<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for Craig_K</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/Craig_K/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/Craig_K/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2014 11:46:41 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Take to the stars (and beyond) with classic cosmic comics &amp;lt;br&amp;gt;</title><link>http://www.avclub.com/article/take-stars-and-beyond-classic-cosmic-comics-207252#comment-1512319461</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I know the issue you're talking about. It was actually one of the post &lt;br&gt;"Reign" issues after the Cyborg storyline wrapped up. It was Dr. Occult &lt;br&gt;who showed up to explain how Superman could have die and come back to life.  I &lt;br&gt;re-read that comic not too long ago (which is why I remember this), and it struck me as an attempt&lt;br&gt; by the writers to explain why the whole death and return thing made &lt;br&gt;sense and wasn't just a publicity stunt.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I saw it less as a statement of Superman's mortality and more like the then-creative team trying to convince a skeptical audience that &lt;br&gt;there could still be real stakes to future Superman stories.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Craig_K</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2014 11:46:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I don&amp;#039;t mean to be a jerk, but..</title><link>http://mollyknight.tumblr.com/post/59192549#comment-3701758</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Is it really Fold's attitude towards the sanctity of marriage that has you upset? I don't know you personally, but I've read your blog for a few years and "the sanctity of marriage" has never really been a topic you've championed in your posts. You don't strike me as someone who spends her time campaigning for heterosexuals to treat marriage vows as sacrosanct. So is it really Folds that got you pissed or are you scapegoating him over your (far more understandable) loathing of Prop 8 and the homophobes behind it?&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Craig_K</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 08:31:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I don&amp;#039;t mean to be a jerk, but..</title><link>http://mollyknight.tumblr.com/post/59192549#comment-3685835</link><description>&lt;p&gt;With all due respect I think you're being a little harsh here. Who's to say that in 2003 Ben was being honest when he said that? Or what the circumstances are/were behind his divorce and re-marriage? And while I do agree that a guy who is on his 4th wife is opening himself to speculation about his ability to commit, surely Ben Folds is not the only mucisian to make a song that was about something that, down the road, didn't hold as true for the artist. I think there's a stronger point to be made there than pillorying the guy for hyprocrisy.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Craig_K</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:27:33 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>