FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » old man blogs at cloud (Page 10)

  This topic comprises 37 pages: 1  2  3  ...  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  ...  35  36  37   
Author Topic: old man blogs at cloud
Bella Bee
Member
Member # 7027

 - posted      Profile for Bella Bee   Email Bella Bee         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes, I was kind of wincing to see Cosby and Woody Allen there in the same bit. Being funny is not the only thing that they allegedly have in common.
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
tertiaryadjunct
Member
Member # 12989

 - posted      Profile for tertiaryadjunct           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by theamazeeaz:
I know people who won't read a series until every single book is out. I don't get it personally.

I started reading the Wheel of Time series In junior high. Book 6 conveniently came out while I was reading them, but then it was another 2 years before the next one. By then I was in high school and had forgotten most of the intricate plot details and 3 dozen characters, so I re-read books 1-6 before reading 7. 2 and a half years later, same deal, re-reading 1-7 before reading 8. At that point I decided to just wait for him to finish... [Frown]

A large series like that is too detailed for me to remember it all well enough to just jump into the middle of the story after a few years, particularly when "years" could be a decade. There are plenty of other books I haven't gotten around to reading yet; I can read those while waiting for unfinished series to finish.

Posts: 89 | Registered: Apr 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's understandable to want to wait. A Game of Thrones came out when I was 7 years old. I'll be in my 30s by the time the series is finished. That's a pretty big chunk of time. There are adult fans of the SoIaF series who were born after the first book was released.

I haven't re-read the series since 2009, I probably will do so again for Winds, since I've forgotten enough of the minor details and characters for it to become somewhat foggy.

Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have mentioned before that I will never read the books until either they are done or grrm is dead. Pretty good strategy so far.
Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am not angry nor do I feel entitled. I do have my doubts about whether GRRM is going to finish (I agree with Dogbreath here) so will wait to re-engage with the books until he does. Why put myself through withdrawal again?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Actually what's gonna happen is I'm going to convince GRRM to retire, then I'm going to get Kevin J Anderson to come up with the series' thrilling canon-spanning conclusion
Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
unless my demands are met by midnight on the 15th of february.

unmarked non sequential bills only

Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Actually what's gonna happen is I'm going to convince GRRM to retire, then I'm going to get Kevin J Anderson to come up with the series' thrilling canon-spanning conclusion

It's too bad GRRM isn't as good of a writer as Anderson is. I mean, Anderson publishes 4, 5, sometimes 6 books a year. He could finish off the SoIaF series in a year and still have time for a Dune novel and a couple Star Wars books.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sadly I do not have the freedom to not read the next book should it be released regardless of its place in line before completion; because some infantile pillock on the internet will do everything in his or her power to spoil it.
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If that's hyperbole out of predicted frustration, I feel you. If it ain't, don't be silly.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It isn't, because it actually happened. Twice.
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What? The best part of GOT is watching other people's reactions when certain events happen.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Elison R. Salazar:
It isn't, because it actually happened. Twice.

I think you take "spoiler" too literally.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Someone once pm'ed me "ROB AND CAITLYN STARK ARE MURDERED AT THE WEDDING BY THE FREYS."

Tell me how that is not a legitimate reason to read the books as a preventative measure.

That and the book readers can't help themselves, I was on a bus once, discussing the books, I was careful to avoid saying anything when the dude straight up mentioned Tyrion murdering Tywin and his buddy is like "Uh, I hadn't read the books...".

Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That person who PM'd you that was being a serious dick.

I think you still have just as much choice whether to read the books as they come out, or not. A "legitimate reason to read the books as a preventative measure" is not hyperbole, but "I do not have the freedom to not [do that]" definitely is.

Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If I want to maintain the same level of enjoyment it certainly isn't.

It's like trying to sleep if someone is playing loud music, its certainly possibly you still have the "choice" to sleep or not, but its still being infringed in an effort to deny you a free choice in the matter.

Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Serious question for Mormons (and North Carolinians). In at least three recent articles (not going to pull them out right now, but I swear I keep seeing it every other week), OSC has complained that the mainstream media made a mockery of the Mormon faith thing, and it cost the election.

