Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

> Which reminds me of a riddle......

> In those "forever after" 50 year marriages, why is it the husband usually dies first?

>

> Because he wants to !

 

 

 

I am more inclined to suspect fowl play. I have never been the same about old ladies...ever since seeing "Arsenic And Old Lace". LOL!

Link to post
Share on other sites

"I have spent all my life under a Communist regime, and I will tell you that a society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed. But a society with no other scale but the legal one is not quite worthy of man either."

 

 

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn Soviet Dissident

Link to post
Share on other sites

"I am more inclined to suspect fowl play. I have never been the same about old ladies...ever since seeing "Arsenic And Old Lace". LOL!"

:-)

 

Hey, IluvRAY ! (rhyme)

Most women that devious don't have 8 years of patience, never mind 50! Believe me, I know!

:D

Ah, the battle of the sexes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wholeheartedly agree with you all! Depending upon the day of the week, that is. You see, I'm Capitalist on M,W,F; Communist on T,Th; Anarchist on Sat; and a Fascist Pig on Sun.

 

And let me tell you that if you're going to try being an anarchist, Saturday night is a helluva time to do it.

 

ccbaxter reserves the right to schedule changes without advance notice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

>And let me tell you that if you're going to try being an anarchist, Saturday night is a helluva time to do it.

 

 

I didn?t realize it when I was young and growing up in the South, but we **** kids were anarchists every Saturday night.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=mickeeteeze wrote:}{quote}

> As does any purveyor of an 'ism'. Why are you admitting stuff?

> Fascist, you.

> :-)

 

Yeah, I guess I was wearing my 'isms' on my sleeve. I've got to resist talking politics on movie forums.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't do that... Think of all the fun you will miss when 'jr and mik' get into one of their rants.... I haven't had so much fun watching the fuss 'n feathers since someone ran off with the local cop's squad car while he was visiting the local house of ill repute......

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=OldPackard wrote:}{quote}

>.... I haven't had so much fun watching the fuss 'n feathers since someone ran off with the local cop's squad car while he was visiting the local house of ill repute......

 

My kind of town!

Link to post
Share on other sites

hamradio wrote: "Also being "politically correct" is a way for modern society telling all of us how to think. That can be considered a form of communism."

 

 

"Political correctness is just tyranny with manners."

 

Charlton Heston

 

Message was edited by: JakeHolman

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=mickeeteeze wrote:}{quote}

> Sorry to disappoint. I don't do religion. Whats more is, I'm really not too crazy about the 'right-left' thing either. I'm a centrist. I think all these far ______ are nuts. Right or left. I really do.

 

Good point. I used to think of myself as a centrist. However, during the last 8 years I've become a decidedly left-leaning one. Social equality, separation of church and state, the middle class and the environment are more important to me than corporate tax cuts, unjustified war/invasion and making millionaires out of the likes of Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, Benny Hinn, Karl Rove and Jan Crouch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was raised that the problem with Communism is that it is a non free society. An example of that was the Berlin Wall. I saw people trying to break out but few trying to break in. I was told under communism you can't believe in God. That the police state tells you how to dress, what to do, what to say, what to think.

 

....but don't you see that if our movies and our arts are censored then we in America are not truely free. If we begin to treat Presidents as Dictators and anything you say about the President is treated like an attack on the American Flag, then we are not free. ....We would have then became this police state Dictatorship that you are so afraid of in other nations.

 

It is through our freedoms of movies and the arts, it is through our being able to question and even laugh at the President that we retain our American freedoms. This may be hard to understand to people in other nations, but in America the President is not suppose to be God, or King, or Dictator. Nor is he suppose to be treated as such. You may not agree with all the movies or all the stand up comics or all the song writers and poets, thats OK because you are free not to watch or listen or read them. What seperates us from Ancient Rome or a Communist Dictatorship is our American Freedoms and that includes the arts. .....Now you give away those freedoms, you might as well burn the flag because it would no longer stand for freedom. If the only movies that are allowed to be made have to be flag waving movies about nationalism, thats not freedom, thats Nazi or Communism.

 

Myself, I see the big flaw in Iran is that they are very censored. Their people are not truely free, unless you consider being killed for your beliefs a freedom. ....The term Politicaly Correct has came up and let me point out that we had a TV show by that name that was cancelled because of its comments about the President. Now, it was not my favorite show, but do we really want the government to start being able to control what Jay Leno or David Letterman or Dennis Miller can or can't say on TV ? Wouldn't we be becoming too much like Iran ourselves if we did that ?

