Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marcher who wrote (177985)	9/9/2021 4:52:42 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217820

He must have been of some merit through some lens at some angle by some measure w/r to some deeds given that he is appreciated by ~nn % of folks, if n >2, and nn makes >22% But during cultural revolutions such do not matter The problem with smashing statutes as against simply removing and storing them is that once smashed, restoration becomes much more problematic even if the pieces are not melted down, and likely require some more troubling series of events leading to restoration. The soviets did almost no smashing, and so Russia has glorious museums. The CCP did a lot of smashing; but then China has a lot of un-smashed due to simply long history marked by ‘stuff’. And CCP had to use the military to guard stuff that absolutely must be protected, because they did not know where the line would be one fine day when accountability called for. I do not know how the General Lee statute is considered, whether smash-able or should-protect, but what is done was quite final, as it was broken into pieces. Let’s watch and see how far the cultural revolution goes. Is no one of oratory note saying anything about what appears to be happening from sea to shiny sea, or are such happenings so rare, and we know about it only through some of the MSM and most pay no mind-share. How do you rate mindshare of the nation (what % of folks have an unsolicited opinion irrespective of for / against) re gender selection after birth, and smash of the old?

To: marcher who wrote (177985)	9/10/2021 1:06:53 AM
From: TobagoJack	4 Recommendations Recommended By ggersh marcher pak73 SirWalterRalegh Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 217820

I thought there was something wrong w/ me, and now I find am not alone … bbc.com Why the world still loves 1970s detective show Columbo It was clear from the outset that Lieutenant Columbo was the anthesis of a TV cop. He wasn't tall or macho; he didn't have a sidekick or squadron. He didn't carry a gun, and wasn't violent; he was squeamish at the sight of blood. In fact, aside from the occasional flashing of his badge – which showed to eagle-eyed fans that Columbo's never-revealed first name was in fact Frank – you'd barely notice he was a policeman at all: there were no shootouts or high-speed car chases, he was hardly seen in the office or at the police station. He didn't chase women – his devotion to his never-seen but constantly referenced-to wife Mrs Columbo, and the never-ending (no doubt exaggerated) stories about his extended family, presented a man of morals and virtue. "There was nobody or nothing like Columbo at all before him," Koenig says. "All the detectives were these hardboiled, emotionless, tough guys. And he was the opposite of that in every way. He hated guns and violence." Instead, with distinctive posture, exaggerated hand gesticulations and a contrived forgetfulness – his habit of leaving a room, only to return having remembered "just one more thing" became his trademark – Columbo stumbled his way around LA's mansions with the dishevelled air of a confused gardener. Yet as Lee Grant tells him in the 1971 episode Ransom for a Dead Man, it was always the jugular he was after. At any crime scene, he'd spot a little "detail" that bothered him – an out-of-place newspaper, a car-tyre track, a nightgown, an unsmoked cigarette – that would set his suspicions alight. Investigations into the murderer, always duped into inadvertently helping by Columbo's humble ways, were slow-building, cerebral, dialogue-based encounters that saw Columbo eventually wear the criminal down with a mixture of astute perception and dogged persistence: not so much death by a thousand cuts as mildly irritating prods on the arm. His unfailing politeness meant he often sympathised with the murderer, and in some cases even likes them ( as he tells Ruth Gordon in 1978's Catch Me If You Can). It was the humanity of Falk's performance that gave Columbo such a universal appeal. "One ought to take one's hat off to the extraordinary acting skills of Peter Falk," says broadcaster, actor and writer Stephen Fry, a Columbo connoisseur who believes it is the greatest television series of all time. "It's a beautiful, brilliant performance. He becomes the character, but he never loses the kind of technique that he learned with his fellow young actors with John Cassavetes. And I think anyone who's ever tried film or television acting will just bow their head at the sheer skill, the concealed artistry. He’s so natural. There's such a warmth to it". Falk embraced the character to the point that where he ended and Lt Columbo started was increasingly difficult to ascertain. He wore his own clothes – a tatty old raincoat, a very 70s-coloured suit and tie – to give an appearance so shabby, Columbo is once mistaken for a homeless man in a soup kitchen. The comedy capers that provide such a light touch – the relationship with his dog, escapades in his beaten-up old Peugeot, the constant misplacing of items (pads, pencils, lighters, bags of evidence) – were as much a Falk trait as Columbo's. "The thing that surprised me most about researching the book was how much Peter Falk was Columbo," Koenig says. "Almost everyone who knew him and worked with him loved him, because imagine hanging out with Columbo, how fun that would be? But also how infuriating he could be because, you know, just imagine hanging out with Columbo." Sent from my iPad