Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, December 02, 2012

OTP December 2012 - Pushing G.O.P. to Negotiate, Obama Ends Giving In

Mr. Obama, scarred by failed negotiations in his first term and emboldened by a clear if close election to a second, has emerged as a different kind of negotiator in the past week or two, sticking to the liberal line and frustrating Republicans on the other side of the bargaining table.

Bitter Mouse Posted: December 02, 2012 at 11:15 PM | 6172 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 4 of 62 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >  Last ›
   301. McCoy Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:18 PM (#4315985)
flip
   302. McCoy Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:19 PM (#4315986)
Rescue Me was very good, but not great and not comparable to any number of other shows. The Shield was just bad. Michael Chiklis is not a good actor

You shut your dirty whore-mouth!
   303. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:19 PM (#4315987)
That said, it's cute how he's still spinning 2012 as a successful election cycle for the R's almost a month after the election.

Not at all. Just pointing out the difference between 2004 (full GOP control of the federal government) and 2012 (split government).
   304. Lassus Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:26 PM (#4315991)
It's the greatest show of all time. [Arrested Development]

Comedy just has to be more personal, because I simply cannot get the absolute worship of this show.
   305. hokieneer Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:29 PM (#4315993)
I have been trying to like Big Bang Theory since as a proper dork/nerd I am told I should love it, but it the spark is not there, anyone else feel the same?

Uh, as a proper dork/nerd you should definitely NOT like that show. Only people who AREN'T nerds should enjoy that show.


I don't think being or not being a dork has any correlation with enjoying BBT. My father-in-law, who is the opposite of the conventional dork/nerd/geek, loves the show. I also have a few co-workers, who are properly vetted as 21st century nerds, that love the show. After being annoyed form both parties for 2 years to watch the show I finally caved. There have been a few moments in the first few episodes I watched that were surprisingly entertaining, but overall there is not much there.

The only shows on TV now that I find funny are: Community, Parks & Rec, and Archer. Bob's Burgers, American Dad, and The League have their moments and would be in the 2nd tier for me. Really dissapointed in the last ~2 years of South Park. I'm probably just getting old.
   306. tshipman Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:42 PM (#4315999)
Is it reasonable to think the story of the Hobbit will actually require three full-length movies to tell?


And

I believe they are including back story and lore not in the book, but from another cannon source.


It's a ####### joke. The Hobbit is a 150 page book written for children and young adults. It's a very simple story that can be easily done in 90 minutes. I hate this stupid cottage industry that has built up around fantasy literature that has determined that you cannot make any edits to what was a pretty good children's book.

The Hobbit isn't scripture. It isn't even particularly great literature. It's pretty good and entertaining, but it's not like it's Alice in Wonderland or anything.

Why the #### does Tolkien inspire this kind of stupidity?
   307. DA Baracus Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:49 PM (#4316003)
Why the #### does Tolkien inspire this kind of stupidity?


You can only make so much money off of only one movie.
   308. zonk Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:50 PM (#4316004)
I only watch BBT via the syndicated TBS reruns -- and that's about perfect consumption for me.

It's a perfectly cromulent sitcom... most of the ensemble is likeable enough (the dude who plays Sheldon especially) and the nerd references are solidly done... plus Kelly whatever (Cucao?) is hot.

I think Vlad nailed it on the last page... it's fine, but not a cultural touchstone on the order of something like Seinfeld.
   309. Fred Lynn Nolan Ryan Sweeney Agonistes Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:52 PM (#4316005)
i wish there were more than two teams, not just R and D.

Yeah, if they'd just stop making everything about those two teams, that'd be greeeeat.
   310. DJS and the Infinite Sadness Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:55 PM (#4316007)
I don't care for Big Bang Theory. While the subject matter of the jokes tend to be enertaining, I find it to be too setup-punchline-setup-punchline to really be all *that* amusing. It's an old formula, played over endlessly for decades and you need to have amazing writers to breathe life into that tired old format given how prevalent it still is. Like a lot of comedies, there's no real tension or buildup in the humor, from the episodes I've seen at least.
   311. willcarrolldoesnotsuk Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:56 PM (#4316008)
2004: GOP president, GOP majority in House, GOP majority in Senate
2012: Dem president, GOP majority in House, Dem majority in Senate

See any differences?
Yes, I see a difference that you have stopped using the idiotic point that Bush improved his margin of victory (from a loss) as a point against Obama.
   312. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: December 03, 2012 at 10:57 PM (#4316009)
Really dissapointed in the last ~2 years of South Park. I'm probably just getting old.

Intentional play on the "You're Getting Old" episode?

I've found South Park hit or miss for at least the last 8 seasons or so. I don't think the past ~2 years have been appreciably better or worse than the few before them. Every season has a few excellent episodes and a few stinkers. Interestingly, there doesn't tend to be a consensus of which episodes are great and which are terrible in the online forums.
   313. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:00 PM (#4316013)
There has never been a sit-com - and I include South Park, etc in that genre - that is "great television." South Park is just scat humor on Comedy Central. It's not even close to brilliant.
   314. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:04 PM (#4316017)
Still don't grasp that adding 7 seats when already holding a majority is better (and tougher) than adding 10 seats when in the minority, huh? Oh, well.

Except when the Democrats are in year 20 of a 40 year run as the majority. or something.


In JoeRithmatic, the only thing that could be more impressive than the GOP winning 7 seats is if they'd won 6, because that would just prove that their uphill task had been one more difficult, and therefore their lesser victory would have been all the more glorious.

Impossibly challenging math like that is part of the reason why even Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon had no coattails despite winning two of the biggest victories in Presidential history [credit: Wall Street Journal].
   315. zonk Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:06 PM (#4316018)
There has never been a sit-com - and I include South Park, etc in that genre - that is "great television." South Park is just scat humor on Comedy Central. It's not even close to brilliant.


Arrested Development is great television. I suppose I could consider the argument that the writing was merely good, not brilliant, but the cast was so far beyond brilliant that it brought the show as a whole up to that level.

I don't do netflix, but the new AD episodes being exclusive to it will almost certainly make me cave.
   316. spike Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:15 PM (#4316024)
It seemed like some weird combination of boring history textbook and Homeric epic.


That sounds about right, yeah.



No question about it, it's only for folks who "delight in such things" as Tolkein might say. Which I do, but certainly understand those who don't.
   317. spike Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:17 PM (#4316026)
. I hate this stupid cottage industry that has built up around fantasy literature that has determined that you cannot make any edits to what was a pretty good children's book.

