidence.

Therefore, I don't know if there are any gods, and can remain agnostic to that position, while still not believing in the existence of them.

And, I know, that all looks like a lot of wordplay, however, it is how I see the terms in the way I look at the world and universe and the most simplistic way I can describe it.

>> ^Jordass:
That doesnt quite make sense to me Raigen. As an Agnostic you dont know but as an atheist you know. As an atheist you have a belief and as an agnostic you you're not sure so it seems to me that though there is a fine line you cant be both. You either think you know and stand by your belief or you dont so if you KNOW there is no god then how can you be not sure?

Fucker shouldn't have worn a sweater where he's going.

RIP, George, you were a great comedian with sharp satire and compelling wordplay.

IMO Buckley continuously fell back on wordplay, digression and semantics to defend (or escape) his stance. He actually backpeddles so hard that he resorts to calling Chomsky out for "start(ing) your line of discussion at a moment that is historically useful for you". I do believe the whole point of a debate is to present your argument and to back it with facts which support that point. If the facts don't match your argument... well...

Its not as if he was able to refute Chomsky's history. His half hearted attempt to one up Chomsky in that line of discussion ended with Buckley backed into a corner with nowhere to. Instead he resorted to attacking Chomsky for having a well researched argument.

Damn those unfortunate facts.


........



Buckley: "there are people who do believe that america... inherited the responsibility for trying to abort international holocaust..."





Who did we inherit this responsibility from, and what crystal ball are we using to determine what will be a supposed "international holocaust"?