From my POV, it was Bain capital, the 47% thing and a high turn out of women, pocs, and millennials who are alienated by right wing party politics. Then again, because I'm not Mormon and I did not live in a swing state or a bible-belt state (where Baptists pass out those "Mormons are a cult" tracts), any of that stuff went over my head.

Would you say it was accurate?

Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
tertiaryadjunct
Member
Member # 12989

 - posted      Profile for tertiaryadjunct           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Non-Mormon Californian here and I didn't really notice any Mormon mocking either. Here is an analysis claiming his Mormonism had an effect, but not a big enough one (it doesn't say anything about whether the media was part of the effect though): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/benjamin-knoll/mitt-romney-mormon_b_4121217.html
Posts: 89 | Registered: Apr 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I honestly can't remember any MSM mockery of Mormonism, and I followed that election fairly closely. Then again, as a non-Mormon I'm not as likely to notice it, and I live in a pretty Mormon friendly area. (There's a BYU campus on island, and a large percentage of the population are LDS)

I can imagine maybe some local news stations in the south doing some kind of tacky "magic underwear" bit, but nothing I've seen in the Mainstream comes even close.

Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It doesn't ring a bell, but I couldn't swear that SNL or Jon Stewart (just to pick a couple of random examples, and assuming they are part of what OSC would consider mainstream media) didn't highlight his Mormon-ness in a mocking way.

I mean - his church membership was extremely common knowledge, and people in general seem to think Mormons are somewhere between weird and silly, so it's nearly impossible for extensive coverage of Romney not to include something that seems like mockery. But I don't recall anybody really making a point of it in the context of politics, you know?

Maybe OSC is thinking of "The Book of Mormon" the musical.

Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/05/03/jon-stewart-slams-critics-of-mitt-romneys-mormon-faith-you-cant-cherry-pick-the-worst-aspects-of-a-religion/

http://www.ldsliving.com/story/68666-jon-stewart-defends-mormonism-on-the-daily-show

Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Cool! [Smile]
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hobbes
Member
Member # 433

 - posted      Profile for Hobbes   Email Hobbes         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't know what OSC said exactly, and I don't know of any polling data that does (or doesn't for that matter) suggest that Romeny's Mormonism cost him the election. But I would guess that if it did play a role, it would be more likely to do so by having Republican voters stay home (or not campaign) then changing the votes of those who did show up.

Hobbes [Smile]

Posts: 10602 | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by theamazeeaz:

From my POV, it was Bain capital, the 47% thing and a high turn out of women, pocs, and millennials who are alienated by right wing party politics. Then again, because I'm not Mormon and I did not live in a swing state or a bible-belt state (where Baptists pass out those "Mormons are a cult" tracts), any of that stuff went over my head.

Would you say it was accurate?

Perhaps there was some torpor in the base because Romney is a Mormon, but I think you're spot on: the thing that really made him look bad was that he was and is a hypocrite, spouting platitudes about his economic prowess, while he made his fortune doing things which are now mostly illegal, because they are so economically destructive.

People might be dismissive of Obama for his "community organizer," resume, but they for damn sure didn't think of him as a soulless businessman who relished firing people and lapping up huge corporate profits.

His obliviousness and repetitive, absurd gaffes were no help: "I love Nascar... I have several friends who are Nascar owners," and "I had to sell stock to pay for college," were tin-eared to a ludicrous degree for someone ostensibly trying to appeal to working class people.

There is a baseline perception of Mormons that they are not patriotic, or perhaps too insular, and are thus "un-American," which I think also contributed to his image problem, but he as a person and his personal history did nothing to mitigate that perception.

Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jon Boy
Member
Member # 4284

 - posted      Profile for Jon Boy           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:
There is a baseline perception of Mormons that they are not patriotic, or perhaps too insular, and are thus "un-American," which I think also contributed to his image problem, but he as a person and his personal history did nothing to mitigate that perception.

Is there really? I find that hilarious, because a lot of Mormons I know are SUPER patriotic. The Sunday before the Fourth of July, we usually have a bunch of talks about America and patriotism and all that stuff. I've heard people get up in testimony meeting and bear their testimony of how this is a chosen land and how the founding fathers were all inspired to give us the freedoms they did so that the Church could be founded here.