If it's anything like the LOTR movies, there will be some fairly significant edits (in my significantly biased opinion, of course).
   318. Eddo Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:21 PM (#4316028)
Arrested Development is great television. I suppose I could consider the argument that the writing was merely good, not brilliant, but the cast was so far beyond brilliant that it brought the show as a whole up to that level.

If AD's writing wasn't brilliant, no comedy's is. There was so much attention paid to detail and foreshadowing and consistency of characters... the cast was phenomenal, but I might argue the writing was the finest part.
   319. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:21 PM (#4316029)
In JoeRithmatic, the only thing that could be more impressive than the GOP winning 7 seats is if they'd won 6, because that would just prove that their uphill task had been one more difficult, and therefore their lesser victory would have been all the more glorious.

Impossibly challenging math like that is part of the reason why even Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon had no coattails despite winning two of the biggest victories in Presidential history [credit: Wall Street Journal].

And we all know how The Wall Street Journal's editorial page is gospel among liberals.

***
It's a ####### joke. The Hobbit is a 150 page book written for children and young adults. It's a very simple story that can be easily done in 90 minutes. I hate this stupid cottage industry that has built up around fantasy literature that has determined that you cannot make any edits to what was a pretty good children's book.

The Hobbit isn't scripture. It isn't even particularly great literature. It's pretty good and entertaining, but it's not like it's Alice in Wonderland or anything.

Why the #### does Tolkien inspire this kind of stupidity?

Damn, Shipman's angrier than when I make fun of the BLS.
   320. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:21 PM (#4316030)
There has never been a sit-com - and I include South Park, etc in that genre - that is "great television."


What about the glory days of The Simpsons?
   321. Lassus Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:23 PM (#4316031)
There has never been a sit-com - and I include South Park, etc in that genre - that is "great television."

I can actually hear that your socks are over your knees. I hope the support is sufficient.
   322. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:26 PM (#4316035)
I think the Simpson has probably two seasons worth of "very good" episodes in its entire run. Most of it is just filler. A sort of self-referential, smugger-than-thou "Two and A Half Men" for the ironic 90's set. Or to put it another way, The Simpsons is to my generation what Frasier was to Boomers.

I've never watched Arrested Development, mostly because it came out after I had given up on TV in general and sit-coms specifically, as a form.
   323. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:26 PM (#4316037)
I can actually hear that your socks are over your knees. I hope the support is sufficient.


I'm stunned you can still sing with all that hipsterism you have stuck in your ear.
   324. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:28 PM (#4316039)
I never quite understood the Silmarillion's hype. I started it but got bored. It seemed like some weird combination of boring history textbook and Homeric epic.


I don't think that the Silmarillion has ever been "hyped", except perhaps by extreme Tolkien devotees, but it is by far the best work of Tolkien. It's not a novel, like The Hobbit or Lord of the Rings. It's genre is epic, and it helps to be familiar with the conventions of the genre, The first part does have the least action of any part of the book, admittedly. In that regard, it is similar to the Catalog of Ships from the Iliad, and the lengthy genealogies in early part of the Old Testament.
   325. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:28 PM (#4316040)
I think the Simpson has probably two seasons worth of "very good" episodes in its entire run.


You're more nuts than Joe.
   326. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:32 PM (#4316045)
In that regard, it is similar to the Catalog of Ships from the Iliad, and the lengthy genealogies in early part of the Old Testament.


This would explain why I've never gotten four chapters into it. Perhaps I should apply the same reading tactic here that I use in said Catolog of Ships - replacing the entire book with "and they all had some ships."
   327. DA Baracus Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:33 PM (#4316047)
I think the Simpson has probably two seasons worth of "very good" episodes in its entire run. Most of it is just filler. A sort of self-referential, smugger-than-thou "Two and A Half Men" for the ironic 90's set. Or to put it another way, The Simpsons is to my generation what Frasier was to Boomers.


Are you trying to piss off everyone and get Ray to post the transcript from a scene of Fraiser that none of us remember?
   328. Lassus Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:37 PM (#4316049)
I'm stunned you can still sing with all that hipsterism you have stuck in your ear.

Nothing more hipster than the dismissal of The Simpsons as the same as Frasier (and Two and a Half Men) has ever happened in the history of BTF.
   329. hokieneer Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:37 PM (#4316050)

Intentional play on the "You're Getting Old" episode?

I've found South Park hit or miss for at least the last 8 seasons or so. I don't think the past ~2 years have been appreciably better or worse than the few before them. Every season has a few excellent episodes and a few stinkers. Interestingly, there doesn't tend to be a consensus of which episodes are great and which are terrible in the online forums.


Yeah it was. I'd be lying if I said that episode didn't resonate a little with me. I'm just shy of 30 years old and have been watching South Park since the very first few episodes when my dad introduced me to the show. The self realization of inherit cynicism and changing tastes/preferences of themselves and their audience was pretty well done.

I'm not sure I'd go back 8 years, but there has definitely been a trend the last X years of a few memorable episodes with mostly filler. This past season, I've found it hard to find the memorable episodes. The best development over the last half of the show's life has been Randy transforming into the funniest character on the show and replacing the Cartman/Kenny combo.
   330. bunyon Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:40 PM (#4316053)
Do they still kill Kenny every episode? I only watched the first couple of seasons.

I'm with Lassus: I think comedy is simply too variable and personal to be able to call it great or not. For instance, I find Seinfeld almost unwatchable. AD was good, with some great episodes. Simpsons has many outstanding seasons, as does Frasier though they're not at all alike. I wouldn't expect you to agree with me. A lot of times, what strikes one as funny will change on an almost daily basis.

Not trying to be a buzzkill, it just always seems a funny argument to me.
   331. formerly dp Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:41 PM (#4316055)
Is the Wire worth the hype? Thinking about watching it....
Just started re-watching, it justifies the hype and then some.
   332. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:43 PM (#4316058)
Do they still kill Kenny every episode? I only watched the first couple of seasons.

They stopped that quite a while ago. It only happens occasionally now. In season 6 or so they killed Kenny 'for good' but he came back after a few episodes or something.
   333. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:48 PM (#4316061)
And we all know how The Wall Street Journal's editorial page is gospel among liberals.

