Could we have a moratorium on that Gordon Sinclair piece? September 15, 2001 6:29 AM   Subscribe

Could we have a moratorium on that Gordon Sinclair piece? I fear that if I read it for the dozenth time, its intended effect may be somewhat curtailed.
posted by holgate to Etiquette/Policy at 6:29 AM (7 comments total)

I believe this is what you're talking about. I haven't seen it posted on metafilter, of course my "overused jingoism" filter has been on for sometime now.
posted by geoff. at 11:54 AM on September 15, 2001

it's better than that "you don't know my people" piece. of all the talentless, driveling jingoism we've been subjected to in the last few days, I find that piece the most offensive.
posted by rebeccablood at 12:29 PM on September 15, 2001

The Sinclair piece is annoying, but the amount of times the Chomsky piece has been referenced plus the "eye for an eye/blind" bit has been just as rampant as alleged "jingoism".
posted by owillis at 12:37 PM on September 15, 2001

true, true. I suppose the rule of thumb is that if it's been emailed to you, it's most likely already on MeFi.
posted by holgate at 4:57 PM on September 15, 2001

< lockerroomsarcasm>If somebody sucks a good dick well, you tell the other guys about it. . .< /lrs>
posted by crasspastor at 7:06 PM on September 15, 2001

geoff, that's a great filter you've got, it seems to be working well! ;-)
i've seen it at least four times
posted by smt at 8:46 PM on September 15, 2001

Guilty, of both quoting the Bible (which still feels strange, I'll tell ya) and linking the Chomsky piece inline to a thread.

At least I knew about the Sinclair thing.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:23 PM on September 15, 2001

« Older non-existent username gives error   |   HELP page Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments