LowerCaseRepublican

Psycho was a groundbreaking Hitchcock film because it was a revolutionary film. It was controversial because it was one of the most sexually explicit movies for the time period. It was also one of the most graphic films for the time period and was a very important contribution to the film community at large and the genre of horror movies. http://www.research.umbc.edu/~landon/Film%...mary_Psycho.htm It has a lot of information about the importance of the movie.

QUOTE(Spiff @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 10:50 AM) After reading another book about Bruce and his childhood (not autobiographical) I found out that he made up a lot of that stuff in HTTD&IP about having to steal money to get lunch at school etc. Turns out his dad spoiled him, gave him everything he wanted and more. But that doesn't make for as good a story. Spiff, what's the title of that book? Cuz I'd like to check it out. And yeah -- HTTD&IP was pretty out there a lot of the times but there were the hilarious parts like how he got out of service in World War II after serving for a while.

Been reading a lot over summer: So far, I've read "How to Talk Dirty and Influence People" by Lenny Bruce (his autobiography), "The Trials of Lenny Bruce" by Ronald Collins & David Skover (his many obscenity trials and what he got arrested for), "Preacher" by Garth Ennis (comic book series about a preacher who meets up with his ex-girlfriend and a drunken Irish vampire to confront God for his flawed creation with lots of side plots), "Lullaby" by Chuck Palahniuk (a childrens' poem book has a poem that may be causing whomever hears it to die so a journalist tries to test the theory etc.) Right now I'm reading "Songs of the Doomed" by Hunter Thompson.

Seems the network brass objected to their playing "The Hand That Feeds" with a background that would just be a picture of George W. Bush. So, NIN refused to perform. From their site: "We were set to perform 'The Hand That Feeds' with an unmolested, straightforward image of George W. Bush as the backdrop. Apparently, the image of our president is as offensive to MTV as it is to me." Can somebody explain to me how that would be objectionable? It is just a photo of Bush. This is almost as bad as when Rage Against the Machine got thrown out of SNL: http://www.musicfanclubs.org/rage/snl.htm

Friendly neighborhood moderator here -- Simply put. Cut the childish bulls***. As the people from Monty Python put it. http://spam.ytmnd.com/ Now back to your regularly scheduled thread about assisting the poster with help regarding getting to the Cell.

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ May 30, 2005 -> 07:23 PM) How is the new SOAD album, I was obsessed with them for a while then lost interest? Its alright. I've listened to it a few times and I like it -- bigger fan of their last album though.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ May 30, 2005 -> 05:32 PM) Looks like John Cleese's illigitimate son... Nice one Flaxx!

EM, they're probably the only ones who can stomach that pap without projectile vomiting all over the place.

New System of a Down album Warren Zevon Killswitch Engage Jimmy Buffett

Good to know he's got the balls to put his name on that verbal diarrhea -- oh wait. f***ing spineless, ignorant idiot bastard. Good to know they are handing out Cy Youngs in the OF now This is some of the most worthless crap -- I actually feel that I genuinely lost a few IQ points reading this nonsensical drivel.

QUOTE(soxhawks @ May 29, 2005 -> 04:10 PM) if you can tell me where Liechtenstein is located i will care Ask and ye shall receive.

QUOTE(knightni @ May 29, 2005 -> 11:44 AM) The US Media ALWAYS whines. There are times where people should MTOB, you know. The US media is lazy...too lazy to do any real investigative journalism which is why we get the White House press releases given almost verbatim -- you know the talking heads have to hate it when some journalist (say Seymour Hersch, etc. etc.) actually makes them do their f***ing job of being the 4th estate.

QUOTE(YASNY @ May 28, 2005 -> 04:33 AM) Which shows that McCain was man enough to put personal differences aside and do what he believed was best for the country. It's all in how you spin it. Conversely it shows that he, and I'm just playing Devil's advocate here, has a spine of Jell-O. They push polled in states insinuating that McCain had an illegitimate black child. For more info... From the web: http://www.stcynic.com/blog/archives/2004/...in_and_bush.php After McCain's surprising defeat of Bush in the New Hampshire primary in 2000, the Bush campaign targeted South Carolina, the next big primary, and began calling voters, particularly elderly voters, to ostensibly take a poll. But rather than asking how they felt about an issue, they asked this question: "Would you be more or less likely to vote for John McCain if you knew that he had fathered a bi-racial child?". Now, they didn't actually say that he DID father a bi-racial child. But at campaign stops, you could see McCain and his wife Cindy with their dark-skinned daughter, Bridget. They adopted Bridget from an orphanage in Bangladesh. This is how you play dirty politics, folks. You plant seeds that push buttons, all with plausible deniability. But it's vile as hell. It didn't stop there. They also put out "anonymous" pamphlets all over South Carolina telling people that McCain's wife had a history of drug addiction (she apparently was addicted to prescription pain killers at one point). Again, plausible deniability while spreading vicious rumors to kill one's political opponents. For a full report on the smear campaign, go here. Even worse is Bush's association with Ted Sampley, the absolutely loathsome former green beret and POW/MIA pimp who has claimed that John McCain is a traitor and even a communist spy that the Soviets had turned into a "Manchurian candidate". He's the same guy behind the attacks on John Kerry now, by the way. After what the Bush campaign did to McCain in 2000, you'd think that McCain would be pretty pissed off, wouldn't you? He said in 2000 that there was obviously no limit to how low Bush would go to win election after what they did to him, at one point even yelling at Bush when Bush grabbed his hand and telling him to "get your hands off me". But this is politics and McCain is now lending his image and endorsement to Bush in 2004. Why? Because it's his party and if he doesn't go along, he doesn't get party money and support when running for reelection to the senate. Again it is the political party "You will follow the party line, eh comrade?" dictating all the rules -- because if McCain calls shenanigans and actually voices his opinion of being pissed off about those slimeball tactics, he gets on the outs with the party & then will have a very difficult time in getting a Presidential nod. The whole monolithic concept of political parties seems to keep any deviation from the party line to compromise in check. There is no way for candidates to get approval for working together and actually getting things done that don't f*** over the American people because whatever they do -- they're bound to piss off the "Party faithful" which can be a problem come election time.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 25, 2005 -> 10:05 PM) http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/25/gitmo.quran/index.html This is what a bunch of detainees are saying. What a bunch of horses***. Leave it to you guys to believe the detainees over our own people. :rolly What they have is a bunch of nonsense from the likes of the ACLU and Amnesty International alleging all sorts of crap and with nothing to back it up. This is a non-story. Nuke, the Red Cross has been discussing the various abuses that have been going on at Gitmo. But why should we believe them either?

