This is the menu for a summit called to discuss how to resolve the global food crisis:

[IMG]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/07/08/article-1032909-01E123A300000578-0_468x276.jpg[/IMG]

[url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1032909/Summit-thats-hard-swallow--world-leaders-enjoy-18-course-banquet-discuss-solve-global-food-crisis.html[/url]

Here's hoping they were able to get something accomplished at some point during that [B]18 course[/B] dinner. :roll:

:lol::lol::lol:

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

it's 19 available dishes, not 18 courses.

I think I’d rather they were feted like kings–if they were forced to eat what third worlders eat they might get a crazy altruistic hair up their nose and give away even more of my money to third world despots.

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

[QUOTE=88Mariner;622030]it's 19 available dishes, not 18 courses. [/QUOTE]

Well, everything I've read describes it as 18 courses, not 18 options, so I'm going to stick to my guns for now. If it's a tasting menu, 18 courses would clearly be extravagant, but it's still very possible.

And for what it's worth, I don't really care if these folks use diamond dust in lieu of table salt or eat the most extravagant meal imaginable, I really don't. I'm not out there solving hunger, and I eat like a fucking champ whenever I can. I do find it funny, though, to think of these people getting together to decide how much gruel to send to the world's starving population before sitting down to a meal like this. I just wonder if the irony was lost on them. :lol:

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

seriously though, who cares what the food is ?

it is a dinner catering to the heads of state of the world, of course its gonna be extravagant.

what, is obama only going to eat spam when he gets elected?

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

i think you're missing the point sean,

"Don't talk about it, be about it."

There was a renewable energy and sustainable living convention here in stl a few months ago, and i live across the street from the convention center. The parking lot behind my building was full of SUVs, suburbans, tahoes, etc. lol. Don't talk about it, be about it.

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

[QUOTE=thesightless;622197]seriously though, who cares what the food is ?

it is a dinner catering to the heads of state of the world, of course its gonna be extravagant.

what, is obama only going to eat spam when he gets elected?[/QUOTE]

Do you honestly not see the humor in this? I think it's a riot...

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

i see humor in a convicted rapist being raped in san quentin.

things i dont find funny is a short list rape victim jokes, holocost jokes, anything to do with politics, and recently dead people.

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

thanks for the enormous buzzkill, dude. :(

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

Who brought Patty Poopy Pants to the party???

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

Debbie Downer?

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

Bobby Bummer?

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

sory. i have developed such a cynical and sarcastic POV lately, with everything going on in my life, and im literally sick of it all.

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

[quote=toasty;622299]Do you honestly not see the humor in this? I think it's a riot...[/quote]

Kinda like Al Gore living in a huge mansion using more electricity than 17 normal homes? :lol:

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

or barak obama saying he is for change while actually being party line?

or mccain applying for the most important job in the world when he should be ni line for social security

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

[IMG]http://img324.imageshack.us/img324/6520/giantdouchevsturdsandwich7om.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

[QUOTE=subterFUSE;622340]Kinda like Al Gore living in a huge mansion using more electricity than 17 normal homes? :lol:[/QUOTE]

Something like that, yeah... ;)

[QUOTE=thesightless;622343]or barak obama saying he is for change while actually being party line? [/QUOTE]

The "change" that Obama speaks of is not a change from neo-conservatism to liberalism or Rep. to Dem. Hillary Clinton would have been a change in that respect, but she didn't offer any meaningful change from the way things are done. After Bush and his cronyism and positively opaque administration, Obama offers a change in the way business is conducted in DC, with increased transparency, frank discussion, and a less adversarial mindset. I know I sound like an Obamabot, but it's true.

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

[QUOTE]Obama offers a change in the way business is conducted in DC, with increased transparency, frank discussion, and a less adversarial mindset. I know I sound like an Obamabot, but it's true.[/QUOTE]

you do, and he doesnt. you think so because you are a fan. im not a fan of either and see right through it. james. every single iota of evidence points to a voting record IDENTICAL to his former opponent. its like a criminal denying the crime on the court house steps even though it is on video, there are multiple DNA matches, and a written statement from him.

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

[QUOTE=thesightless;622391]you do, and he doesnt. you think so because you are a fan. im not a fan of either and see right through it. james. every single iota of evidence points to a voting record IDENTICAL to his former opponent. its like a criminal denying the crime on the court house steps even though it is on video, there are multiple DNA matches, and a written statement from him.[/QUOTE]

You think voting record is the most important thing, I think it is way down the list, secondard to legislation authored, sponsored, and governing philosophy. See my post in that other thread we've got going.

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

legislation authored is a great thing to go by, but a lot of it is done by more than one person from all parties.

voting record IMO, is the most important because actions accomplished are a viable, concrete track record. along the lines of "do what i do , not what i say"

i judge people by their actions. saying you are pro gay marriage isnt the same when you vote against it (mccain, unless he truly polled every person in his constituency and they came back anti gay marriage.)

the only thing barak has above the rest (IMO) is that he didnt vote for the war, and that is only because he wasnt there. kucinich is the only one who can lay that claim.

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

[QUOTE=thesightless;622406] voting record IMO, is the most important because actions accomplished are a viable, concrete track record. along the lines of "do what i do , not what i say" [/QUOTE]

Yeah, but what do those votes mean? Very little, IMO. It's like those absurd attack ads that use votes to cast people in a false light. Example, from 2004:

[QUOTE]John Kerry voted against giving body armor to our troops, or for new tanks and artillery.[/QUOTE]

Well, OK he did vote against a bill that provided for those things, but that's because he voted for a different bill that also provided for them instead. It's madness, and it's meaningless. Not unlike statistics, you can use those votes to tell whatever story you like.

Obama preaches transparency, and he and Sen. Coburn, who is about as hardline a Republican as you'll find, coauthored and got passed the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006. Obama also believes in nuclear non-proliferation, and he and Republican Dick Lugar coauthored and passed legislation devoted to that as well. I find information like that far more meaningful than knowing what he voted on X piece of legislation without knowing any of the context of the vote (i.e., was this bill the result of negotiations, was it part of a package deal, etc.).

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

hey!!!

i didnt trype that ! dont quote me to things i didnt say.

Re: Department of Irony, Pt II

[QUOTE=thesightless;622608]hey!!!

i didnt trype that ! dont quote me to things i didnt say.[/QUOTE]

What in the world are you talking about? :what