While watching a portion of The Alien Legacy on AMC, I saw Sigourney Weaver, evidently a gun control advocate, hemming and hawing about the weapons in Aliens. "I think there are better ways to handle a situation."
Against the Aliens? Uh, what...a vigorous leaflet campaign? Chanting? Pickets?
I know that she didn't mean it that way, but in the context that the comment was presented...sheesh.
I know...she could dash off a heartfelt letter to the editor...
Maybe that's why there were no guns in #3. She was doing some kind of lame MacGuyver thing. Of course she did carry a gun in Resurrection, and threw a tantrum with it in the genetics lab. I guess her principles have a price. Kind of like gun-control advocate Rosie O'Donnell who shilled for K-Mart, the biggest seller of guns in the country.
Think before you speak...
She's an *actress*, someone else gets *paid* to tell them one to say, they just have to emote...and they get to *practice* a lot, first
:)
Maybe that's why there were no guns in #3
The survival rate wasn't much better..wonder if that says anything...either way?
The survival rate wasn't much better..wonder if that says anything...either way?
***** There was only ONE alien in #3. If they'd had Vasquez there the movie would have been 15 minutes long!
I think it's safe to say most movie stars are not on the bright side. Also, Hollywood is about as far left as you can get, so put both of those together and you have some truly insipid statements. "Guns are really bad, and should be illegal, except the ones my bodyguards carry."
Honestly, who the hell listens to a political statement made by a movie/tv star? Most of these people never graduated from high school, get busted for bar fights (and many other things), and burn throgh marriages like a hot rod through regular unleaded.
<>
In our celebrity-obsessed culture the numbers might be frightening.
Yeah, Hollywood celebrities bite. Look at that old actor popping up at NRA rallies, waving his rifle and grunting about his cold dead hands, every time there's a memorial service for school-shooting victims...what a jerk, huh?
Ah, the Good Ole Days. Remember when G. Gordon Liddy publicly advocated shooting American law enforcement personnel in the head? What a superpatriot!
Note: Two keys words in Chadzilla's original post--"evidently" and "context"--relate to the subject line in the most ironic manner.
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run this country are all busy driving taxis and cutting hair."
--George Burns
Afterthought: I watched a portion of that same AMC program today--the "Alien 3" segment--and Sigourney Weaver (co-pro on "Alien 3") pointed out that, unlike the first movie, everyone in "3" was trapped in an enclosed area with this monster BUT WITH NO CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS of any kind. She did not present nor otherwise describe this as an advantage or position of moral superiority.
Uh.
"Most of these people never graduated from high school, get busted for bar fights (and many other things), and burn throgh marriages like a hot rod through regular unleaded."
Reality check!! Quick show of hands: how many people here are in Mensa? Sh'yeah, right...and what with her eighteen arrests for public intoxication, five divorces, seven kids born out of wedlock, webbed toes, and single-digit IQ, Sigourney Weaver has NO business whatever expressing an opinion in public... :)
Sigourney Weaver has as much right as anyone else to state her opinions as anyone else.
Her celebrity status gives her the opportunity to have those opinions aired publically more than most people.
That opportunity does not mean her opinions should be taken any more (or less) seriously than anyone else simply for that opportunity afforded her.
She has an opinion, she can voice it. *shrug* Take it on it's merits, based on the stregth of the arguments, not on her position as a celebrity.
========================
I'm somewhat amused that the movie industry is one of the few industries where almost all female employees are pretty much required to take of their clothes in front of their bosses* in order to further their career. Such required behavior would not be tolerated in any other profession. I'm sorta suprised there's not more protest about this from the more socially active in Hollywood** Given what actually goes on in the movie industry in regards to human social issues, it's very hard to take seriously what any of them say about social issues
*and complete strangers, and be filmed doing it, for public distribution.
** To say nothing of the racial and ethnic stereotyping of blacks, hispanics, and asians.
That be me! :-)
Squishy wrote:
>
>
> Note: Two keys words in Chadzilla's original
> post--"evidently" and "context"--relate to the subject line
> in the most ironic manner.
>
Squishy wrote:
>
> Afterthought: I watched a portion of that same AMC program
> today--the "Alien 3" segment--and Sigourney Weaver (co-pro on
> "Alien 3") pointed out that, unlike the first movie, everyone
> in "3" was trapped in an enclosed area with this monster BUT
> WITH NO CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS of any kind. She did not present
> nor otherwise describe this as an advantage or position of
> moral superiority.
>
It was a direction I had no problem with, it handled the situation differently than the first two movies, so I was all for it.
> Reality check!! Quick show of hands: how many people here are
> in Mensa?
Not me, that's for sure. I'll honestly admit for all to read...I never passed my college Entry Level Mathematics Exam, had to have it waived (I was an English major). Hell, I even failed Algebra in High School.
> ..and what with her eighteen
> arrests for public intoxication, five divorces, seven kids
> born out of wedlock, webbed toes, and single-digit IQ,
> Sigourney Weaver has NO business whatever expressing an
> opinion in public... :)
Ms. Weaver has every right to express her opinion in public, in private, wherever. Freedom of Speech, I'm all for it. I just found the placement of her comment within the context of the documentary humorous as that her statement was presented in such a way (not intended, granted) that made it seem as if she were addressing the situation in the movie. The production clip where Weaver goes from being in character to herself is priceless (she's standing there, pulse rifle and flamethrower in hand, looking ready to kick ass and take names when the director yells CUT, she then quickly lifts her hands and flaps them in a 'Yuck, take it away." and crew members remove the weapon from her shoulders.
Maybe it should be "think when you edit"
As much as I love rootin' tootin' fantasy shoot 'em ups ("Do you feel lucky?") I admit that I am also a gun control advocate (although I do support the right to privately own hunting rifles and/or target pistols). So I fully agree with Ms. Weaver's statement in real life situations. More than one person has made comments about how unrealistic it was that Mel Gibson's family in Signs had no weapons (shotgun, rifle, pistol, SOMETHING), but I never gave it a second thought, being a person with no weapons (well, an aluminium baseball bat) in his house (they scare my wife to death).
My dad had a gun when I was kid (.38 I believe) although he believed he had everything well hidden, my brother and I knew exactly where he kept it (nightstand) and were they kept the bullets (Mom's jewelry box). One day I played with it, he got rid of it and never regretted it.
