Friday, March 14, 2008

Goat Friday

TESTIMONIAL

Rufus D. Goat
of Haydens Bog, Vic, says...

“Like any discerning ruminant, I only read Applied Hermeneutics for the fascinating articles... cawww...! get a load of this set !!

click to ogle  —  image source turtlehavendairygoats.com

Labels: , ,

16 Comments:

Anonymous Dylan said...

Crikey - almost deserves a NSFW rating... :)

14/3/08 7:24 AM  
Blogger Kathy Farrelly said...

It's enough to put one off one's weeties!
Full marks for a highly original approach though, Jarcob.

14/3/08 7:53 AM  
Anonymous Jacob said...

Have you never had freshly-squeezed goats' milk on your Weeties, Kath?

14/3/08 3:28 PM  
Blogger Father Park said...

I'm not sure that's not Wall......

14/3/08 3:33 PM  
Blogger Kathy Farrelly said...

Ewwwwww.... Jarcob!
No goats' milk on weeties for this little blonde duck!

" I'm not sure that's not Wall......"

Heh heh heh heh... Well Mike, it sure as hell looks like the arse to me!

14/3/08 4:03 PM  
Anonymous jo said...

That's an udder disgrace!

14/3/08 11:42 PM  
Anonymous Jacob said...

Ah, yes... Wall!

Mostly harmless. Might have a point, but makes it so didactically and school-marmishly, ence offensively to grown-ups.

Could be a case of nominative determinism.

Wall...

Of rhetoric?

Of the corral of 'guided discussion'?

An academic, I think, which would be no surprise (present company excepted, if you're reading Dylan - good comeback, by the way).

Then there's the other clinician of 'guided discussion': No 'nitpicking', or 'word-games' allowed, thanks, you fucking plebs. No 'definitions' to muddy the waters that have already been charted for you. No anything that "the left is want [later corrected by the editors to 'wont', I note] to do". A guided discussion in the direction of... gee, wonder where he's going with it??

Ah Father Park, full marks for bombadiermanship. Plus a Don Quicote sticker for tilting at the windmills of their minds. Both dudes have already arrived at where they want to go.

14/3/08 11:58 PM  
Blogger Father Park said...

Fascinating isn't it? The one sets the rules for engagement and dismisses responses - before they a made - on his guielines; the other pedantically picks at contributors for straying from the point and writes, perhaps, 5-8% of his own "thinking". One wonders what he would do without like-minded journos (his favourite - near only - "source").

I suspect that I'll retire again shortly. It becomes like blog chess or - more pertinent - blog rugby. One has to follow the arcane rules or be dismissed.

Fiona has mentioned a book review she'd like me to do. Not sure I've the time. The bit on the Athenian navy for Ancient Warfare has missed the boat, err, deadline. Well, it will. And I need to find something else to do for a living.

Perhaps I'll get Josh to write another poem. He's a mate coming over today though. We'll take him directly to the pub for lamb shanks and black beer (well, not him at eleven one suspects) and then back to the Rectory. I sahll work on getting "lost" at the pub and accidentally being left there....

15/3/08 11:35 AM  
Anonymous Jacob said...

Oh my, looks like your windmill tilting took the wind out of its sails. Caved, but of course it's all your fault.

Like a circle in a spiral
Like a wheel within a wheel
Never ending or beginning
On an ever-spinning reel
As the images unwind
Like the circles that you find
In the windmills of its mind


Perhaps semi-retirement is the answer. That's pretty much where I'm at (e.g., this very blog). I have to pace myself anyway, due to this chronic ancient 'tennis' injury, which makes life a bit complicated considering a lot of my paid work is at a computer. Often it's just too much to put much time into hacking away on these things after hours.

Anyway, Mike, you seem to be saying you're in the mood for a career change? If so, could be promising.

And yeah, Josh's poems are always most very welcome.

16/3/08 12:24 AM  
Blogger Caz said...

BOLLOCKS!

MIGHTY BIG BOLLOCKS!

16/3/08 1:51 PM  
Anonymous jo said...

Caz is right you know.

16/3/08 3:17 PM  
Blogger Jacob A. Stam said...

No, not bollocks, anudder thing entirely. I'm udderly dismayed anyone would think I'd post a picture of bollocks on this blog. We're taste-central here.

16/3/08 8:19 PM  
Anonymous jo said...

Only bollocks could be that ugly.

16/3/08 8:52 PM  
Blogger Caz said...

TEATS!

MIGHTY BIG TEATS!

Just doesn't have the same ring to it as:

BOLLOCKS!

MIGHTY BIG BOLLOCKS!

Naahhh.

16/3/08 9:00 PM  
Anonymous Jacob said...

I can't be sure but I think I'm being out-voted here.

But let me put it this way: How could something so nurturing and sustaining as this appendage be as ugly as a set of bollocks?

Huh?

You know I'm right!!

(Allow me to note (parenthetically) that such an argument as this could only occur in the bollocksphere. It's only a matter of time until Godwin's law kicks in and someone makes a comparison to Hitler or Nazism. (That's not so much an inanity as a challenge.))

16/3/08 11:14 PM  
Blogger Kathy Farrelly said...

" How could something so nurturing
and sustaining as this appendage be as ugly as a set of bollocks."

Of course, you are right old mate!

It is udder bollocks!

16/3/08 11:32 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home