Golly, that was responsive. Even if liberals don't share its philosophical conclusions, the Wall Street Journal is a respectable newspaper that worries about getting the basic facts right. For instance, Nixon and Reagan having no coattails in 1972 and 1984.
   334. Srul Itza Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:53 PM (#4316066)
Are you suggesting that the creation of the Israeli state in 1948 was not driven by European guilt after the Holocaust?


The Holocaust helped, but the idea that Israel was a whole cloth invention of Europe is the argument of an ignorant red neck, an Anti-Semite, or a terrorist sympathizer. So drop dead.
   335. Srul Itza Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:54 PM (#4316067)

The Israeli state was in the works for decades by the time WW2 ended and with or without the Holocaust there would be a Jewish state in the middle east.


Don't confuse the Southren boy with facts.
   336. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:58 PM (#4316069)
the argument of an ignorant red neck


Hey wait a second here!

Don't confuse the Southren boy with facts.


I don't like where this discussion is heading.
   337. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:58 PM (#4316070)
There has never been a sit-com - and I include South Park, etc in that genre - that is "great television." South Park is just scat humor on Comedy Central. It's not even close to brilliant.


Most of the shows I consider to be "great television" are sitcoms. I don't think the medium is particularly well suited to drama. The limits of television (at least on the non-premium channels) are such that I find myself unable to take most dramatic shows as seriously as the writers seem to want me to take them.
   338. Mefisto Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:59 PM (#4316071)
It's the greatest show of all time.


Sorry, but the greatest show of all time is Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
   339. Srul Itza Posted: December 03, 2012 at 11:59 PM (#4316072)
Once you figured out that nearly anyone introduced after the first season was there only to get killed, it removed a lot of the dramatic tension from the show.


The Return of the Red Shirt!
   340. Srul Itza Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:00 AM (#4316073)
I don't know where I'd have put the Jewish state. If they couldn't find a place that was acceptable to both the Jewish community and the local population, then I'd have not created a Jewish state. That seems like a better alternative to what we have now.


Is that your Final Solution, umm, Answer?
   341. Srul Itza Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:01 AM (#4316075)
. The only way it wasn't going to lead to what we're seeing now was if one side had managed to wipe out the other side earlier on.


Well, that was the Arab plan. So sorry the Jews wouldn't go along with it. Maybe next time.
   342. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:04 AM (#4316076)
Is that your Final Solution, umm, Answer?


I am Jewish. I suspect I'd still be on this earth even if Israel didn't exist. You can make this is an anti-Semitic thing if you want. For me, it's more of an anti-people-being-unnecessarily-murdered thing.
   343. Srul Itza Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:04 AM (#4316078)
The only way it wasn't going to lead to what we're seeing now was if one side had managed to wipe out the other side earlier on.

And the odds of that were distinctly less than Strasburg never again throwing better than 75 mph.


Really? The Arabs greatly outnumbered the Jews and attacked 3 times (unless you think they really were just funning around in 1967). What may have seen a fore-ordained conclusion to you was a much more near run thing to the people who lived through it.

But then again, we are used to the Goyim being cavalier with Jewish lives.
   344. Los Angeles El Hombre de Anaheim Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:04 AM (#4316079)
Obama votes "present" 129 times? Move along, nothing to see here.
It was an issue brought up in 2007, and voters have already had their say on it. The only people in America still clinging to a 5-year-old argument that the vast majority of the country simply doesn't care about anymore are the people who believe bad weather and the Liberal Media Conspiracy have managed to crown another overlord. (And who knows what the liberals did to cause the bad weather!)

That said, it's cute how he's still spinning 2012 as a successful election cycle for the R's almost a month after the election.
The Republicans did fine. The only way things could have gone better for them is if they had gained ground in either house of Congress or won the White House.
   345. tshipman Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:05 AM (#4316080)
Damn, Shipman's angrier than when I make fun of the BLS.


Nothing makes me angrier than the way people talk about adaptations of fantasy literature. Really, you can't do The Hobbit without Beorn? Really? Tom Bombadil being cut from The Lord of the Rings ruins the movie for you?

Again, this is all about a pretty good child's book. There is no great, deep message in The Hobbit. It's a story about leaving home and having an adventure. It's just a travesty that no one cares about tight storytelling anymore. Quite possibly a greater travesty than the ongoing attempts to discredit public servants by the Republican party.
   346. Srul Itza Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:06 AM (#4316081)

The responsibility of the Western powers is far less relevant and meaningful here than the responsiblity of the Zionists.


How dare they want to survive. How dare they assume that nobody else would stand up for them, but themselves.
   347. Srul Itza Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:07 AM (#4316082)
No one should express an opinion about Israel except Jews?


Works for me. Better than further dissemination of ignorance.
   348. Srul Itza Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:08 AM (#4316084)

EDIT: Note that I have not said a word about what Jews should or should not do. I've confined my comments to the state of Israel.


A distinction without a difference to the people you are talking about.

And please, keep the money. It would be better for Israel if you did. So long as you also cut off the Egyptians.
   349. Srul Itza Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:12 AM (#4316086)
So, we agree that this was a bad idea, because it displayed no chance of resulting in anything but bloodshed and future wars.


As opposed to the decades of peace we would have otherwise enjoyed. Yeah, right.

The real issue is that, so long as America supports Israel, it is a target for terrorism, thereby inconveniencing Steve. So PLEASE, keep the money and the support.
   350. Srul Itza Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:16 AM (#4316089)
No, I'm not. I'm saying that by the 20th century, and especially by the middle of the 20th century, given the unprecendented scale and destructiveness displayed in the wars of conquest waged in the 20th century alone, it was horribly clear that the idea of the Jews conquering the land of Palestine -- "taking it and holding it," in your words -- was not going to be anything close to "plain and simple," also in your words. A "bad idea" is the very least one might term it.


Instead, we should have relied on the good faith and intentions of the Goyim, because that had worked out so well.

You just don't get. You can't spend 1,000 years trying to exterminate us, and expect that we are going to suddenly trust you. The Holocaust was not a matter of ancient history -- it happened in the middle of the 20th Century, in the middle of an advanced country. And it was not just the Germans. It was the Poles and the French. And it was the US and the British who certainly knew what was going on, at least at the highest levels, and could not be bothered by it, just as they could not be bothered to help rescue Jews who were trying to escape Europe before the War.
   351. bunyon Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:16 AM (#4316090)
And please, keep the money. It would be better for Israel if you did. So long as you also cut off the Egyptians.