Evidently? Well, she IS I guess, I just used evidently incorrectly because I had either forgotten she was or had never knew and could not think of a better way to phrase it.
I await sarcastic responses, insults, and flame posts. :-)
Evidently? Well, she IS I guess, I just used evidently incorrectly because I had either forgotten she was or had never knew.
"Evidently" is correct because that just means that there is evidence of something. Whether the evidence os flimsy or strong, you can still use the term
Oh, Boy Squishy realy stepped in it this time.
....And, i guess i am too, for bothering to reply.......Oh,well.
....Poorly worded first paragrapeh, Squish. No, Heston did not plan on Pro-gun rallys when ever there is a school shooting. See, and you wonder why some bipeds think your so mean. Too much Michael Moore in your mental diet. Makes you dispeptic. Sure does me......
....As for Liddy. I could catch his show a few years ago. I remember the explanation he gave. He ment it regards improperly warrent serving. There is a proper way to serve a warrent, and it does intail some risk to the officers, but ensureing the people in the building know they are dealing with law officers is part of doing thing by the book. A lil bit extream, his attitude? True. I just want the record strait. He intended it as a comment on Abuse of authority by Goverment agencys....and how many movie plots have stood on THAT foundation? Still, if the gov. want yer arse, they will get it, justified or not. Big Brother is watching ALL of us, my Droogs....
....Oh,well. Flame on, Squishmister. Gotta belch out those flames of rightiousness. Oh, and Chadzilla.....say what you want, too. If ya wanna enjoy freedom of speech, ya gotta live with being disagreed with.
....And that comes from a real NRA kinda guy. Remember, you have the RIGHT to own a gun...but, its not an OBLIGATION....unless your Swiss.
....Coo-coo...coo-coo.....
Oh, Boy Squishy realy stepped in it this time.
I figured Squishy only made two mistakes in haste.
1) Some posts branched of from the original Sigourney Weaver remark to make comments about celebrities in general (particaularly Creepazoid). In, sarcastically, taking those comments back to Weaver, the point was missed that nobody was ascribing anything to her. Nobody said anything abuot Weaver's marital or educational status, so by retaliating on that point about her pointedly, the remark was off target. Incidentally, unless I'm mistaken, the average IQ of posters here really doesn't effect the IQ of anyone else. Even if we were all gibbering idiots (and given the movies we watch....) , that would not effect the high school graduation rate for Hollywood celebrities. In similar fashion, that comment was off target
2) Replying to the issue that celebrities are left wing wackos with comments showing right-wing celebrity wackos is a red herring. So there are right wing celebrity wackos. Moral of the story is that celebrities can be wackos, whataver political leaning in their persuasions. Pointing out that there are right-wing wacko celebrities does not really address the comment that there are left-wing wacko celebrities so is not a very effective defense of left-wing politics or persons.
Hummm....great last point, Sir Freep.
....Maby we could open a store called "Gibbering loons-R-Us." You could get all our sale merchandise from Burbank alone.......
Pointing out that there are right-wing wacko celebrities does not really address the comment that there are left-wing wacko celebrities so is not a very effective defense of left-wing politics or persons.
***** Squishy was just standing up for his side - I can respect that. And he makes a point: right or left I can't ever remember hearing a movie star or a singer say anything intelligent about a political issue (exception: those who have actually become involved in the real work of politics as opposed to just pontificating from their ivory.. no, solid diamond towers). Just like leftist celebrities, Heston overstates and oversimplifies and demonstrates no real grasp of the entire issue (meaning both sides).
As to whether celebrities have the right to speak their mind (I use that word loosely), of course they do... And we have every right to laugh our asses off and express embarassment for them due to the idiotic things they say (although in Weaver's case it wasn't that bad frankly). We also have every right to call hypocrites (Rosie O'Donnell is one) what they are. As for whether we have any moral right to do this, I would say absolutely. Maybe we're not members of MENSA (although I hope nobody considers that a serious criteria for intelligence), but we do live in a much more real world than your average multi-millionaire star and have a lot more appreciation for real world concerns. Sean Connery got paid $2,000,000 for a day's work on Costner's Robin Hood. TWO MILLION. ONE DAY. If you taxed him 90% he'd still be making money at a preposterous rate. He's welcome to an opinion on government fiscal policy... but it doesn't carry nearly as much weight for me as the opinions of any one person on this message board. Not even close.
A member of the organization poisoned his neighbors, killing their mother, because he was offended by their stupidity and loud music. He put thallium in their soda. Thallium is an element that literally eats away at your nervous system, it is a slow and very, very painful way to die. There is no cure.
Just some trivia that I picked up watching Forensic Files....
I'm not saying that they don't have the right to express their opinions (but Alec Baldwin pushes the envelope). I just wish people would stop listening to them just because they are celebrities, especially when those people are ignorant folls in the first place.
And yeah. A Hollywood liberal probably would obstruct the marines and get killed by the aliens they are trying to defend.
I'm not saying that they don't have the right to express their opinions (but Alec Baldwin pushes the envelope).
***** No - that's the point - in America, there is no envelope beyond creating a public hazard (fire in a crowded theater). There's no going to far in expressing your opinion -- and if Alec Baldwin wants to keep showing his ass while trying to talk politics, I'll keep laughing. The best was when the multi-millionaire champion of the common man was caught on tape shrieking at a meter maid, threatening to "have her fired" for writing him a $25 parking ticket. He also vowed to leave the US if Bush became president and I think he's still around. If you're someone who leans right, why would you want to silence such an embarassment to the left??
But there are very, very few right-wing celebrities anyway. As Squishy and so many others like to point out there's Charlton Heston, and they always use the same tired, predictable jabs that prove nothing and only point out how weak whatever arguement they're making is by beating that dead, decomposed, and buried horse. Can you name any right-wing celebs who aren't in their twilight years, has-beens or filling out a waning career? I still wouldn't care what they have to say, it's just that Hollywood is left to the death.
Creepozoid said: "And yeah. A Hollywood liberal probably would obstruct the marines and get killed by the aliens they are trying to defend." ---- You know, I think I saw that movie.
I keep coming back here for the intelligent discussions. Gotta love you guys.
Some clarifications:
First, I meant no offense to Chadzilla. When I mentioned "irony," I meant that the usual "Crossfire: BMO" gang reacted to his original message with the usual "See! See! Liberal are TEH BAD!!!11" spaz-outs. I was making fun of them, not CZ. While his description of the "Aliens" segment may be correct, so is my description of the "Alien 3" segment, which suggests a different philosophy about self-defense on the part of Weaver.