 

Message was edited by: WhyaDuck

Link to post
Share on other sites

>Duck wrote:" ...but don't you see that if our movies and our arts ate censored then we in America are not truely free. If we begin to treat Presidents as Dictators and anything you say about the President is treated like an attack on the American Flag, then we are not free. ....We would have then became this polise state Dictatorship that you are so afraid of in other nations. "

 

What are you talking about?

 

There are Plenty of other sites where the current President is lampooned every minute of the day.

 

The press in this country has a lot of freedom.

 

If the Left had its way, there would be censorship--such as The Fairness Doctrine.

 

Are you truly for all sides having a voice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are Plenty of other sites where the current President is lampooned every minute of the day.

 

There is no current president; I would, however, like to send a 50,000-volt current through the guy who thinks he's president.

 

I was raised that the problem with Communism is that it is a non free society. An example of that was the Berlin Wall. I saw people trying to break out but few trying to break in. I was told under communism you can't believe in God. That the police state tells you how to dress, what to do, what to say, what to think.

 

....but don't you see that if our movies and our arts are censored then we in America are not truely free. If we begin to treat Presidents as Dictators and anything you say about the President is treated like an attack on the American Flag, then we are not free. ....We would have then became this police state Dictatorship that you are so afraid of in other nations.

 

As though the folks who set the fire and fan the flames of hatred of Communism and all things "communistic" ever cared about anyone's personal freedoms, except their own freedoms to make more money.

 

The hypocritical double-standard of these people is that they never fail to decry the "Totalitarianism" of Communism, or even the mildest forms of Socialism, using the lot of the poor folks who have to live under it, while running a government and corporations that look the other way, or even embrace (for economic reasons -- i.e. profit) authoritarian regimes -- Apartheid South Africa, Mobutu's Zaire, Franco's Spain, Pinochet's Chile, Stroessner's Paraguay, the Shah's Iran, Cristiani's el Salvador Greece under the military junta, and on, and on, and one -- whose human rights record was/is even worse than any Communist state's.

 

The difference always was that the authoritarian regimes were always happy to allow in U.S. businesses for the purposes of making money for both the companies and the countries' corrupt leaders.

 

Again, the extraordinary, and extraordinarily destructive hypocrisy of such a double-standard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See what I mean..... When 'jr gets going on his soap box, ya almost feel like you should be paying admission to see the show...... So why not sit up here on a big rock and have a piece of fry bread with FredCDobbs and myself..

 

Message was edited by: OldPackard

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK...Leaving all the religious arguments out of this, I would like to humbly ask for one moment of your consideration regarding a comment made way back in the middle of this conversation:

 

Someone earlier on referred to the current perceived "mortgage crisis" and how they think the government (specifically the Republicans) ought to do more to help homeowners who are facing foreclosure.

 

Since when is it the government's responsibility to bail out anyone who made bad financial decisions? Even the savings and loan problems from years ago were not really the government's responsibility--though in some part they were CAUSED by the government. And YES--of course...the banks and mortgage company's need to be held accountable in their lending practices. But the truth is that most of the people having trouble with their mortgages today put themselves there by trying to buy homes outside their means. People who knew they did not have the income necessary to purchase homes in the price range they were buying are as much to blame as the banks who lent to them. We have a long standing tradition in our heritage as a nation that people should work to get what they want. And we should not have any reason to expect or demand the government to hand over our fellow citizens' hard earned money extorted by a too heavily burdened tax code in order to supplement the income we should be providing for ourselves.

 

Not everyone is entitled to automatic help just because they want to buy their dream home. (Or for any other reason for that matter) And the government is not entitled to expect me (as a very hardworking taxpayer) to pay for someone else's mistake--or some bank's deception either for that matter.

 

I am not saying we should have a government with NO compassion whatsoever, but the days have long since past where compasssion has given way to an "entitlement" mindset. Just because someone is a lower income American citizen (or maybe not even a citizen but perhaps they just happen to reside in this country legally or illegally) it does not automatically qualify them to get money from the government whenever they think they need it.

 

And the so-called representatives within the government who attempt to raise taxes and increase spending for just such reasons as this are a very large part of the problem. They would like nothing better than to live in a "socialist" world in order to put forth their own private agenda as to what they think they should be free to do with MY hard-earned money. And lest you think I am writing this from my yacht out on the coast or something...my husband and I together make well less that $65,000 a year. So please do not insult me with comments about being rich and out of touch with the poor hurting masses.

