About me
About me

Louis Walsh back on X Factor


Warning: This post was published more than 10 years ago.

I keep old posts on the site because sometimes it's interesting to read old content. Not everything that is old is bad. Also, I think people might be interested to track how my views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have mellowed and matured!

But given the age of this post, please bear in mind:

  • My views might have changed in the 10 years since I wrote this post.
  • This post might use language in ways which I would now consider inappropriate or offensive.
  • Factual information might be outdated.
  • Links might be broken; embedded material might not appear properly.

Many thanks for your understanding.

Remember when Louis Walsh walked out of X Factor one week, apparently quitting the show because he just couldn’t hack it any more? He was back in place for the next Saturday, of course, but it gave the tabloids a week’s worth of sensationalism.

You’ll remember than earlier this year the tabloids got excited because he’d been sacked as a judge. And, as sure as night follows day, he’s now been reinstated. And the tabloids have something new to write about.

Apparently, Brian Friedman signed up to be a judge, despite not wanting to, er, be a judge. So what’s next? Dermot signed up despite not wanted to present, so Kate will be back? Dannii Minogue will have a massive fight with Sharon and walk out? We’ll basically revert to the old format, bit by bit?

But it’s all entertaining, and I guess The X Factor plays to the pantomime spirit that the British, and the celebrity gossip magazines in particular, love. It’s addictive viewing – and whatever they do to the format, I bet I’ll be hooked.

This 1,158th post was filed under: Media.

More posts worth reading

What I’ve been reading this month (published 4th December 2017)

What I’ve been reading this month (published 6th November 2017)

What I’ve been reading this month (published 5th October 2017)

National shock as 75% fail A-Levels (published 18th August 2006)

The Campbell cancer (published 13th February 2005)

Former minister is HIV positive (published 30th January 2005)

Let’s Swing Again (published 7th April 2005)

Comments and responses

Comment from Mort Karman

by Mort Karman

Comment posted at 02:20 on 25th June 2007.

The high cost of going potty is going even higher.
My wife and I were looking at toilets for our new home.
A modern chamber pot goes for as much as $3,500, not including the plumber doing it.
As we looked at the prices of the fancy poop places we were astonished.
“How can you pee or poop on a $3,500 bowl?” My wife inquired.
Some people (or is it peeple) can. We saw other ones at prices ranging from over $1,00 to close to $5,000.
At last we found plain potties in the $100-150 range.
We bought a fix up home and it does need a new bathroom, but we can pee and poop just as well on a $100 pot as on a $5,000 one.
Does one really need a high end (pun intended) potty. Does this mean you can poop up with the the upper class?
I close with the words of King lear in his old age-“To pee or not to pee-that is the question.”

Comment from Mort Karman

by Mort Karman

Comment posted at 15:20 on 25th June 2007.

After finding the high cost of going potty much too high we have vowed to do something about it.
We are opening a used potty store.
People can purchase high end used chamber pots at less then half the price of new. As an example we have the $3,500 toilet in almost new condition for half the price. It was owned by a little old lady with constapation who only used it a few time a week.
We have come up with a name for our enterprise-HONEST KAR-USED JOHNS

Compose a new comment


You may use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> .

If you would like to display a profile picture beside your comment, sign up for Gravatar, and enter your email address above.

By submitting your comment, you confirm that it conforms to the site's comment policy. Comments are subject to both automatic and human moderation, and may take some time to appear.

The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. This site uses cookies - click here for more information.