"No, Heston did not plan on Pro-gun rallys when ever there is a school shooting."
...And I never said he did. (Read again.) However, it is extremely poor judgment to continue with pre-existing plans for one the same day the bodies are being buried. It may make some feel invulnerable ("Them grievin' parents can't push ME around!!"), but in the big picture it just hurts the cause.
Funny you should bring up Michael Moore, who is an NRA member. Believe it or not, like him, I support responsible gun ownership. I also believe in regulation and applied standards to qualify that ownership. This sort of thing makes us unpopular on both sides of the gun "debate"--read: simpleminded moron shriekfest--which helps convince me it's right.
Interesting Heston anecdote: in one instance in which his public opinions veered from the "official" beliefs of La Pierre's worshippers, he was immediately regulated to "Despicable Liberal Traitor" status by many until he backpedaled a few days later. Since then, he's been Moses all the way. (Google for details. Easily found.)
"But there are very, very few right-wing celebrities anyway."
Riiiiiiiight. I think you mean "movie stars," not "celebrities." All sorts of media figures are celebrities, and very many of them are conservative. (And speaking of "dead horses," J.R. trots out Alec Baldwin, right on schedule.) Rush Limbaugh is a celebrity, and he's ALL politics. (And a quick Google will turn up probably upwards of three thousand sites listing all the demonstrably idiotic and false things he's said over the years, which is why I didn't bother to bring him up. Ditto Ann Coulter.)
Yes, many conservative actors are dead. There's a reason, I think. Example: John Wayne, while filming "The Conquerer" (in which his character "seduces" a woman by raping her, after which she is utterly devoted to him, woo-hoo, family values ahoy pilgrim), participated in a campaign to scoff at "lefty" concerns that the shooting site might be contaminated with radioactivity from A-bomb tests. He (and the entire production crew) had no idea at the time that the "lefties" were right to be concerned...
(And be sure to enjoy John Wayne's "The Green Berets," for its incredibly accurate depiction of the realities of--and philosophies behind--The Vietnam War. YES, I'm being sarcastic.)
And my statement about restricting Weaver's right to free expression was indeed a gag. (The " :) " should have been a tip-off.) I'm just making fun of this knee-jerk, ill-considered "Liberal Media" fantasy again.
Idiots exist in all ideologies; idiots with loud political opinions of little merit exist in all walks of life (hence the George Burns quote back in my first message). Newt Gingrich was once hailed as the Next Great Genius of Conservative Thought, and the monster's marital life is a revolting spectacle of selfish, vicious stupidity. Yet I'm supposed to dismiss each and every opinion expressed by a celebrity because some of them get...divorces?
If Hollywood were wholly in the grasp of some universal ultraliberal conspiracy to control the minds of America...why hasn't it worked? That line's been uttered for decades--from way back when it was "the Jews control Hollywood" (which conservatives no longer say because--**giggle**--it's POLITICALLY INCORRECT!! **laughs ass off at escalating irony, oh hi Dano**) or Joe McCarthy's Commie Conspiracy or George Will and Pat Buchanan sniffing about a "Culture War." And yet there is still Dirty Harry. And "Rambo III." And "The Right Stuff." And "Metal Gear Solid." And Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, and O'Reilly. And corporate-owned news outlets. And Medved. And "The 700 Club." And on and on and on.
Amazing, isn't it? The Liberals are so good at disguising their deep-rooted, desperate thought-control conspiracy, it's as if it isn't even there. The devious bastards!! :)
Yeah. BUT PEOPLE LISTEN to them (most Californians follow their weample to a "T"). The whole world would be a better place if they were silenced.
"Silenced?" You mean killed? Or just prevented from speaking? And who? Liberals? Californians? People? The whole world? Or just America?
Seriously: people need to think for themselves. Celebrity worship is not the fault of the celebrity; it's the fault of the worshipper.
M. Moore is an NRA member , for the sake of "In yer Face".....humm....should Tom Sellick join the the Violence policy Inst. for the same reason? Wonder how folks would take that?
....True, Squishy, you did not say Heston planed to show up after Columbine just to do an "In yer face" of his own, but in a hurried reading, i did take it that way. As one who does not blame the tool, but the monsters who misuse it, i did not react emotionaly to the presence of the NRA rally in that state, as i tend to think the monsters should be held responsable. Foolish, i know, but there it is....
....I too, support responsable gun owner ship.....but, lets agree on how that is defined. You don't shoot people, deliberatly or negligently, except in dire need,in unavoidable self defence. Simple, right?
....Not to the pro-gun control groups. They do want all guns banned. And to see the resaults, look at England. Violent crime is on the rise. Would an armed citizenry decrese that? Likely. But...they would still be treating the symptoms, not the causes. Ultimatly, its a matter of the beliefs of a scociaty, and how those are expressed.
....Guns are no miricle cure. Look at Afganistan, or Somalia. I think part of the problim is this : It is how people look at other people. The "I" Vs. "Them". The pro-gun control groups think they can remove violence by dealing with things.(Wepons). The anti-gun control groups know that is not possable, as human nature will find a way to express it self, as long as there is the DESIRE to take from others, by force, what the taker wants.
....And this is far more complex and difficult, then , to quote Bryan Gumbal " Just takeing all the guns away".
....Agine, i ask you....how many movies have we seen involving rebellions aginst tyrants? I wonder what titles would be on that list?
....What i mean is, as we have a deep, almost cellular level awareness of how easily power can be abused....why take it as granted that justice is dependable, from we frail, imperfect creatures?
....As an American, i see this debate this way. Give all power to the Goverment, and those people will mess up. How they do so, is mearly a matter of method.
....Things have changed, since i was a kid.
....Modern Liberality, is not what it once was. Nor is Conserivitisim. The two have passed throung each other, and some mixing has taken place. The Cons want relitivly less gov, the Libs want more. Each thinks its got the answers.
....Each is only partly right.
....And in this counrty, as every other, those who want power will say what is needed, and "Talk the talk" , to get it. I say agine...the partys are only a matter of chooseing between the lesser of two evils....so i guess it depends on what "Evils" you feel most comfortable with.
....A better man then i wrote a book that defined the different operating philosophys of the two extreams. Thomas Sowell's "The vision of the Annointed".