Deal.
   352. Los Angeles El Hombre de Anaheim Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:26 AM (#4316094)
Is The Arrow's Batman envy dooming the show?
Given the popularity of Dark Knight-esque themes, it's not a bad place to start, but they grow out of it. Otherwise, it's just another been-there-done-that.

Is Happy Endings working for anyone else?
My wife loves that show. Doesn't quite work for me, but even I have to admit that they have some pretty funny non sequiturs working at times.
   353. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:30 AM (#4316096)
Given the popularity of Dark Knight-esque themes, it's not a bad place to start


Speaking of the Dark Knight, watch for a shot of my big fat head in the stadium scene of the third movie. I look surprised, and maybe a little queasy.
   354. tshipman Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:31 AM (#4316097)
A distinction without a difference to the people you are talking about.

And please, keep the money. It would be better for Israel if you did. So long as you also cut off the Egyptians.


I would think that both of those things would be bad for Israel. It's been the received wisdom for 30 years that the foreign aid payments to Egypt are basically bribes to not attack Israel.

Israel doesn't survive in the region without the military equipment and money from the US. These are just like things that people should recognize, not points in an argument.
   355. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: December 04, 2012 at 12:49 AM (#4316109)
Israel doesn't survive in the region without the military equipment and money from the US. These are just like things that people should recognize, not points in an argument.


That may have been true once, but not anymore. Israel has nuclear weapons, the ultimate equalizer. That's passing over its GDP and technological advantages, which would exist even without U.S. aid.
   356. Juan Uribe Marching and Chowder Society Posted: December 04, 2012 at 01:04 AM (#4316115)
Quite possibly a greater travesty than the ongoing attempts to discredit public servants by the Republican party.


I think a lot more people than just Republicans are trying to discredit public servants.

http://snltranscripts.jt.org/94/94g911.phtml

   357. McCoy Posted: December 04, 2012 at 01:31 AM (#4316135)
Israel has nuclear weapons, the ultimate equalizer.

Not really. For starters Israel might not even have them but setting that aside as a longshot what are they going to do with those nukes? This isn't Russia or America sending a missile 6,000 miles away this is a country that would basically be dropping nukes right on top of themselves and why would they do that? If Syria invades is Israel going to launch nukes at Syrian cities? What happens next? I'm pretty sure the entire Middle East would take up arms against Israel and Israel would be in a state of war with the rest of the region for the rest of their existence and the US and UN are not likely to come in and bail them out if Israel was using nukes, especially on civilian populations.

Nuclear weapons are basically big giant pissing contest toys. I've got a nuke so don't use your nukes against me.
   358. McCoy Posted: December 04, 2012 at 01:38 AM (#4316136)
Played the first episode of TWD game. It's okay and looking it up it appears the price of the game is dirt cheap so I would say you get what you paid for. I think some sort of cross between GTA, Mist, and a RPG would have been the best thing for TWD world.

Heres the world, here are zombies, here are survivors go out and live as long as you can would have been a great game in my opinion.
   359. Steve Treder Posted: December 04, 2012 at 02:08 AM (#4316141)
The real issue is that, so long as America supports Israel, it is a target for terrorism, thereby inconveniencing Steve.

Oh fer fux sake.

   360. hokieneer Posted: December 04, 2012 at 02:10 AM (#4316142)
Heres the world, here are zombies, here are survivors go out and live as long as you can would have been a great game in my opinion.


Day-Z is exactly like that, complete with the dick moves you would expect.

Epic's upcoming game Fortnite is a multiplayer sandbox that's part minecraft, part survival horror (not just zombie) game with the primary focus being on scavenging and building.
   361. BrianBrianson Posted: December 04, 2012 at 03:28 AM (#4316153)
If only the Israelies had given the Palestinians some shiny beads and a few blankets infected with smallpox for the land, the Americans would probably have a much harder time arguing against it.

It's probably too late for that, now.
   362. Jim Wisinski Posted: December 04, 2012 at 04:40 AM (#4316161)
The Silmarillion is fantastic if you're truly interested in the world Tolkien created, the origins of all the stuff that happened in LotR, and more details about ancient things referenced in it (Numenor, the Last Alliance, Earendil, etc.). If your interest doesn't reach beyond enjoying LotR as an epic novel of adventure then there's no real point in picking up the Silmarillion. It really is a weird combination of novel and reference book.
   363. Greg K Posted: December 04, 2012 at 05:41 AM (#4316166)
The Big Bang seems kind of condescending to nerds. Not so much jokes as it is "hey, nerds...remember that TV show/video game/movie you like? These guys like it too!" Although I haven't watched a lot of it, so that's just a very initial observation.

Re: The Silmarillion. I wasn't aware it ever had any hype. I read it as a kid after Lord of the Rings and it was my impression that it was a rough collection of notes Tolkien made about backstory. Kind of a reference material. That's at least how everyone seemed to treat it. I don't recall anyone ever saying "Lord of the Rings was alright, but the Silmarillion, that's where it's at!"

As for Lost...I realize I have a bit of a soft spot for that show, so I could go on for hours. I'll save you all that and just finish with a comment. RE: 253, I certainly agree that later characters were a lot more likely to die without contributing a great deal, I just meant setting the cut-off point at season one is plain wrong. Lost without Desmond or Ben is hardly Lost at all. I guess I never really got why the writers not having a firm plan for everyone was such a bad thing. Characters developed and for the most part acted in ways that felt true to themselves as they encountered the various aspects of the island. That's what I liked about the show.
   364. Greg K Posted: December 04, 2012 at 05:53 AM (#4316167)
Speaking of the Dark Knight, watch for a shot of my big fat head in the stadium scene of the third movie. I look surprised, and maybe a little queasy.

I wasn't in it but the exterior of Wayne Manor was Wollaton Hall, a Tudor mansion in Nottingham. I met the film crew at a pub, and then totally forgot about it until Caine's eulogy scene at the end when I recognized the hill in front of the house (but not, you know, the actual ####### mansion which I seem to have totally missed all through the movie)
   365. Greg K Posted: December 04, 2012 at 06:05 AM (#4316168)
Comedy just has to be more personal, because I simply cannot get the absolute worship of this show.

What are your favourite comedy shows/movies?