But I completely agree about the rest. I think Romney was a monumental liar and flip-flopper who came off as wooden at best and completely out of touch with most Americans at worst. I always got the feeling that he didn't have any real convictions or beliefs beyond wanting to be president. He always said whatever was expedient. But I don't think it was his Mormonism or the media's supposed mockery thereof that cost him the race.

Posts: 9944 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I would say that there seems to be, in the same way that perhaps Catholics are seen as partisans of something "un-American" by some. This was more pronounced in the past of course. Certainly that was the talk in the 1960s when we elected a Catholic to the White House for the first time (Biden is only the second).

Mormons have a similar thing: they are seen as being partisans to Utah, and in the past that was actually much more true than it is now. There was a time when at least some Utah Mormons saw their future as an independent nation, although it was never a serious proposition.

quote:
I always got the feeling that he didn't have any real convictions or beliefs beyond wanting to be president. He always said whatever was expedient.
I think you might be right.

It was like the infamous "47%" comments. Yes, I understand that the man knows that things don't exactly work that way, and I don't believe that he believes the words he was spouting. But he was spouting them. Nobody made him do that. And no matter how tired you are, you shouldn't say things you don't believe in, just to get a rise out of somebody for some money. That's rightly seen as cynical politicking.

There was an interesting piece on this in Double Down (the sequel to Game Change), that essentially made the same argument. Romney's staff found that he was far too malleable for his own good- too willing to say what needed to be said, no matter how far that strayed from his own principles, and that this lack of spine really hurt his campaign.


Again, I think there are some good reasons people have been and were dismissive of Obama as a naive idealist and a dreamer, but *at least* he had that. And when he made his own "guns and religion" comments, the thing is, I think people understood that he really believes that, and forgive him for it. Romney read as a straight up mercenary, Tywin Lannister of the modern age. Being President seemed the thing he wanted to do as a capstone to his life- and that kind of thing doesn't inspire love.

[ December 02, 2014, 06:23 PM: Message edited by: Orincoro ]

Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Romney's infamous malleability was actually his greatest strength. It's required to be the person who can win both the conservative primary and still stand a shot at the general election. If you were consistent with your principled views, you would only be able to compete in one or the other.
Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
advice for robots
Member
Member # 2544

 - posted      Profile for advice for robots           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'll echo Jon Boy in saying that I'm surprised to hear Mormons are thought of by some as insular and not patriotic enough. I've got to think that it mostly means we're "other" to lots of people who see their understanding and version of patriotism as the only real way. I dunno.

I gotta admit, a Mormon in the White House was an exciting prospect for a while. What it would be like to home teach the Romneys? Would you call them Brother and Sister Romney and would they let you bring in cookies? Would Secret Service let the Elders Quorum help them move in?

Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Romney's infamous malleability was actually his greatest strength. It's required to be the person who can win both the conservative primary and still stand a shot at the general election. If you were consistent with your principled views, you would only be able to compete in one or the other.

GWB seems to be a contradiction to this requirement.
Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
afr - [Big Grin]
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GaalDornick:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Romney's infamous malleability was actually his greatest strength. It's required to be the person who can win both the conservative primary and still stand a shot at the general election. If you were consistent with your principled views, you would only be able to compete in one or the other.

GWB seems to be a contradiction to this requirement.
That's a very interesting point, and one that I've been contemplating as of late. I've read GWB's autobiography, as well as several of his cabinet members (in the middle of Rumsfeld's right now) and studied his administration extensively, yet the man is still a complete enigma to me. Like, I can understand Rumsfeld, I can understand Cheney, I can understand Rice, can see how they think, how they got to where they did. Bush I don't get.

If I were to hazzard a guess, it may be because Bush is incredibly likeable. For better or worse, he just strikes you as that guy... you know that guy, a little socially awkward, a little bit scatter brained, but honest, earnest, easy going and incredibly loyal. A man's man but friendly and completely non-threatening. The perfect buddy. He'd be great to have a beer with, or go fishing with. You can imagine him sitting on your back porch with his feet kicked up, drinking a beer and shooting the shit. It'd be easy to forget he's an old money millionaire with an Ivy League education who's been surrounded by wealth his entire life.