Give it a look. At least it'll amuse you.
....Liberals think they can perfect themselves, and others. Conservitives know that can't happen. Hence, i fear the modern liberal, as he has become the new version of Joe McCarthy. Not deliberatly....in face, he is unaware of it. But, it is the inevitable resauly of human imperfection just finding another outlet.
....Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
....And if i have learned one thing, its this : Those who think they are doing you a great service, are most to be feared, as they can't see their errors...as they think error is impossable, with good intentions.
....And we all know what the road to hell is paved with.......
....Conservitives are hardly perfect...Look at Gingriche's pvt. life, indeed. I simply think, that, as a group, basicly, they are aware of their imperfections, on a level that, for what ever reason, Liberals have lost sight off.
....Well....enough pontficating for one day!
BUT PEOPLE LISTEN to them (most Californians follow their weample to a "T"). The whole world would be a better place if they were silenced.
***** What the heck are you talking about "if they were silenced"??? What kind of statement is that for an American to make? You can't really believe we should SILENCE people just because we don't like what they are saying, can you?? Seriously, can you?
As for people really listening to vapid entertainers, I don't buy it. The West Wing is clearly a left-wing show that has a consistent formula of setting up strawman supporters of right-wing beliefs so that the witty and urbane main characters can rip them apart. It is also one of the most popular shows in the country. If people were listening to all the photogenic stars of the West Wing, then why didn't the Democrats do what everyone expected them to do in the elections a couple of weeks ago? Almost all the stars out there are spewing anti-war invective about Bush's Iraq policy (despite the fact that the policy still may lead to a peaceful solution), and yet a clear majority of ordinary people supports the way Bush is handling things. I don't see star power having any significant effect... possibly because the types of people prone to listen to it are the same types of people who don't vote because they don't want to miss Entertainment Tonight.
"the Jews control Hollywood" (which conservatives no longer say because--**giggle**--it's POLITICALLY INCORRECT!! **laughs ass off at escalating irony, oh hi Dano**)
***** Hi Squish - looking at my posts here, you are right: I am up to my usual ultra-conservative tricks again (*rolls eyes*). I should edit those posts for free thought. As for the Jews controlling Hollywood, I think Farrakhan and Jesse and Sharpton would be interested to know that you classify them as "conservatives." They're really the only people I can think of (them and some anonymous skinheads I've seen on TV specials about racist groups) who have made statements to that effect (I'm sure you can give me a link to a quote by someone like Trent Lott or Dick Armey, if there is one(*weary sigh*)). Maybe if I ever listened to the talk radio you insist I listen to then I could come up with some of my own (*calculates high school as the last time I listened to ANYTHING on the radio, much less talk*). And of course small groups of loud idiots claiming to represent entire races, genders, or sexual orientations should absolutely be allowed to bully artists, scholars, and journalists into correctness. To not agree with this would be to harbor a "conspiracy theory" (*rolls eyes again*).
As for celebrity idiocy - I reiterate: who cares what any of them say? I just consider it a little extra clowning by my favorite jesters that I get on the news instead of having to buy a ticket. It's free entertainment, people. I mean where else are you going to see Whoopie Goldberg do comedy?? Certainly not in any of her movies.
James "Squishy" Carville. Crossfire indeed.
I love setting Dano off. He flails about so entertainingly!
"As for the Jews controlling Hollywood, I think Farrakhan and Jesse and Sharpton would be interested to know that you classify them as "conservatives." They're really the only people I can think of...who have made statements to that effect."
Yes, too bad Hollywood cannot make them "servile toadies," huh? No, I classify them as bigoted idiots. To repeat for the sake of the mentally challenged: conservatives don't say openly-bigoted crap like that anymore--well, most don't--"liberals (control the media)" is safer. (And just to be clear, I don't think all conservatives are bigots. That's the type of broad generalization Dano makes while crying about broad generalizations he claims I make about him.) But it was a very popular phrase not so long ago. (And the basis for that line in the "Simpsons" when Burns sees the germs on Smither's face screaming "Freemasons run the country!!" In fact, Cartman on "South Park" still uses it on occasion.)
"And of course small groups of loud idiots claiming to represent entire races, genders, or sexual orientations should absolutely be allowed to bully artists, scholars, and journalists into correctness."
You mean the Christian Coalition?
Or do you mean the Moral Majority?
Oh, wait, you mean "Liberals" and their "Politically-Correct Nonsense," don't you? Of course--when THEY do it, it's BAAAAAAAAAAD; when the Right does it, I'm sure you're equally offended...right? I got confused because you left the word "all" out of the tired old conservative cliche quoted above ("represent ALL races..."). The Klan claims to represent an entire race, and they're loud idiots and bullies; maybe that's what you meant? (Yeah. Sure.)
Flangepart, I'm not reading anymore of your posts until you start spelling better. We all know you can do it; we've seen it.
You mean the Christian Coalition?
Or do you mean the Moral Majority?
Oh, wait, you mean "Liberals" and their "Politically-Correct Nonsense," don't you? Of course--when THEY do it, it's BAAAAAAAAAAD; when the Right does it, I'm sure you're equally offended...right?
***** And I love it when Squishy scrambles around to make people who disagree with him into something easier to attack. If he'd stop long enough to read what I write, he might actually realize that I don't even consider myself much of a conservative. Of course the Christian Coalition and Moral Majority and lots of other conservatives use scare tactics and labelling to stifle debate and it's just as bad (not worse, but just as bad) when they do it -- go back and carefully re-read my take on Heston, silly goose.
If you weren't so touchy about the fact that people don't just take what you say for granted, and most people (dare I say almost all?) on this messageboard have very different views from you, maybe you wouldn't feel such a need to lash out at the one person in this thread who actually agreed with some of the things you had to say. Bitter little man.
A few people scoff at Weaver's complaining (15 years after the fact, and after her massive profit, by the way) about guns in the movie Aliens, and observe that without guns it wouldn't have been much of a movie, and suddenly we're the radical right picking on the poor liberals? Sounds like someone's got a little persecution complex. Election results got ya down?
: )
I once knew a guy in grad school like Squishy. It didn't really matter to him what the issue was, he'd simply keep throwing words at a topic until everyone around him was worn out & exhausted. He would then believe he had "won", and "winning" was the most important thing to this fellow -- not conversation, not an honest exchange of intellectual opinion and ideas: Just having the last word, hopefully at the expense of others.