I ask because I agree with your observation...comedy seems a lot more subjective than other genres, so I'm just curious.
   366. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: December 04, 2012 at 06:09 AM (#4316169)
(1) "Big Bang Theory" is the most insultingly anti-nerd show ever made. It's predicated on the idea that it's hilarious that some people value science and learning.

(2) The fact that people other than Jews & Palestinians give a #### about Israel is basically 100% of why the whole situation is such a shitshow.

(3) Srul's rhetoric is another large part of what is wrong with the whole debate. It's as vile and repulsive as stuff that comes from the other direction.

(4) "South Park" has always sucked. It's snide and unfunny.

(5) Everything JRR Tolkien sucks, but not because it's snide.
   367. sunnyday2 Posted: December 04, 2012 at 06:29 AM (#4316171)
I keep missing these new types of debates on BTF. Is this just for the hot stove league or is this a permanent improvement? Anyway, it is amazing how civil the conversation was on page 1, pretty good on page 2, now of course horrible. Kudos to the guys who insist on talking about fiction. Oh wait a minute, everybody's talking fiction.

Well, except those who say that Israel was inevitably bound to end up like it has. The Holocaust happened in the 20th century. What if Vietnamese immigrants had come in and cleared the existing residents of, say, GEORGIA or RHODE ISLAND out of their homes in the 20th century. How would that have turned out?

OTOH yes it is true that the Zionist movement had been around for almost 100 years BEFORE the Holocaust. But seriously, who shouldn't have known how this would turn out?

The greatest book title ever: It's about European machinations in the Middle East after WWI: The Peace to End All Peace. Gotta love it.
   368. BrianBrianson Posted: December 04, 2012 at 06:55 AM (#4316172)

Well, except those who say that Israel was inevitably bound to end up like it has. The Holocaust happened in the 20th century. What if Vietnamese immigrants had come in and cleared the existing residents of, say, GEORGIA or RHODE ISLAND out of their homes in the 20th century. How would that have turned out?


The British and Germans did it in the 17th century, and it worked out pretty well for them. Not so much for the people they cleared out, though.
   369. bookbook Posted: December 04, 2012 at 07:57 AM (#4316183)
It is bizarre to try and follow a caricatured Israel discussion thread through the more important arguments about South Park and Obaa's 2012 victory.

It's a bit difficult for us to put ourselves into the shoes of 1948. As some one who really never has experienced anti-semitism, I can't appreciate how strong a motivator that was. However, for the past twenty years, it has been easy to see the necessity for a two-state solution, as the only possible solution, and the relentlessness of the Israeli government's efforts to make sure it won't happen.
   370. formerly dp Posted: December 04, 2012 at 08:00 AM (#4316184)
Heres the world, here are zombies, here are survivors go out and live as long as you can would have been a great game in my opinion.
I get what you're driving at, but I think that game costs a lot more money to make than the one you played. I tried it on my tablet-- it was a fun in a novel kind of way, but not enough to pull me away from other games.

As to the iPad as a productivity device (from way, way above)-- I agree with you to some extent, but there are some people I work with who use theirs very productively-- it's out in every meeting, and in genuinely helpful (not just look at my cool toy) ways. I have an Android tablet, and it stays at home when I go into the office. When I travel, it's a companion to my laptop rather than a replacement for it. I just wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it as a productivity device, based on the uses I've seen. I think adding a stylus can help a lot.

Tablets, especially the 10" variety, are magic for reading comics.

I don't remember any discussion from last week on Bradley Manning's testimony. Did I miss something?
   371. Lassus Posted: December 04, 2012 at 08:09 AM (#4316186)
The real issue is that, so long as America supports Israel, it is a target for terrorism, thereby inconveniencing Steve.

Srul, I think you're in the top five brains of the site, but it's about here that you really start to crack.
   372. Lassus Posted: December 04, 2012 at 08:25 AM (#4316194)
What are your favourite comedy shows/movies?

That one where they make fun of british spelling! I kid. Let's see...

Newsradio, Wkrp, Better Off Ted, Party Down, MASH, The Newhart Show that had the Darryls, Simpsons, Harvey Birdman

I'm sure there are some I've missed. I'm not the biggest sitcom fan on earth, cannot STAND Always Sunny, and as a real traitor to my people I've never actually developed a love for Futurama.
   373. Rants Mulliniks Posted: December 04, 2012 at 08:33 AM (#4316195)
I like the Big Bang Theory, I guess I'm not nearly as nerdy as you guys. Either that, or I can actually take a joke that comes at my own expense.

I don't remember any discussion from last week on Bradley Manning's testimony. Did I miss something?


That's because nobody in the MSM is allowed to give it anywhere near the coverage it deserves.
   374. BrianBrianson Posted: December 04, 2012 at 08:37 AM (#4316197)
It's hard to form a clear opinion about the Big Bang Theory, because it's so inconsistant. Not just in quality (which it is), but in deciding whether it's laughing at nerds or with nerds (there are some episodes that mix both appropriately, but some that go entirely one way or entirely the other). Character development is often inconsistant too (because they can never decide on what they're doing, except that Johnny Gilecki is the protagonist, because of poor judgement or something). But they keep changing how evil Sheldon is supposed to be, or how creepy Howard is supposed to be, and so on.

That said, a show on TV about phyics/astronomy postdocs? How can I possibly not support it?
   375. Greg K Posted: December 04, 2012 at 08:42 AM (#4316199)
Newsradio, Wkrp, Better Off Ted, Party Down, MASH, The Newhart Show that had the Darryls, Simpsons, Harvey Birdman

I'm sure there are some I've missed. I'm not the biggest sitcom fan on earth, cannot STAND Always Sunny, and as a real traitor to my people I've never actually developed a love for Futurama.

People really are fascinating!

My list would be similar in a lot of ways, and yet exactly opposite in others. (I absolutely love Newsradio and It's Always Sunny). That's why I more or less shy away from being outright critical of other people's taste in humour, aside from the "not for me" kind of approach you're taking here. If forced to justify my love of Always Sunny I'm not sure if I could come up with a coherent argument...I could certainly wax poetic about it for hours, but I don't think that's the same thing. Such is comedy.

...with the exception of Frasier of course. That was the staid "set-up, punchline, repeat" formula mentioned up-thread in reference to Big Bang Theory to the nth degree.
   376. Rants Mulliniks Posted: December 04, 2012 at 08:53 AM (#4316203)
Bored to Death on HBO was great - Jason Schwartzman is always funny IMO.
   377. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:00 AM (#4316205)
The only thing worse than McCoy's complete derangement wrt TWD tv series is

It's the greatest show of all time.

