I always looked forward to seeing him. He was the best at what he did. And one day, he just left. I had no idea where he disappeared to or who got to have him. The very thought made me jealous. I then started seeing another guy. He is also good at what he does. But somehow it just wasn’t the same.

Barbers are funny that way. (And yes, you can all breathe a sigh of relief.) You develop a relationship with him and if you leave him, things can become quite awkward. You try avoiding that person if you see him on the street. But in this last case, I was the one left sitting in the barber’s chair: Mike left last November to help his friend, an old neighborhood cutter named Mr. Duvall–a man who could have served as the inspiration for Cedric the Entertainer in Barbershop. Nevertheless, Mike has returned to my current cuttery. I saw him this morning while my new barber was trimming away. It was all very cordial but Mike knew what he had done and how he had lost me. I am also certain my new barber could tell I thought about switching. But, as we all know, it is almost impossible to make “the switch,” even with barbers.

Happy Birthday to Rolling Stones lead singer Mick Jagger, who turns 62 today. And speaking of the Stones, there’s been some talk for the last few days of a song in their upcoming album A Bigger Bang entitled “Neo-Con.” As you might guess, it is supposedly a screed against the Bush administration’s foolish attempts to spread democracy and about the havoc it has wreaked in places like Iraq. It may end up on the cutting room floor, as happens quite often. But if it remains, well, so be it. Conservatives (South Park types and neocons both) have always had to reconcile the good with the bad–appreciating the acting of Sean Penn and Tim Robbins while trying not to dwell on how much they would hate you if they met you. Or getting past the message in order to appreciate the song (like U2’s “Bullet the Blue Sky”). None of this is new. What would be remarkable is if the new Stones album was actually any good. With 16 tracks, it will be the band’s longest album since Exile on Main Street. (Personally, I prefer the 1970s Stones and haven’t liked anything after Tattoo You.)

A friend of mine used to think I was crazy for saying Christopher Walken was my favorite actor. But with Stephen Hunter’s recent homage to him in last weekend’s Washington Post, I’m feeling vindicated.

As Hunter relates, “For the past 20 years, Walken has specialized in big roles in small films or small roles in big ones.” The question is, has Walken ever disappointed? Sure, some of his movies might have (think Communion), but his performances have largely been superior. My favorite Walken role might still be as Max Zorin in A View to a Kill, though his recent fatherly portrayals in Blast From the Past and Catch Me If You Can are close runner-ups. (And let’s not forget his classic “Contintental” lecher on SNL.)

Perhaps we all have our favorite Walken roles. Either way, Hunter’s tribute is long overdue.

If you only read one piece this weekend, it should be Irwin M. Stelzer’s brilliant and depressing analysis of what’s going on in London.

“The one mildly interesting thing is that a questioner in the audience would know who Wonkette is but not me or Michelle Malkin.”

This Telegraph story says that:

The vast majority of British Muslims condemn the London bombings but a substantial minority are clearly alienated from modern British society and some are prepared to justify terrorist acts.

The Telegraph then reports the results of a survey of London’s Muslim community and finds that 6 percent “insist that the bombings were . . . fully justified” while 24 percent “have some sympathy with the feelings and motives” of the bombers.

So yes, it is technically true that the “vast majority” of Muslims in London–and no doubt elsewhere–are four-square against terrorism, but isn’t this sizable minority a problem? And hasn’t it been from the very beginning?

Imagine, for a second, that in the days following the Oklahoma City bombing a poll found that 24 percent of Republicans (or Democrats or Unitarians or any other American group, for that matter) “had some sympathy for Timothy McVeigh’s feelings and motives.” Do you think that you’d be hearing much talk about how the vast majority of that group oppsed the attack? I think not.

This is simply one more example of the West’s infantilization of Islam and our eagerness to absolve them from responsibility. It began years ago with discussions of the “Arab street,” it manifested itself more fully after September 11, and it continues today.

John Roberts: Conservative intellectual or Washington climber?

Beldar beats up on Dahlia Lithwick, apparently because he doesn’t understand the organizaing principle of Slate: Counterintuition über alles!