I'm just reminded of the Jon Stewart quote: For example, do you support universal health care? Then you must also want a ban on assault weapons. Pro-limited government? Congratulations, you are also anti-abortion. Luckily, all human opinion falls neatly into one of the two clearly defined camps. Thus, the two-party system elegantly reflects the bichromatic rainbow that is American political thought."

Seniors set alarm clocks to go off at 2 minute intervals after they left for the day (locked in their lockers of course) so the afternoon was spent listening to about 270+ alarms going off. Seniors also took these motorized balls attached to fake squirrels and let them loose in the hallways. They were numbered, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6. They purposely excluded 3 so the staff would spend the afternoon trying to find it.

Happy birthday!

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 24, 2005 -> 07:30 PM) The big, big difference is that the governor of Michigan didn't offer him asylum in exchange for hard currency, and then refuse to turn him over as soon as a crime of mass murder was committed in his behalf. I am pretty sure Michigan, and all of the states that had involvement in this case cooperated to the fullest extent possible. That kind of blows that hypothetical. We've offered Cuban terrorists to stay here before (trained on our dollar...i.e. Orlando Bosch) and they've refused to turn him over to Cuba since he was a CIA asset during the Cold War -- Bosch bombed Cuban passenger jets. A country cannot live by "Do as I say but not as I do"

Good luck Tex! And PS everybody, maybe this means Tex won't be around as much. Let our trashtalking begin!

Corrected.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 24, 2005 -> 03:21 PM) Your comparison is rediculous. McVeigh happened to live in Michigan for a while. Does that mean they provided him with the bomb making materials? Did they rent the truck that he used in the attack for him. Did they send state troopers to case the Murrah Federal Building for him? Well if we bomb Afghanistan from the skies (and you and I both know collateral damage is going to happen) as a state which harbored a terrorist then we should do the same to Michigan -- if we're truly to follow this fiat to its logical conclusion. And you damn well bet that the militia assisted in getting him the materials to perpetrate the attack.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 24, 2005 -> 02:28 PM) Love thy enemy huh? Lets look at our "enemy" for a minute shall we. Their ultimate goal is to wipe out America and replace it with a muslim theocracy ( this is the gods honest truth ), they murder people, including their own, indiscriminantely, and they bastardize a peace loving religion like Islam by twisting its teachings around to justify murder and destruction. Our "enemy" is not Islam as you subtly imply with your post, but the less than 1 PERCENT of Muslims who seem to think its ok to murder and destroy indiscriminantely to advance their aims of a Taliban like world. This is an enemy which needs to be destroyed and shown no quarter. LCR allow me to reduce the scale of this for a moment to explain it. What do you do when someone is actively trying to kill you and your family and cannot be dissuaded by reason? I didn't imply it was all of Islam -- I'll leave that to the Freepers and PABAAH fanatics. I'm just saying that it is hypocritical for "Christians" to say that they ascribe to the teachings of Jesus while at the same time supporting a war effort that has killed hundreds of thousands of people. And to counter your claim -- When the militia nuts in the US, who can't be dissuaded by reason bombed the federal building in Oklahoma City, where was the US military demands for bombing the Hell out of Michigan (McVeigh's home state)? I mean, if we are to invade and bomb the states that harbor terrorists, then we need to bring these demands to their conclusion.

The best part about these "This is too obscene!" pseudo-debates that goes on nationally -- the clip gets played about 2837498237893274823473984 times on TV which means that more and more people will see the supposedly objectionable clip, including the children that groups like the PTVC pretend to want to protect.

No more appropriate time to post this gem from "America the Book" by the Daily Show crew "The candidate can choose one of two platforms, but remember - no substitutions. For example, do you support universal health care? Then you must also want a ban on assault weapons. Pro-limited government? Congratulations, you are also anti-abortion. Luckily, all human opinion falls neatly into one of the two clearly defined camps. Thus, the two-party system elegantly reflects the bichromatic rainbow that is American political thought."

Not specifically saying it is anybody in this thread but does anybody else find it amusing that the most fundamentalist Christians in the US also seem to be the most outspoken supporters of the war? I guess that "love your enemies" message of the New Testament really sunk in. As Lenny Bruce said, "I always thought it was 'Thou shalt not kill' not 'Thou shalt not kill but...'." And EvilJester -- I'm sure you've heard the Doug Stanhope discussion about terrorism and religious wars: "You'll never see this on the news. Today 40 people died when the Atheist Stronghold suffered heavy shelling from the Agnostic Front in the north."