Sorry, but the greatest show of all time is Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
That would be Firefly, yokel.

You people.
   378. formerly dp Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:02 AM (#4316207)
That's because nobody in the MSM is allowed to give it anywhere near the coverage it deserves.
Even if I grant your premise, how does that impact our ability to discuss it on this board? The NYTimes has been covering the story regularly, including this piece from last week. I agree 100% that it has not received the coverage it should, and that it should be a huge black eye for Obama. But in terms of the election, what would Romney have done differently with Manning? It's basically a banner only being carried by the far left at this point.

I cannot stand Big Bang Theory. It's not that they poke fun at nerds/geeks, it's that they poke fun at the mainstream imaginary of nerds/geeks. Like any network TV caricature, it says more about the lameness of the audience than it does about the culture it's representing.

Always Sunny=genius. The switch never flipped with me on Futurama.
   379. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:08 AM (#4316208)
I guess I never really got why the writers not having a firm plan for everyone was such a bad thing.


It's a sign of sloppy world-building, which is a subset of bad writing. As early as the first two seasons, you can see the writers raising mysteries that were left unresolved, and for which the creative staff has admitted that they had no solution, like the ####### glass eye. Even if they don't want to reveal whose eye it was, they should know the answer, so that the characters who would be in a position to know that answer would be able to react appropriately in a situation where they encountered the eye (or whatever other dangling mystery you want to use). Action reveals character.

There's also the fact that people like Lindlehof and Cuse straight-up lied over and over again in interviews about the amount of planning that went into the show's backstory. Remember when everything on the island was going to have a scientific explanation? I hate it when people lie right to my face like that.
   380. Rants Mulliniks Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:16 AM (#4316212)
Even if I grant your premise, how does that impact our ability to discuss it on this board?


Let's talk about Bradley Manning then!
   381. formerly dp Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:28 AM (#4316220)
Let's talk about Bradley Manning then!
OK. Everything they did to Manning they wish they could have done to Assange instead.
   382. Misirlou was a Buddhist prodigy Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:37 AM (#4316223)
   383. Rants Mulliniks Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:38 AM (#4316224)
That's for sure, he's basically been the punching bag for the whole Wikileaks issue. I expect his chances of getting a fair trial are about 1 in 100.
   384. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:42 AM (#4316226)
The thing that bugged me most about the final seasons Lost wasn't the sloppy plotting. Not that it wasn't sloppy. But Cuse and Lindelof were pretty clear that they wanted to focus on completing their characters' stories, and that the mysteries would take a backseat to that. I can accept that as a vision for the show.

But then, their way of "completing" their characters' stories was to kill off 90% of them on the island in defense of the entirely unresolved mysterious nature of the island, and then have them meet up again in ####### Heaven.** That's not a resolution of anything! That's a story fundamentally about the island and its power, not about the characters. So they did nothing to pay off their character arcs, and they made everything about the island even though they had no good answers to the mysteries they'd created.

The arc of John Locke, easily the most fascinating character the show created, demonstrates this in miniature. He returns to the island, somehow risen from the dead, and he has this fascinating focus and drive which he'd never had before. You want to know what happened to him, how he's changed, what he's going for. Then it turns out that he's actually dead, this isn't John Locke, John Locke committed suicide in horrifyingly sad fashion thinking himself a total failure, and now his body is inhabited by one of the mysterious spirits of the island. So the story of John Locke is utterly shunted aside in favor of a story about the island, which they had no good way to resolve. (They did something similar to Claire and Sayid - those aren't character arcs closing, those are characters being destroyed in order to further the plot and the mysteries of the island.)

I'm ok with sloppy plotting, if you're going for character truths or whatever. I can go along with that. But in the end, they made the show about the plotting and about the island and its mysteries, whether they meant to or not. And so they failed to do justice to their characters, and failed to pay off the plot.

Even so, the first season of Lost is a masterpiece of serialized network tv storytelling, and there are great episodes in pretty much all of the later seasons as well. The Penny-Desmond arc is sap, but it's world-class, can't-help-but-cry sap. I love it.

**Plus the man who brought them together in heaven, you know, Jack's dad, what was his name again? Christian Shepherd. Go #### yourselves.
   385. Greg K Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:51 AM (#4316232)
But then, their way of "completing" their characters' stories was to kill off 90% of them on the island in defense of the entirely unresolved mysterious nature of the island

Better yet it's like one day they realized they were almost done the show and hadn't got around to killing them yet. Sayid, Sun and Jin all go in about 30 seconds, as if an after-thought. Which is in stark contrast to the protracted march towards Charlie's death over half a season.
   386. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:53 AM (#4316233)
Sorry, but the greatest show of all time is Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

That would be Firefly, yokel.
I like Firefly, as do all right-thinking people, but there was just no way to build characters and relationships in 12 episodes that could have the emotional impact of Buffy arcs like Surprise/Innocence and Becoming (the Angel story in season 2), The Prom/Graduation Day from season 3 (summing up three seasons of television), Willow's coming out in season 4 (spread over a bunch of episodes), the run from The Body to The Gift in season 5, or Once More With Feeling in season 6. Plus you build up characters over that period of time and the comedic / genre play opportunities are so much greater (Zeppo / Doppelgangland / Hush / Superstar).

Firefly had good episodes, but what's tragic about Firefly is that it never had the opportunity to attain to the heights it perhaps could have reached. The character arcs were only just starting in the first season, and the film sped through the plot arc so effectively that it wasn't ultimately about the relationships like you know the second and third seasons of the show would have been.
   387. formerly dp Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:55 AM (#4316235)
I expect his chances of getting a fair trial are about 1 in 100.
Those are better odds than I expected from you.

The more significant issue to me isn't that there's been any sort of a media cover-up, it's that the American public just doesn't seem to care, either about the Manning or about the any of the gross incompetence that prompted his actions. Not a huge shock, given the past decade, but still a bigger problem that Manning's only a symptom of.
   388. Lassus Posted: December 04, 2012 at 09:59 AM (#4316238)
I like Firefly, as do all right-thinking people, but there was just no way to build characters and relationships in 12 episodes that could have the emotional impact of Buffy arcs

I'm sure the plan was for a regular season length like Buffy. Wasn't it?