Obama has a lot of that folksy charisma too, and it's helped him a lot. Especially against McCain and Romney.

Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Romney's infamous malleability was actually his greatest strength. It's required to be the person who can win both the conservative primary and still stand a shot at the general election. If you were consistent with your principled views, you would only be able to compete in one or the other.

Well, then perhaps the conservative base is... too far from the center at this point?
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by advice for robots:

I gotta admit, a Mormon in the White House was an exciting prospect for a while. What it would be like to home teach the Romneys? Would you call them Brother and Sister Romney and would they let you bring in cookies? Would Secret Service let the Elders Quorum help them move in?

I would suppose that his staff would be very, very strenuous in their objections to any of these things.

Do you think Kennedy and Biden let it be known that they go to confession? It's a bit of a catch 22. It's abandoning your principles if you don't, but possibly off-putting to other faiths if you do.

Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
advice for robots
Member
Member # 2544

 - posted      Profile for advice for robots           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:
Originally posted by advice for robots:

I gotta admit, a Mormon in the White House was an exciting prospect for a while. What it would be like to home teach the Romneys? Would you call them Brother and Sister Romney and would they let you bring in cookies? Would Secret Service let the Elders Quorum help them move in?

I would suppose that his staff would be very, very strenuous in their objections to any of these things.

Do you think Kennedy and Biden let it be known that they go to confession? It's a bit of a catch 22. It's abandoning your principles if you don't, but possibly off-putting to other faiths if you do.

Well yeah. That was mostly tongue-in-cheek. Romney wouldn't have necessarily been abandoning his principles if he couldn't, say, accept home teachers to come to the White House. I actually have no idea how or if home teaching would even work in that case. And no, the Elders Quorum wouldn't have helped them move in (although that would have been a little bit awesome).

However, I don't see how he would have to abandon his religious practices. Why would it be off-putting to other faiths if he went to church on Sunday and generally observed his faith, same as he does now?

Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:


It was like the infamous "47%" comments. Yes, I understand that the man knows that things don't exactly work that way, and I don't believe that he believes the words he was spouting. But he was spouting them. Nobody made him do that. And no matter how tired you are, you shouldn't say things you don't believe in, just to get a rise out of somebody for some money. That's rightly seen as cynical politicking.

There was an interesting piece on this in Double Down (the sequel to Game Change), that essentially made the same argument. Romney's staff found that he was far too malleable for his own good- too willing to say what needed to be said, no matter how far that strayed from his own principles, and that this lack of spine really hurt his campaign.


Wasn't there a scene at the end of Double Down, where Obama met with Romney after the election and was basically amazed to find that he really believed it?
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Romney's infamous malleability was actually his greatest strength. It's required to be the person who can win both the conservative primary and still stand a shot at the general election. If you were consistent with your principled views, you would only be able to compete in one or the other.

Well, then perhaps the conservative base is... too far from the center at this point?
It's a party that is already operating on a strategy of "if we can't consistently and sufficiently manage a system of disproportionate electoral representation in our favor, we are completely boned."

It's a party that will barely be able to stop itself from literally shutting down the government and road-hauling our credit rating just to make sure liberals don't get any credit for making government work. Multiple times.

So the way you are putting it is kind of a demographic understatement.

And if the next republican primaries are as completely comical as we try to forget the last one was, you'll know that it's a course still unrighted for them.

Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by theamazeeaz:
quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:


It was like the infamous "47%" comments. Yes, I understand that the man knows that things don't exactly work that way, and I don't believe that he believes the words he was spouting. But he was spouting them. Nobody made him do that. And no matter how tired you are, you shouldn't say things you don't believe in, just to get a rise out of somebody for some money. That's rightly seen as cynical politicking.

There was an interesting piece on this in Double Down (the sequel to Game Change), that essentially made the same argument. Romney's staff found that he was far too malleable for his own good- too willing to say what needed to be said, no matter how far that strayed from his own principles, and that this lack of spine really hurt his campaign.