Soon, everyone in the Anthro department stopped talking to him. I don't know whatever became of him. I don't care. Neither did anyone else . . .
peter johnson
Sorry, Uncle Squishy, but i tend to worry about What i'm saying, and once thats done, go over the spelling. You should have seen it before i posted!
....But....if it has to be perfectly typed before you even try to read it....is that fair to me?
The White Males Fight Back:
Bart: "I think sharing is overrated too. And helping others. And what's all this crap I've been hearing about tolerance?"
Homer: "Hmm! Your ideas are intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter."
------------------------
Dano: "And I love it when Squishy scrambles around to make people who disagree with him into something easier to attack."
Really--kind of like how you keep lying about what I've written: for example, "Squishy keeps saying 'Republicans equals racist!'"--and other times you've "rearranged" what I've written to make things easier for you? (I suppose that's why my being able to back up my arguments with references makes you so angry.) Lies make the Baby Jesus cry! Why do you make the Baby Jesus cry, Dano?
...say, that reminds me: taken that "test" yet, Dano? Surely you are secure in the rightness of your convictions, yes? (Notice that the four public figures in your prior post--Farrakhan, Jackson, Goldberg, and Sharpton--all have one thing, and one thing only, in common. It says a lot, whether you're aware of it or not.)
Flangepart: "But....if it has to be perfectly typed before you even try to read it....is that fair to me?"
Perfectly typed? No. Everyone makes typos. But when a post is littered with "agine" and "strait" and several other misspellings of very simple words, it becomes not worth the effort to translate. Who's that being fair to? You normally write a LOT more clearly than that...and you aren't exactly bothering to read my posts thouroughly, either.
Li'l Pee Jay: you've already made a complete fool of yourself in your "Por Le Squish" thread, back when you were simultaneously insulting me, talking down to me, and kissing my ass--unsuccessfully; I'm honestly surprised you ever showed your face here again after THAT hilariously childish spectacle.
This isn't about "winning"--it's about challenging ignorance. I used to be a Fudd once, myself. ("Be vewy vewy caweful--I'm an angwy white male! Heh heh heh heh heh!") But people challenged the beliefs my redneck family had instilled in me, and consequently I quit being an ignorant redneck. And I'm grateful to those who argued with me, Dano and PeeJay, rather than trying to lick my anus in the hopes I would join their pack, adding to the safety they felt in numbers.
Guys, if you want a board where patently false right-wing fantasies such as "The Liberal Media Conspiracy," The War Against "Politically-Correct Nonsense," Racial Slurs Don't Harm Anyone and The White Male As The Ultimate Victim go completely unchallenged, I suggest you look elsewhere. Otherwise, be better prepared to defend your positions. (Note to Dano: racial slurs are very common at the Mr. Cranky boards. No political correctness there!)
-------------------------------------
Talk about escalating irony! It's all about the timing:
Right after my last post here, I left for work and picked up a paper and there it was: the hideous offspring of "Reverend" Fred Phelps (Farrakhan, Jackson and Sharpton are not the only ones to make an embarassment of that title) in California to protest a school play about the murder of Matthew Shepard. Along with their usual vicious, stupid vomit ("God hates f**s, God sent AIDS"), they were singing "God Hates America" and holding signs that read "God Sent The Sniper," and "Thank God For 9-11."
Phelps had been invited by a local Baptist minister, who felt that the play's message--that it's wrong to murder homosexuals for being different--was "politically-correct nonsense." Phelps, however, was busy protesting a book-signing by Al Gore, so he sent his children and grandchildren to spew in his place.
One of his children told a counter-protester, "I don't think of you as a f**, but rather a f**-enabler."
BUT AT LEAST THEY WEREN'T BEING "POLITICALLY CORRECT."
Meanwhile, the War on Terror has taken a back seat to The REAL Threat Against America: homosexuals. After telling us 9-11 occured, in part, because we didn't have enough translators to decipher messages triggering the plot, the US military dismissed several translators this week...for being gay.
BUT AT LEAST THEY WEREN'T BEING "POLITICALLY CORRECT."
"Mallard Fillmore" author/artist (and closet bigot) Bruce Tinsley drew a Sunday strip a few weeks back castigating airport screeners for searching everyone instead of concentrating exclusively on Arabs and Arab-Americans. He presented a list of "suspects," including the only obvious choice, Osama Bin Laden--but since the 9-11 hijackers looked little or nothing like Bin Laden, the only thing they had in common is their ethnicity--and not every terrorist shares THAT. Still, a more recent strip expressed Tinsley's displeasure that experts, before their capture, thought the Washington Snipers MIGHT have been "a white male." Another example of the Fudd's belief that he and he alone is The World's Victim...yet how many "white" churches in America have been burned because of Timmy McVeigh? How many Fudds have been stopped by police?
BUT AT LEAST HE WASN'T BEING "POLITICALLY CORRECT."
Aw, I wrote all that, and I completely forgot: the last time I heard anyone talking about how "Jews control the media" was when evangelist Billy Graham and President Richard Nixon discussed it--and how to "deal" with it--when another wonderful chapter of those Nixon tapes were released to the public. (Chimpy has since put an end to the public release of those tapes. Welcome to the New America, where the Freedom of Information Act suddenly means nothing.) Hope this refreshes your selective memory, Dano.
BUT AT LEAST THEY WEREN'T BEING "POLITICALLY CORRECT."
Aw, I wrote all that, and I completely forgot: the last time I heard anyone talking about how "Jews control the media" was when evangelist Billy Graham and President Richard Nixon discussed it--and how to "deal" with it--when another wonderful chapter of those Nixon tapes were released to the public. (Chimpy has since put an end to the public release of those tapes. Welcome to the New America, where the Freedom of Information Act suddenly means nothing.) Hope this refreshes your selective memory, Dano.
***** It would have if I had ever heard that quote (one can only selectively forget something that one has actually heard - my best memory from the Nixon administration was turning three by the way - oh what a party!). I have no problem believing that Graham and Nixon had such a discussion however. Question: How is it that Iraqis gassing Curds isn't "recent" enough to matter in our discussions, but the Nixon administration is? Not saying you don't raise a good point here - I think you do - thanks for the info.