 

Which will lead me to make one last statement that goes against the promise I made at the beginning (to avoid arguments of religion)

 

In the earlier parts of our country's history--before the government decided to regulate and run everything for us--if it were NOT for the Christian organizations and churches--you would have had little or no hospitals, schools, orphanages, or any other sort of charitable organizations to assist those in need....In fact...this nation would likely not have existed at all because a VERY large percentage of our founding fathers were ALL Bible believing faith-in-action Christians.

 

(Just a little reminder to the revisionist histiorians out there.)

 

Now since all of this has little to do with the orginal post for this thread, I leave this conversation; for I do not have any interest in back and forth arguments with people who may disagree with me. I will not attempt to change your mind, and I don't want you to waste any of your time attempting to change mine. But if it makes you feel better, I also hold no ill will against you, so I hope whatever names you may consider calling me will be of a civil and non-personal nature as I am sure you are too intelligent to resort to such childish behavior on a website that is supposed to be about something so non-threatening as a love for classic movies.

 

I bid you good day.

 

Message was edited by: rohanaka

Link to post
Share on other sites

>rohanaka wrote rohanaka: " Since when is it the government's responsibility to bail out anyone who made bad financial decisions? "

 

Awesome...Awesome...

 

What you wrote is so true and sad. We now have a large part of our population that believes it's entitled to a home, a new car and/or whatever with no sacrifice or hard work required to obtain those things,

 

And, worse yet, there is no failure in life because the government will bail them out.

 

Many years ago, a husband and wife would work for years and save enough money, sacrifice, to put down on a home--minimum 10 percent. And they made their mortgage payments on time.

 

Banks would not even look and you unless you had at least 10 percent to put down.

 

Today, people believe if they want it they are entitled to have it.

 

Some, need to be told, no you are not entitled to a new home or automobile, etc. NO you must

earn it These things are a privilege not an entitlement or right. Life is not fair...

 

People must accept the reality of their bad decisions and not have others bail them out with higher taxes and feel good government promises. There are no free lunches.

 

Thank you rohanaka for a truly great post.

 

"In politics, if you want anything said, ask a man; if you want anything done, ask a woman."

 

Margaret Thatcher

Link to post
Share on other sites

*"If the Left had its way, there would be censorship--such as The Fairness Doctrine."* - JakeHolman

 

I don't know why I am stepping foot in here because I swore i wasn't going to take the troll-bait the OP posted but that statement above is so luducrously off-base I can't let that stand.

 

Just how is "The Fairness Doctrine" censorship? The Fairness Doctrine required media outlets that use the public airwaves - free of charge, no less - to present both (or more) sides of any controversial or topical issue. As corporations operating "in the public trust" it was paramount that license holder not be allowed to use their licesne to advocate on an issue of public importance at the exclusion of contrary opinions.

 

From wikipedia -

"A license permits broadcasting, but the licensee has no constitutional right to be the one who holds the license or to monopolize a... frequency to the exclusion of his fellow citizens. There is nothing in the First Amendment which prevents the Government from requiring a licensee to share his frequency with others.... It is the right of the viewers and listeners, not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount." - U.S. Supreme Court (1969)

 

The Fairness Doctrine was written and applied to ensure discussions contained differing points of view and not just those of the license holder. The policy _required_ a freedom of ideas from over-the-air televsion and raidio broadcasters. That's _not_ censorship. And I find it intellectually dishonest to paint it that way.

 

Kyle In Hollywood

 

Message was edited by: hlywdkjk just to correct typos

Link to post
Share on other sites

*"Since when is it the government's responsibility to bail out anyone who made bad financial decisions?"*

 

When the Government of The United States decided it needed to "bail out" an _investment_ bank.

 

Kyle In Hollywood

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Life is not fair..."

 

Well, there you have it. Compassionate conservatism.

We need to bring back sweatshops, child labor, high infant mortality, and can SS, too. People can't produce?

TOO BAD.

Life gets better Generation to Generation? OVERRATED!

Hopefully this Administration will invade Iran before election day. Because it's getting scary going out for coffee with the Iranian threat looming over our heads.

I'm just saying.

Thank God for the neo-conservative movement.

:-)

What's that to do with communist scripts in Hollywood? I dunno. I'm having fun.

 

Message was edited by: mickeeteeze

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...