Wasn't there a scene at the end of Double Down, where Obama met with Romney after the election and was basically amazed to find that he really believed it?
No, that doesn't ring a bell. Although there are bits in the book that show how much personal contempt Obama has for Romney.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by advice for robots:
quote:
Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:
Originally posted by advice for robots:

I gotta admit, a Mormon in the White House was an exciting prospect for a while. What it would be like to home teach the Romneys? Would you call them Brother and Sister Romney and would they let you bring in cookies? Would Secret Service let the Elders Quorum help them move in?

I would suppose that his staff would be very, very strenuous in their objections to any of these things.

Do you think Kennedy and Biden let it be known that they go to confession? It's a bit of a catch 22. It's abandoning your principles if you don't, but possibly off-putting to other faiths if you do.

Well yeah. That was mostly tongue-in-cheek. Romney wouldn't have necessarily been abandoning his principles if he couldn't, say, accept home teachers to come to the White House. I actually have no idea how or if home teaching would even work in that case. And no, the Elders Quorum wouldn't have helped them move in (although that would have been a little bit awesome).

However, I don't see how he would have to abandon his religious practices. Why would it be off-putting to other faiths if he went to church on Sunday and generally observed his faith, same as he does now?

Because when you don't like the President, anything he does is subject to criticism. There was a lot of talk about how would-be VP Lieberman was going to deal with the fact that he is ostensibly an orthodox Jew, and whether he would follow the sabbath rules, and the like (he doesn't anyway).

Hell, I've seen people commenting on Obama going on daytime TV as him slacking off from his job- as if going on TV isn't a huge part of his job.

Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This has been spreading through my Facebook:

http://conservativetribune.com/father-fallen-marine-letter/

It's pretty sad to use a condolence letter for the death of your son as a mouthpiece for your politics.

Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hogan died in the middle of 2012. I was in the DEP with him (we both joined from Indiana), he was a good guy. I'm somewhat skeptical of the veracity of that article.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The letter is dated July 2012.
Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
They have so much contempt for history that they show a cop using Liquid Paper in 1951 to alter a document in order to get access to Turing’s war records. Only one tiny problem: The first correction fluid was invented by a woman typist in her Texas kitchen in 1951 – but it wasn’t commercially available until 1956.
Those arrogant, elitist movie makers pushing their gay agenda have stooped to a new low. Did they seriously think the American people would be fooled by such a glaringly obvious mistake?
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jon Boy
Member
Member # 4284

 - posted      Profile for Jon Boy           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I can just imagine some liberal screenwriter deliberately putting that minor anachronism in there.

quote:
Hmm. This scene is pretty good, but it doesn't convey my contempt for history well enough. I hate history so much!

Oh! I know! Liquid Paper wasn't commercially available until 1956—as any fool knows—but I'll have a character use it in 1951! That'll show 'em! Score one for the Liberal War on History, which is totally a real thing!


Posts: 9944 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Should we tell OSC that most movies that take place in the past and show antique cars, will have cars that were built after the movie is supposed to take place?

I haven't seen the movie, but if they made up the spy thing, half of the scenarios and all this stuff, than it's too much of a fan-fic.

quote:
The first correction fluid was invented by a woman typist in her Texas kitchen in 1951
I'm not sure if the point of this quote was to concede that yes the product was invented, but no one in England would have had it because it was not in wide distribution. But the "woman typist in her Texas kitchen" has a name, Bettte Nesmith Graham, and she built a multi-million dollar company (while being a single mother to a Monkee).
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A movie which is not even pretending to be a strictly factual documentary is showing its CONTEMPT FOR HISTORY by anachronizing white out by four years or so.

How CONTEMPTUOUS

Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I mean I know it might be a lost cause because we're talking about literally osc here but when you use these disparaging pejorative and Action Words on such extremely trivial things you just show that the words mean nothing when used by you.

If this is what counts as CONTEMPT then ok congratulations

Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I guess The Passion of the Christ showed CONTEMPT for history because it showed Jesus as a Caucasian.

oh well...

Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jon Boy
Member
Member # 4284

 - posted      Profile for Jon Boy           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I doubt there's a single period piece in all of existence that is not peppered with mostly trivial anachronisms.
Posts: 9944 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Mad Men?

I'm sure there are some and I could Google it, but they try very hard.

Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I once saw a period piece that took place a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away that AFAIK is entirely accurate.
Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 37 pages: 1  2  3  ...  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  ...  35  36  37   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2