...say, that reminds me: taken that "test" yet, Dano? Surely you are secure in the rightness of your convictions, yes? (Notice that the four public figures in your prior post--Farrakhan, Jackson, Goldberg, and Sharpton--all have one thing, and one thing only, in common. It says a lot, whether you're aware of it or not.)
***** If you say so, Freud. If you didn't want me to name Jesse, Al, and Louis, then you shouldn't have brought up the "Jews in the Media Conspiracy." I'm secure enough in my tolerance to ignore the baiting. Since I stated up front that it's wrong and foolish to use hurtful words in hurtful situations, I'm starting to get embarassed for you with all your sn****ring about your "test." Let it go.
And I'm grateful to those who argued with me, Dano and PeeJay, rather than trying to lick my anus in the hopes I would join their pack, adding to the safety they felt in numbers.
***** For the record, disagreeing with you does not constitute trying to get you to join anything. Sounds like you went in one direction and don't want to hear anything that's contrary to your new world view. Bottom line: how does laughing at Sigourney's hypocritical and rather pointless bemoaning of the use of guns in Aliens translate into "left wing media conspiracy" and "all the angry white men must be put in their place." I guessed it looked like a job for the messageboard's moral nanny.
Phelps had been invited by a local Baptist minister, who felt that the play's message--that it's wrong to murder homosexuals for being different--was "politically-correct nonsense."
***** Hmm... So if an extremist uses a phrase in one case, that phrase is totally discredited? I direct you to your astute answer on the agreement you and Jimmy Swaggert had on Frank Zappa. Just because an imbecile takes an argument and applies it where it does not belong, doesn't discredit the argument. You should KNOW this - you yourself saw what was wrong with Jesse Jackson's screed against the movie Barbershop. Does what he said in that case totally discredit your positions?? Arguing from anecdote rarely proves a point. This case is no different.
Meanwhile, the War on Terror has taken a back seat to The REAL Threat Against America: homosexuals. After telling us 9-11 occured, in part, because we didn't have enough translators to decipher messages triggering the plot, the US military dismissed several translators this week...for being gay.
***** Uh huh. Please locate the post where I said anything intolerant about gay people and refresh my selective memory again. What's your point? That there are religious a***oles and right-wing a***oles out there?? Point conceded. Point never even opposed, Squishy. Jeez. Talk about jousting with windmills.
"Mallard Fillmore" author/artist (and closet bigot) Bruce Tinsley
***** What author/artist who?? What are you even talking about??? Good Lord you sound like Old Man Smithers at the end of a Scooby Doo - ranting and raving
about things nobody's even mentioned. "Everyone would think like me, if it weren't for those SNOOPING author/artists!!"
Dano: "Since I stated up front that it's wrong and foolish to use hurtful words in hurtful situations, I'm starting to get embarassed for you with all your sn****ring about your "test." Let it go."
Yes, you "concede" things like that ("hurtful words in hurtful situations are wrong"), then in your next post repeat them ("people who don't like those words are PC whiners"). Don't be embarassed for me, Dano. I'm very comfortable and confident of my viewpoint here, and not afraid or embarassed to discuss it in open public conversation. You? You won't take the test.
Dano: "Bottom line: how does laughing at Sigourney's hypocritical and rather pointless bemoaning of the use of guns in Aliens translate into "left wing media conspiracy" and "all the angry white men must be put in their place." I guessed it looked like a job for the messageboard's moral nanny."
Dano, you're the one who keeps injecting yourself into discussions at any opportunity to tell anyone and everyone Lefties Are Dumb and Wrong--so who's being the "moral nanny" here? And as we've previously discussed, what you describe as Weaver's "hypocritical and rather pointless bemoaning of the use of guns in Aliens" is THIS, as described by Chadzilla:
Chadzilla: "I just found the placement of her comment ("I think there are better ways to handle a situation") within the context of the documentary humorous as that her statement was presented in such a way (not intended, granted) that made it seem as if she were addressing the situation in the movie. The production clip where Weaver goes from being in character to herself is priceless (she's standing there, pulse rifle and flamethrower in hand, looking ready to kick ass and take names when the director yells CUT, she then quickly lifts her hands and flaps them in a 'Yuck, take it away." and crew members remove the weapon from her shoulders)."
So, we have (1) a comment taken out of context by the documentary's editor and (2) a gesture that can be interpreted in any number of ways (the pulse rifle/flamethrower rig doesn't look easy or comfortable to wear), and Royal Dano has decided this is "hypocritical and rather pointless bemoaning of the use of guns"--ignoring a statement she makes about "Alien 3" that suggests her viewpoint is quite the opposite...even after I pointed it out. You don't even comprehend the subject you're arguing about; do I need to point out that's freaking hilarious? :D I repeat: don't be embarassed for me...
Dano: "I direct you to your astute answer on the agreement you and Jimmy Swaggert had on Frank Zappa."
Sauce for the goose, baby. You're not the only person here who gets mad and wet because I don't think the way you'd like; that was, in part, intended for Li'l PeeJay, and in part for you, to suggest there are things far worse than what you consider "PC whining." Ditto the rest of the post about Bruce Tinsley (a favorite subject between me and Flangepart) and the translators. It's just about bigotry--unless you can reasonably explain how closeted homosexuality among low-level personnel threatens our translation resources in the War on Terror--but, given the opening, I'm sure you'd dismiss all protest against these things as "nonsense."
And you misunderstand: I find the buttkissing ("But...I agreed with you on this, this, and that!") offensive, not the arguing--because it suggests I am expected to reciprocate the act. Sorry--I just don't swing that way.
Side rant: In an earlier post, Dano suggested I might be bitter about the election results. Sorry, I actually got what I wanted. Although I prefer a conservative local government and a liberal federal one, with a nice mix on the state level, my local government turned out conservative enough, and I'm glad the GOP took Congress.
For the next two years, they have no excuses.
The spin is already being spun; Republican propagandists--who once claimed deficit spending in the '80s was the work of "tax-and-spend" Democrats and the budget surplus of the '90s was the work of "responsible" Republicans, as if both parties were not actively involved in either--are now claiming the opposite: that it was Reagan's wild deficit spending alone that caused the Soviet Union to wither and die. (For them, this also covers the question of HOW Jellybean The Sleepy Cowboy singlehandedly brought down the Reds, even if that isn't remotely true, nor well-explained.) They're also claiming massive-deficit spending is the best thing for the economy at this time--but you can be sure they wouldn't be saying this with Democrats in charge.
