the blog quebecois

I have no idea who Paul Ross is. I gather that he's some kind of TV/game show host in England. At any rate, this is an Amazon UK page featuring a selection of what can be only described as Paul Ross iconography, as befits one of today's secular saints. His image can be had on a coffee mug or a jigsaw; or as pictured here, a 20-inch box canvas print for only £48.93. You would think that there would be a limited market for this sort of thing, but guess again: There are over 200 reviews by satisfied purchasers and/or people with serious mental problems. They range from the obvious:

If you only buy one 20 inch canvas print of Paul Ross this year, this is the one to get.

to the poignant:

Having recently seen Paul Ross on Celebrity Come Dine With Me when I got home from work early and turned the tele on before The Simpsons, I was reminded how much I like him, and sought out something to remind me every day lest I forget, as he isn't on television nearly enough. In the absence of a duvet cover, this is the perfect item of Paul Ross memorabilia. Because it's on canvas, it's far classier than a mug or poster, and you could even pretend to friends and wellwishers that you painted it yourself; I certainly intend to do this if anyone ever visits me.

to the rapturous:

I purchased this wonderous print almost 2 years ago & it means more to me than you can ever imagine. In fact I recently had a horrific house fire & only had time to save 2 things - I chose this & one of the twins!.

Don't buy this picture. It looks fine on the website, but the one they send you is upside-down. My wife hasn't stopped crying for a week.

So, clearly the Brits love their Paul Ross, or as they might say, "Cor, it's that bloke wot's on the telly!" Alas, it is not available for shipment outside Great Britain, so I will have to have it smuggled out.

Or buy some beer instead. Too close to call, really.

This clip predates the (commercial) Internet by some years: I saw it on TV in the late 80s. I've been looking for it off and on, searching YouTube occasionally to see if someone's uploaded it. An Internet-wide search finally found it. Enjoy!

Jeff's Boxing:

In Southhampton, England on September 9, 1989, Tony Wilson fought Steve McCarthy. On the third round Wilson was knocked down and he was able to get up before the 8th count. He was then bombarded by McCarthy on the rope. The referee seemed to stop the fight by TKO, but wait... a lady, later known as Mi[n]na Wilson, Tony Wilson's mother, entered the ring and smashed [her] son's opponent's head twice with her high heeled shoes.

I had been under the impression that McCarthy, who had to withdraw, was declared the victor; shockingly that wasn't the case.

NY Times:

The British Boxing Board of Control, meeting in London yesterday, ruled that Tony Wilson could keep his victory over Steve McCarthy on his record, even though Wilson's mother landed the winning blows with her high-heeled shoe in a light-heavyweight bout in Southampton, England, Sept. 21.

The board said it would honor the referee's final decision despite ''the unsatisfactory nature of the ending of this contest.'' A rematch will be held at a different site, under tight security at ringside, and without Minna Wilson present.

In the third round of the fight, for a shot at the British light-heavyweight championship, McCarthy punched Wilson to the mat for an 8-count. Wilson's mother climbed into the ring and started beating McCarthy's head with one of her shoes, opening a large wound, which required hospital treatment and forced McCarthy to retire. Under the rules, the referee gave Wilson the victory.(AP)

Though I doubt it was much of a bragging point in his career, assuming he didn't die of embarrassment, that is.

I have no idea what the story is on this. Full size at Awkward Family Photos.

Screenshot from a free online game from Electronic Arts. There's nothing to download or buy, but coming from EA, you can count on a quality gaming experience. Advertising is doubtlessly involved somewhere too. They don't do these things out of the goodness of their stony little hearts, y'know? I haven't yet played it, but there are numerous clips on YouTube:

As you can see, it's an entertaining, cartoony take on WWII, without the blood, chaos and terror that made the original production such a downer.

If you'll recall Michael Moore's "documentary "Fahrenheit 9/11 you probably remember this scene of George W. Bush on a golf course, intended to prove that he was a heartless monster who played at the bourgeous pastime of railroad tycoons and oligarchs while soldiers bled in the grim streets of Baghdad. That was the theory, anyway. All that I took away from it was that Bush has a nice golf swing, compact but powerful.

Indeed his innate athleticism has long been noted. In 1999 Golf magazine credited the then-Governor with a 15-point handicap, calling it "legitimate" in comparison to Bill Clinton's.

But what's this? Barack Obama turns up on a list of the 200 best golfers in Washington, with an "estimated" handicap of 16. One problem with that might be found in this video:

If that terrible, herky-jerky swing qualifies for a 16 handicap, then my name is now Tiger Freaking Woods.

So why didn't I think of it? The Helen Keller Simulator.

Human Rights Group Campaigns To End Use Of Child Politicians In Africa

The programming site Stack Overflow recently ran a contest to find the funniest source code. Leaving aside my forays into C++, computer programming would seem to have limited comedic potential; however, the ability to include comments and use descriptive variable names (which will either be stripped or rendered mostly-unrecognizable by compiling) allows for a certain amount of snark.

Above is the winning entry. The programmer who wrote it contributes some background here.

Once home, Joe realizes anew that Dope is the answer, and in his addled state he actually believes that kids will not only want to hear him play a slide flute, but will dance a jig to his pathetic tune. Days later a member of the French Resistance shows up with a small piece of lumber, and then it’s only a matter of time before HE SHOWS THEM. HE SHOWS THEM ALL.

James Lileks casts his jaundiced eye upon comic-book ads. This link lands you about in the middle of them -- to navigate, use the back and next buttons at the bottom of the page (if you reach the title page, you can reenter the series by clicking on the Comic Ads in Comics link on the left side).

Remember back when you were a kid, and you would spend whole summers just finding dead bodies in the woods and pushing them down the river, laughing and high-fiving with your friends? It's time to get that feeling back.

Adult Swim recaptures the halcyon days of childhood. Warning: Music and sfx. You can mute them with a button at bottom-left.

I'm not much into bestiality, especially of the arthropod/crustacean (though what kind of sordid, vile -- shudder! -- couplings they manage on their own is entirely praiseworthy and deserving of a government parade or two) variety, so how I came to be in possession of this fine example is anybody's guess. I'm afraid to go poking around in my images directory for fear of what else I might find.

In an incoherent essay, Janet Keeping, president of the Sheldon Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership criticizes Ezra Levant for "obnoxious" and "offensive" language in his disputes with Jennifer Lynch and the CHRC. But later, it turns out that Ms. Keeping recognizes that strong words are sometimes called for:

Here's another rule: It's not always possible to say what needs to be said without causing offence.

One of my favourite American civil liberties cases, Cohen v. State of California, concerns a man ejected from a courtroom for wearing a "Fuck the draft" T-shirt. This occurred while the United States was still waging war in Vietnam. It was argued that, in order to claim freedom of expression, Cohen should have expressed himself more politely -- "Resist the Draft," perhaps. The Supreme Court disagreed and applied the U.S. Constitution to protect "the emotive function" of speech which "may often be the more important element of the overall message sought to be communicated."

So, if I'm following this, the phrase "Fuck Jennifer Lynch" is not necessarily objectionable if I'm merely demonstrating the "emotive function" of speech. That's good to know, because I'm otherwise inclined to shut down these corrupt and abusive agencies using automatic weapons fire and hand grenades. I suppose some would find that rude, too.

And let me forestall the inevitable complaint: "Fuck Jennifer Lynch" is in no way sexual. Students of the form will recognize that the correct rejoinder is "Not even with your dick, moosebreath."

Thus I pay respect to Ms. Lynch's sexual autonomy. Also that I find her somewhat less attractive than Yassir Arafat.

Via SDA