Jump to content

tantric superman

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    6,441
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by tantric superman

  1. Yep, Bingo on the polling helpfulness of Beto signs.  It might be a great barometer of who might offer you a nice craft beer, but the almost dead sonofabitch republicans are going to show up on voting day, and the only thing that might help are younger republicans, who wouldn't put a sign out, who might vote for Abbott, and maybe Beto.

    The people who Beto needs to vote, the mexicans and blacks, aren't going to spend 20 bucks on a beto sign.  They probably won't spend time going to the voting booth, either.

     

  2. Sorry if posted - anyone with a link to a site where I can download all the game times to my calendar?

    Never mind.  Got it.

     

     

  3. 1 hour ago, Farkimedes said:

    Top Gun. I hadn’t seen it start to finish in maybe 15 years, so this last weekend the ball and chain rented it with me. I remember seeing a Rotten Tomatoes scores of like 55% and thinking that was crazy.

    Holy hell has it aged poorly. Basically anything that isn’t a flight scene is borderline unwatchable. The dialogue with Kelly during the Love Plot is so bad you almost can’t believe they filmed it. 

    It was shitty from the day it hit theaters, but the youngsters thought it was cool.  Now you realize it was campy.  But it's pretty great as far as camp goes.  

    • Like 1
  4. I'm a good deal older than some of you guys, and I started watching lots of movies way back in the 80s back when there about four theaters in my college town that would have double features of all sorts of foreign films.  All of that Bergman and Bresson and Goddard stuff was often slow as shit but it was kind of novel to me.  So I think I just got lots of practice in terms of getting used to slow films and really not disliking escaping into a slow movie (like 2001).  

    Got to be in the mood for some of these flicks, and well rested. 

     

  5. On 5/31/2018 at 10:23 PM, wild_turkey said:

    I watched 2001: A Space Odyssey a couple years ago for the first time and thought it was boring as shit. I understand some of the things it did well and that’s certainly impressive for its time, but I did not find it entertaining. I think a lot of people who love it appreciate it for how they saw it when it was new. The special effects and technology were great then, but they helped cover up a boring plot.

    For reference, I love scifi movies and I like lots of slow films. Just thought this particular movie sucked for a modern day first time viewer.

    Neg away.

    I appreciate it in all its boring glory now more than I did then.  Shit, I could watch every Kubrick film at quarter speed and I would still love it.  Every fucking frame is gorgeous.

     

  6. Although Judge Thomas has gained a reputation as an outspoken opponent of affirmative action, the subject has been little discussed so far. Today he told Senator Hank Brown, a Colorado Republican, that he opposed timetables, preferences or quotas but said he supported efforts to seek out and enlist fully qualified minorities. Under such a program, he said, he was able to attend Yale Law School.

    "The effort on the part of Yale during my years there was to reach out and open its doors to minorities whom it felt were qualified, and I took them at their word on that," he said. "And I have advocated that very kind of affirmative action."

    But Yale officials have said that Judge Thomas was actually admitted under a preference program, in which different standards were used in an effort to have minorities make up about 10 percent of the entering class.

    ...

    After Mr. Metzenbaum's persistent questions about abortions led off the hearing, the same issue was sharply pressed in the afternoon by Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont. The Senator sought to question Judge Thomas again on what he meant in 1987 when he briefly but pointedly praised an article that argued Roe v. Wade was immoral and a violation of natural law. Judge Thomas's writings in support of natural law, the concept that there is a higher, more fundamental law that transcends any written law, has been the focus of much questioning.

    Mr. Leahy seemed annoyed when Judge Thomas said for the first time today that he may never have read the article by Lewis Lehrman, a New York businessman and patron of conservative causes. In his 1987 speech entitled, "Why Black Americans Should Look to Conservative Policies," he praised the Lehrman article. He said the article "on the meaning of the right to life is a splendid example of applying natural law."

    Judge Thomas said he might have only skimmed the piece before he spoke and had not looked at it in years. Judge Thomas said he disavowed the message in the article insofar as it meant that natural law should be a basis for a court's ruling.

    When Mr. Leahy asked Judge Thomas if a fetus has any constitutional rights, he paused for several seconds before saying that he did not believe there were any cases that took that view but he would have to check. In fact, Roe v. Wade explicitly holds that a fetus does not have constitutional rights.

    Under repeated questioning from Mr. Leahy, Judge Thomas said that he did not believe he had ever expressed an opinion about Roe even in private nor had he ever formulated a personal opinion on the case in the 18 years since it was decided.

    https://www.nytimes.com/1991/09/12/us/the-thomas-hearings-thomas-undergoes-tough-questioning-on-past-remarks.html

     

  7. Whatever, you aren't balancing anything or protecting the capitalist system, so just say what you mean.  You are creating a rule that allows people who want to benefit from our market system to be able to discriminate on religious grounds.  You appear to be carving out some exception for "non-standard" products which doesn't seem to have any relationship to anything other than your own system of logic, but that's okay. 

    • Like 3
  8. 10 minutes ago, TahoeHorn said:

    I have some huge prejudices.  The gay thing isn't one of them.  My prejudices are about the nature of capitalism.  I'm a hard core capitalist who has strong ideas about the right way to make capitalism work properly - how to balance the needs of the buyer with the needs of the seller.  My arguments transcend any description of the buyer or seller. 

    There is no "balance".  Capitalism and the ideas of capitalism are not going to be affected in any way shape or form in telling a business it needs to not treat gays any differently than others. 

    You aren't balancing anything.

    I think there are plenty of times to take absolutist type positions, but don't pretend you are balancing.

  9. 41 minutes ago, Moby Ric said:

    I have no idea why ESPN3 exists.  Nobody watches it or even knows how to make it work.  I'd like to watch Tech before the Texas game comes on, but its on ESPN3.

    Watching every game on ESPN Now, nee ESPN3 (aka "can't you watch the game on your computer") -- have shitloads of emails to do and easier just to watch on second screen.

×
×
  • Create New...