All they have besides the spin is The Holy Perpetu-War Against The Invisible Enemy. The "War Is Peace/Lies Are Truth/Ignorance Is Knowledge" War.
The next two years are going to be interesting indeed. I'm betting my savings will see me through, and hoping my loved ones and I don't wind up dead as a consequence of the bottomless thirst for Idiot Foreign Policy that seems to almost be based on Ann Coulter's vicious idiocy ("Invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity!").
Lacking anyone else to criticize, the public and press will be focused on the GOP, and the GOP, lacking anyone else to blame for each misstep, will be focused on each other. The feeding frenzy is going to be bloody.
By the time the next elections come up--if elections haven't been done away with by our benevolent, wise leaders--we'll see what happens. Ciao!
Stop the madness before it consumes you all!!!
All I wanted to do was just use/borrow/steal/paraphrase a gag I saw on an episode of Red Dward once....really, that was the only thing on my mind. "Leaflet campaign." It was funny then, it's funny now, but...heck with it...
Of course, stepping between two arguing individuals just runs the risk of making me the target...
...uh...hi...guys...how ya doin'?
Fine - enough sniping.
But I'd like to take a minute to address the one point from Squishy's earlier post that stuck in my mind. He says he was brought up in racism and was saved by people who challenged those beliefs. Good. He couldn't help to whom he was born and I applaud him for having the strength to change. I also found what he said about his dad to be genuinely sad and I felt sorry for him. Honestly, no scoffing.
Now here's why we don't see eye to eye. I wasn't brought up in racism, and I was brought up in an area with a very large minority population. I've been friends with non-white kids since I could walk. Coming from those two backgrounds, we inevitably have a different take on things. Growing up with people of different races I learned not to take such things so seriously. Pretty much every black joke I heard growing up was told to me by black kids. I reciprocated with Irish and Catholic jokes. Race never seemed like a big deal, and I'm thankful for that. By the time I met a real racist, I was happily immune.
Growing up in this environment also taught me about the triviality of words compared to real racism. There was a white lady on our school board who constantly crowed about my school's "wonderous diversity" and arranged NAACP speakers to come in and talk to the student body. Never once did this woman utter a racist word. But then her daughter started seeing a black kid, and then it was a whole different story. She cracked down on that relationship as if her daughter's boyfriend had the plague. So much for niceties meaning everything.
Now I understand that a reformed racist cannot take such things lightly because of the painful memories they must bring up, but maybe Squishy could at least understand that not everyone comes from a deadly serious racist background like he does. Some reformed racists can be awfully self-righteous and holier-than-thou. It's like talking to a Born Again Christian. Thanks anyway, sir, but I got it right the first time.
Here's a test for Squishy: Make friends with some black people. Don't bore them with your politics - talk to them about work, sports, girls, boys, whatever. Hang out with them for a while. Maybe if they start to feel loose enough around you, you will hear one of them use the word n****r. When this happens, get on your high horse and scold them about using that kind of language. See if they still want to be your friend.
If you pass that one, you might try going to a Garth Brooks concert, or a rodeo, or a high school football game in Texas. Shout as loud as you can: "REDNECK!!!" Funny thing the way you define what a "slur" is. I know plenty of people who take offense from "redneck" on either a racial or cultural level, and yet you have no problem throwing that one around. Curious.
I got no beef with you whatsoever, Chadzilla--our discussions are always civil and reasonable, even when we disagree or a rare misunderstanding occurs. You spell well, too.
...Forgot one last anecdote, one even more germane to the issue than the others. I know Dano loves anecdotes, so here it is, and I'll try to keep it short.
An article was recently published in my local paper about "white privlege." BEFORE YOU GO FLYING OFF THE HANDLE, I should like to point out that it was NOT a blanket condemnation of Anglo-Saxons or their culture, NOR a conspiracy theory about racists, NOR anything of the sort; it just described things that white people MIGHT take for granted that "minorities" MIGHT (and sometimes do) see as putting them at a disadvantage--so that we might understand each other's point of view a little better. That's all.
The response was amazing--but predictable. The article was characterized by a number of enraged Fudds as a "hypocritical assault" on white people, who had their own anecdotes about being "talked back" to by Blacks, or being afraid to go out at night because of same. One wrote demanding a study of "black privlege" and "female privlege" (wow). Another described white people as "the only remaining group that it's still legal to arrest unlawfully, beat up, and murder" (WOW!!).
This is what I'm talking about when I rail on about Fudds. Fudds see themselves as the sole victim of the world, and any "political correctness"--that disagrees with their own--as the worst possible crime.
Test already passed, Dano. Several "minority" friends, both at work and outside work; watch bad movies with them often. We've also argued long and hard about the "N-word," and we're still friends. (They also argue the issue with family members, go figure.) The guys I'm no longer friends with are the white guys with the foul mouths and bizarre victimhoods...
Example: one turned to me out of clear blue sky one day and said, "Don't you feel threatened by the fact that THEY are allowed to celebrate Kwanzaa, and everyone else celebrates Christmas?" (My God, there's so much wrong with that, where to begin? "THEY?" "Threatened?" "Allowed?" "Christmas?" I repeat: out of a clear blue sky.)
"She cracked down on that relationship as if her daughter's boyfriend had the plague. So much for niceties meaning everything."
Hey, good to see you're not above using anecdotes after all, Dano. You wouldn't be the first to realize there are hypocrites all around us. Jeff Foxworthy has already beaten me to the punch on "redneck;" so has "King of the Hill." If you think for one second it has the same sort of impact as an African-American hearing it from a white person, you take yet another step down the ladder in my eyes. Not too many rungs left, either.
Correction:
If you think for one second it has the same sort of impact as an African-American hearing THE N-WORD from a white person, you take yet another step down the ladder in my eyes.
My point being, of course, that Fudds have a relatively safe history when it comes to racial victimization in America.
Squishy wrote:
>
>Example: one turned to me out of clear blue sky one day and
> said, "Don't you feel threatened by the fact that THEY are
> allowed to celebrate Kwanzaa, and everyone else celebrates
> Christmas?" (My God, there's so much wrong with that, where
> to begin? "THEY?" "Threatened?" "Allowed?" "Christmas?" I
> repeat: out of a clear blue sky.)
>
Yeah, and what about HANUKKAH or RAMADAN!?! Uh, I for one am VERY threatened!!! SATANIST!!!