As long as we're talking Whedon, I'm a huge huge fan but I found Dollhouse to be one of the worst things ever.
   389. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:00 AM (#4316240)
Sayid, Sun and Jin all go in about 30 seconds, as if an after-thought.
Seriously. Sun and Jin died for no good reason, leaving their child an orphan, but we're supposed feel a sense of resolution because they find each other in heaven?
   390. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:05 AM (#4316246)
I'm sure the plan was for a regular season length like Buffy. Wasn't it?
Oh, yeah. And the show was already having trouble maintaining its vision against network notes and stuff before it got cancelled.
As long as we're talking Whedon, I'm a huge huge fan but I found Dollhouse to be one of the worst things ever.
The first half of the first season is terrible, but I thought it became good - not great - after that. The thing with Dollhouse is that they built a show about slavery and the abuse of human bodies. The only way to do that justice is to make it a thriller about destroying the Dollhouse and the evil corporation behind it. But for much of the first season, it was a show about the cool stuff you can do with human slavery technology. It stopped being that after the first season, and it got reasonably good.

They also figured out, I thought really impressively, how to maximize Eliza Dushku's somewhat limited talents in season 2. By having her play a "doll" who retained her essential personality at all times, she could play the basic kick-ass grrl Eliza Dushku character while just adding bits of texture to it when they added in pieces of personality. She played that very well.

Also, everything with Victor is complete gold. Enver Gjokaj made the show worth watching on his own.
   391. bunyon Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:06 AM (#4316247)
Like any network TV caricature, it says more about the lameness of the audience than it does about the culture it's representing.

And like any critique of a 22 minute show that takes itself seriously, the critique says more about the arrogance of the critic than the show it critiques.

It's a comedy. You either laugh and enjoy it or you don't. There isn't much more to it than that. And of course they're caricatures but, given my experience in grad school, it's not a bad one.
   392. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:11 AM (#4316249)
The story of Isreal is very complex and trying to sort villains from heroes at this point is a fools game. We are where we are, the real question is where to go from here. On that topic I am convinced that the path Bibi is taking is as wrong as it is possible to be on if your goal is a safe, secure, peaceful and prosperous Isreal going forward.

Existing in a state of perpetual war with your neighbors is a terrible plan, and no "laying down and letting themselves be killed" is not the only option to what they are doing. That said neither the Palastinians nor the other powers in the region (or the US for that matter) have done much in the last decade or so that has been helpful.

In many ways the whole situation is a cautionary tale on what happens when reflex, tribalism, and violent short term interest trump humanity. Oh well.
   393. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:14 AM (#4316251)
It's a comedy. You either laugh and enjoy it or you don't. There isn't much more to it than that.
No way. Comedy and humor are founded deeply in our basic humanity. Comedy is about cultural commentary - we laugh because various cultural and linguistic constructs get combined in unexpected and clever ways. (Nothing, of course, is less funny than this sort of explanation of comedy, but hell, you weren't trying to be funny either.) When a comedy gets its laughs through cheap gags and mean-spirited caricatures, it deserves criticism. When a comedy builds off of legitimately human characters and clever commentary on society and language, that's when you get real greatness.

The big issue with the episodes of Big Bang Theory I've seen was less the obvious disdain the writers had for science and knowledge, and more the obvious disdain the characters had for each other. The nerds don't respect Penny as a human being, they seem to hate each other and spend their days seeking out clever ways to express that hatred. It's the Chuck Lorre formula, admittedly with better joke craftsmanship than 2.5 Men, but it's not something I enjoy.

The obvious problem with my theory here is Seinfeld, obviously one of the greatest shows ever, but about horrible people who hate each other. Obviously any general discussion of any subject will have exceptions, but I do have some dumb theories about why Seinfeld is good despite (even because of) its mean-spiritedness. The show worked, I think, because (1) the joke crafting was pretty much unmatched in contemporary television, (2) the subject of the jokes was occasionally put-downs, but more often it was commentary on odd, off-center things in contemporary life in the Larry David why-the-####-is-he-angry-about-this mode, (3) the plotting of the episodes likewise was brilliant, so it wasn't just about put-downs, it was about stories and (4) the creation of an anti-sitcom served as commentary on the form, playing with the audience's expectations of what happens in a sitcom. And the actors somehow made caricatures like George and Elaine into something almost like human beings that you couldn't help but connect with.
   394. formerly dp Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:18 AM (#4316252)
And like any critique of a 22 minute show that takes itself seriously, the critique says more about the arrogance of the critic than the show it critiques.
Oh, burn. I would like the show to be funny. But it does the same thing to nerds/geeks that network sitcoms do with gay characters-- it's stereotype humor, and not particularly clever stereotype humor. Low-hanging fruit.
It's a comedy. You either laugh and enjoy it or you don't. There isn't much more to it than that.
There's always more to it than that.
   395. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:22 AM (#4316256)
Comedy and humor are founded deeply in our basic humanity. Comedy is about cultural commentary - we laugh because various cultural and linguistic constructs get combined in unexpected and clever ways.


Even if true, you are stating this as if culture were a monolith that every person within it reacted to the same way, which is clearly not true. Humor does leverage both culture and basic humanity (which is how past works from centuries ago from a different culture can be funny, BTW), but our reaction it - whether it is "funny" - is completely personal and depends on our relationship to our culture and how our basic humanity is expressed.

Personally I do value a show where the characters are liked by the powers behind the show (writers, so on), where they are acknowledged as human beings evil if evil despicable people. I agree that humor found in situation and genuine relationships is funnier than broader humor or humor built on as you put it expressed hate, but I think they can all work.
   396. zonk Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:24 AM (#4316258)
Those are better odds than I expected from you.

The more significant issue to me isn't that there's been any sort of a media cover-up, it's that the American public just doesn't seem to care, either about the Manning or about the any of the gross incompetence that prompted his actions. Not a huge shock, given the past decade, but still a bigger problem that Manning's only a symptom of.


The problem with Manning is that he wasn't functioning as a pure whistleblower... it would be one thing if he had been discriminating in what he had leaked -- say, the videos and reports of the Baghdad and Granai incidents and only specified diplomatic cables germane to US perfidy in the GWOT... but he didn't. It was a undiscriminating dump of 250k diplomatic cables and more than half a million reports - the majority of which served no real purpose other than as salacious diplomatic gossip and classified information that had no use other than to be "Hey, look! Classified secrets!"