I celebrate Christmas because I'm Christian, others celebrate different because of other cultural or religious beliefs. Got no problem with that. Only time it bugged me was when this Jewish kid in school got and EXTRA week off because of Hanukkah. I begged my parents to convert so I could get three weeks off too.
> You wouldn't be the first to realize there are
> hypocrites all around us.
I watch a lot Conservative Christian programming for entertainment. It was pretty funny watching Robertson, Hagee, and a few others denounce Halloween while showing all the spooky trimmings of the 'holiday'. But one thing really whacked me...Hagee is a very vocal critic of the 'satanically' inspired Harry Potter, but in a recent infomercial interview he calmly explained how he studied the writings of not only John Grisham (his favorite writer) but of STEPHEN KING to learn how to craft characters. If you can't see the irony of that, then you are blind.
And yes, I'm going to read his novels...some day. :-)
Squishy wrote:
>
> I got no beef with you whatsoever, Chadzilla--our discussions
> are always civil and reasonable, even when we disagree or a
> rare misunderstanding occurs. You spell well, too.
>
Why thank you Squishy. For the record, I think the only time we ever got close to a spat was over John Carpenter's The Thing. While it is one of my favorite movies of all time, you made no secret of just how much you detest it. Fun little tennis match we had there and I remember your opening shot...
"I like you Chadzilla, you seem nice, so I'm going to try and not say angry things to you.." or words to that effect. What that has to do with the topic at hand, I have not a clue. But it is one of my favorite board posting memories.
:-)
An article was recently published in my local paper about "white privlege."
***** Never read it - can't comment. Sounds like an interesting (though unworkable) concept. But if it makes you feel better (who knows - it just might), I lump the people who spoke out against the article in the name of white opression right in with the politically correct people who condemn things based on minority opression. Someone can go ahead and criticize that article based on its merits (what some of us did with Sigourney's comments), but when someone just tries to shout down or silence something out of hand, I get annoyed. You may realize this if you go back and re-read my reactions to people who said movie stars' political opinions should be silenced. If this makes me a "vewy angwy white man" or if it makes you a "vewy guilty ex-wasist" then I guess we'll have to live with the labels. The board would be a better place without them though.
I officially want this thread, which continues to teeter, to die. If both parties would please just step back, I am certain it will do so.
I swear, every time politics comes up all hell breaks loose.
My point being, of course, that Fudds have a relatively safe history when it comes to racial victimization in America.
****** Well that makes the slur all right then. I stand corrected. As an urban northerner, I can't say much about white opression. Of course having grandparents named Cazazza and Barchi I suppose I could jump on this "Ban the Sopranos" bandwagon, but that would contradict my nature. With a great grandmother named Gomez, I might even claim "Hispanic Status" on those various forms the government occasionally passes out to be filled in (not a conspiracy theory - a fact that anyone who deals with government forms knows about). Again, just not my style.
I have met southerners, however, who are very decent people and who do think of redneck as a slur. Whether they were ever "victimized" in our History is an interesting debate. No, I'll not descend any more rungs in your all-important opinion of me - I don't think you can compare their experience to that of blacks... but you don't meet many Georgians named "Sherman," and there's a very good reason for that. Think southerners aren't still touchy about the Civil War? You haven't met many southerners. Like I said, go to a Texas football game and yell redneck if you don't think it's a slur.
Very well, Dano: There is some debate about whether "redneck" is a slur at all, let alone one equal in power to certain others, but I apologize for using it and will try to refrain from using it again. (Be sure to write Jeff Foxworthy and Mike Judge about this issue.)
For Andrew's sake, let me just clarify two things, then I'm finished:
Dano: "I lump the people who spoke out against the article in the name of white opression right in with the politically correct people who condemn things based on minority opression. Someone can go ahead and criticize that article based on its merits (what some of us did with Sigourney's comments)..."
(1) To my knowledge, no one wrote to protest the article "in the name of white oppression." They wrote because they perceive the "white privlege" subject as an assault on them--you know, "politically-correct nonsense." They completely missed the point of the original article because of a knee-jerk reactionary nature.
(2) "Some of us" don't even understand Sigourney Weaver's comments. "Some of us," as I pointed out earlier, picked up on this from the original post on this message board, read into it what we wanted to, and missed the point of the original article because of a knee-jerk reactionary nature.
Okay, three things.
Dano: "...Politically correct people (who) condemn things based on minority oppression."
Condemn things like racism...and oppression?
This is wrong?
...Wow.
I mean, WOW. :D
http://www.ucomics.com/nonsequitur/2002/11/18/
Andrew, you might want to consider posting this strip when these things happen--then we can start squabbling over which one of us is "blither" and which one is "blather." :)
Here's your sarcastic flame response. Not really, but hey.
"More than one person has made comments about how unrealistic it was that Mel Gibson's family in Signs had no weapons (shotgun, rifle, pistol, SOMETHING), but I never gave it a second thought, being a person with no weapons "
I did notice that, and I never grew up with a gun. I didn't fire one til I was 18. Shooting clay pigeons is pretty damn fun though, you should give it a try if you never have. Of course, my uncle is a farmer, and it is true: almost all farmers have some guns. Their kids always grow up using them to, and of course they essentially never have accidents since they're used to them and are not curious about them.
"So I fully agree with Ms. Weaver's statement in real life situations. "
I agree to. You shouldn't pull out a gun to deal with your problems. Does anyone DISAGREE with that?
"My dad had a gun when I was kid (.38 I believe) although he believed he had everything well hidden, my brother and I knew exactly where he kept it (nightstand) and were they kept the bullets (Mom's jewelry box). One day I played with it, he got rid of it and never regretted it. "
He should of kept it locked.. Just keep it locked in the bedroom WITH the bullets in the same place, and it's faster to get it ready then having them unlocked in two seperate places - for those home defense situations millions of people are so worried about.
Condemn things like racism...and oppression?
This is wrong?
...Wow.
I mean, WOW. :D
***** No. I mean condemning things like a crack about Rosa Parks in a movie. Or condemning a white actor playing a Vietnamese character in Broadway's Miss Saigon. Or condemning an historian who wrote about corruption as a small part of his study of the black majority in the South Carolina state legislature during the 1870s. That kind of thing. Unless you consider that racism and oppression. In which case, wow right back at you, Squish.
..