You don't get to indiscriminately dump classified information into the public realm as a citizen of any country and you certainly don't get to do it as a member of that nation's armed forces... the laws are pretty clear on that, and to the best of my knowledge - no one is contesting that he did precisely that.

There's a difference between someone like say -- Hugh Thompson (the My Lai whistleblower) -- and what amounts to an anarchistic middle finger to "The Man".

If the idea is that it's possible to 'crowdsource' international diplomacy and foreign policy, then I would say activists, heal thyself -- because there's a whole lot of 'ends justify the means' happening here that completely ignores reality.

And - FWIW - I don't think folks like Glenn Greenwald do the 'cause' (however they want to define it) any good... ever since the kerfuffle with a number of folks Greenwald interviewed for a rather salacious and hyperbolic expose (making enemies of a number of people who were in Manning's corner before talking to Greenwald), I've pretty much confined him to persona non grata in my own personal log of trusted writers. Pawn that Manning may be, I'm not interested in being a Greenwald pawn either -- I don't trust the pigheaded self-righteous whether they're part of the government or external critics of it.
   397. BDC Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:25 AM (#4316259)
the joke crafting was pretty much unmatched in contemporary television

And, it strikes me, Seinfeld was about a stand-up comic. In that respect, it goes back to Jack Benny, in some respects to the Dick Van Dyke show. When the premise is rooted in the necessity to come up with jokes, there's a level of artificiality that makes sympathy irrelevant. (Benny cultivated a miserable persona for himself; Rob Petrie [and Laura, of course] OTOH were sympathetic, but Rob was surrounded by embittered and cruel joke writers.) A consistent theme in Seinfeld is that Jerry works the idiocy of his life and friends into his act, which somewhat explains why he would hang out with such people (in addition to being a Jack-Benny type himself, with his own selfishnesses and cruelties).
   398. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:25 AM (#4316260)
Even if true, you are stating this as if culture were a monolith that every person within it reacted to the same way, which is clearly not true. Humor does leverage both culture and basic humanity (which is how past works from centuries ago from a different culture can be funny, BTW), but our reaction it - whether it is "funny" - is completely personal and depends on our relationship to our culture and how our basic humanity is expressed.
Of course. I don't disagree with any of that.

My point wasn't that some things are or aren't "objectively" funny. My point was that comedies are ripe for cultural analysis and criticism. Simply saying "I find this funny" or "I don't" in no way exhausts our capacity to talk about comedy.
   399. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:27 AM (#4316261)
The problem with Manning is that he wasn't functioning as a pure whistleblower... it would be one thing if he had been discriminating in what he had leaked -- say, the videos and reports of the Baghdad and Granai incidents and only specified diplomatic cables germane to US perfidy in the GWOT... but he didn't. It was a undiscriminating dump of 250k diplomatic cables and more than half a million reports - the majority of which served no real purpose other than as salacious diplomatic gossip and classified information that had no use other than to be "Hey, look! Classified secrets!"
I think it's reasonable to say that Manning committed a crime for which he should be tried and punished.

I don't see how the fact that Manning committed crimes means that his treatment is anything less than a stain on American democracy.
   400. Lassus Posted: December 04, 2012 at 10:29 AM (#4316263)
The first half of the first season is terrible, but I thought it became good - not great - after that. The thing with Dollhouse is that they built a show about slavery and the abuse of human bodies. The only way to do that justice is to make it a thriller about destroying the Dollhouse and the evil corporation behind it. But for much of the first season, it was a show about the cool stuff you can do with human slavery technology. It stopped being that after the first season, and it got reasonably good.

I'll be the first person to admit I had a hard time getting over all this. It was shown as evil, yes, but Whedon himself seemed enamored of the evil, and too much so. If this wasn't the case, he did a really poor job of making that even slightly clear. I'd have to re-watch, but I think there had to be a way to offer something a little more stark regarding the good and evil bits. "It's complicated" can only carry me so far sometimes.


Enver Gjokaj made the show worth watching on his own.

Easily, kid has talent coming out his ears. Still hoping for a breakout for him, but I have a horrible feeling it isn't going to happen, he may be another truly excellent actor lost in the tide.
Page 4 of 62 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Francis
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogYankees won't get into bidding war for Chase Headley: source - NY Daily News
(3 - 9:58am, Nov 26)
Last: Pops Freshenmeyer

NewsblogBoston Red Sox prove (once again) that competitive balance in baseball will never exist | cleveland.com
(6 - 9:50am, Nov 26)
Last: Everybody Loves Tyrus Raymond

NewsblogRolling Stone: The 15 Worst Owners in Sports
(41 - 9:49am, Nov 26)
Last: Astroenteritis

NewsblogStanton Losing About $141 Million of Record Deal to Taxes - Bloomberg
(80 - 9:49am, Nov 26)
Last: Jim Kaat on a hot Gene Roof

NewsblogBig Unit, Pedro, Smoltz headline Hall of Fame ballot
(82 - 9:47am, Nov 26)
Last: Bitter Mouse

NewsblogOz: Mike Trout Q&A: His workouts, goals & what he’s thankful for
(13 - 9:47am, Nov 26)
Last: Darren

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(8670 - 9:45am, Nov 26)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogOTP Politics November 2014: Mets Deny Bias in Ticket Official’s Firing
(4853 - 9:25am, Nov 26)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 11-26-2014
(2 - 9:24am, Nov 26)
Last: Rennie's Tenet

NewsblogAdam Rubin: My Hall of Fame ballot
(55 - 9:05am, Nov 26)
Last: LargeBill

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - November 2014
(1135 - 2:05am, Nov 26)
Last: Athletic Supporter can feel the slow rot

NewsblogWendy Thurm on Twitter: "What the hell kinda panda is that?"
(7 - 9:59pm, Nov 25)
Last: Omineca Greg

NewsblogSchool of Roch: Melky Cabrera a "fallback option" for the Orioles
(29 - 9:41pm, Nov 25)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogJazayerli: The Legacy Of The 2014 Royals, Part 1.
(42 - 9:08pm, Nov 25)
Last: 'Spos stares out the window, waits for spring

Newsblogred sox - So … is there any money left for pitching? Red Sox roster building reconsidered - WEEI | Alex Speier
(120 - 9:02pm, Nov 25)
Last: Zach

Page rendered in 0.9706 seconds
52 querie(s) executed