I notice this one is marked as "Coming Soon."  Is that because it's the international trailer, or because of the continuing rumors that Serenity may enjoy an early release due to public demand?

-Autistic Angel

Have you been paying attention to the judicial nominee process lately? The Republicans have every reason to go on the offense, considering the Dems have done everything in their power to block almost all of Bush's high-level appointees.

Out of 214 judicial nominations Bush has sent to the senate, Democrats have blocked only 10.  95% of Bush's nominees have been approved by the senate.  Compared to every president back to Jimmy Carter, that's an astonishing success rate.

-Autistic Angel

The strangest thing about this evening's events is how the conservatives are wearing themselves out fighting an opposition that doesn't exist.  All the democrats have said so far is that John Roberts is a rather new judge, his personal views aren't yet known, and they hope to learn more about them during the confirmation hearings.

To listen to the conservatives talk about it, though, you'd think that democrats had threatened to club Robert's children and eat their bones.  Shouldn't we at least wait to learn *something* about this guy before we start talking about why he's the best / worst nominee ever?

-Autistic Angel

I don't understand the very basis for this thread -- Raven titled it, "A brief moment of honesty reveals a chilling agenda," but quotes someone who's on his side, making a point he already agrees with.  What was the moment of honesty?  That Texas has been annexed by Mexico?  Or is that the chilling agenda?

A better title for this thread would have been, "A moment of extreme hyperbole reveals a hysterical fear-monger."

-Autistic Angel

[a brand-new direct-to-video Futurama movie has been greenlit]

From DVD.ign.com:

In the first of IGN's exclusive Video Blogs direct from San Diego's Comic-Con International, voice actor Billy West (Fry, Zoidberg, the Professor, and many more voices for many more shows) revealed to us that a brand-new direct-to-video Futurama movie has been greenlit. Not only that, but there is also an option for a second movie as well.

With the model established by Family Guy's return – where a direct-to-video movie eventually spawned the show's return to Fox primetime as well – could the much-missed Futurama also be on the way back to a set near you?

(emphasis added)

-Autistic Angel

I have disagreed with more than 95% of the policy decisions she has made.

I don't have any idea what that means.

If someone asked me why I object to George W. Bush, I can assure you that I could speak at length and in great detail on the subject.  Social security, civil rights, the War on Terror, the Medicade prescription bill, environmental initiatives, tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, Valerie Plame, attacks against John McCain in 2000, sex education, torture memos, No Child Left Behind, the peace in Iraq...take your pick.

But for all of that, I've still never felt the urge to flee the country.

When she has unlimited power to step on the little guy, this little guy is leaving.

What makes you think any democratic president, much less Hillary Clinton, would have anything that would even vaguely resemble "unlimited power" with a Republican-controlled congress?

1.) Sen. Clinton has no interest in helping anyone but her political career. She is 'filling a niche' since Senator Palpatine..er...Lieberman didn't jump on it this time. This is hot air and political posturing, nothing more. I'm leaving the country (and I'm dead serious, not Kim Basinger serious) if she is elected.

Why?

-Autsitic Angel

I spent a great deal of time training Cheeto in the first two worlds, and he has in turn spent lots and lots of time training Rooster on Creature Isle.  Teaching your Creature all the miracles, when to use them, and when *not* to use them is invaluable in some of the more harried levels of the game.

-Autistic Angel

I would have expected Nightmare on Elm Street to be a more popular choice.  After all, unless you're a teenager, Freddy Kruger won't touch you.

-Autistic Angel

The issue is that you would have no idea what point in the movie you would be entering until after you'd made your choice by running into one of the theaters.  Sure, it's *possible* that you'd luck out and get to spend several days in Rivendell chatting it up with Arwen, but taken as a percentage of the overall film, it's far more likely that you'd find yourself in the heart of Mordor or some impossible battle sequence.

-Autistic Angel

Through a series of a events far too labyrinthian to explain here, you have come into possession of the Magic Ticket from Last Action Hero, allowing you to enter the world of any movie you choose.  Unfortunately, your choice of movies is rather limited at the moment: your creditors have tracked you down at the cineplex and the only way out is to spend several days hiding out as a movie character.

Which of the following Feature Presentations would you most want to take your chances in, and why?

The Day After -- 1983 -- Jason Robards, Steve Guttenberg



Jurassic Park -- 1993 -- Sam Neill, Laura Dern



Independence Day -- 1996 -- Will Smith, Jeff Goldblum



Dawn of the Dead -- 2004 -- Sarah Polley, Ving Rhames



A Nightmare on Elm Street -- 1984 -- Heather Langenkamp, Robert Englund



Return of the King -- 2003 -- Elijah Wood, Viggo Mortensen



War of the Worlds -- 2005 -- Tom Cruise, Miranda Otto



Saving Private Ryan -- 1998 -- Tom Hanks, Tom Sizemore

Bush's judicial appointee Janice Rogers Brown once said, "In the heyday of a liberal democracy, all roads lead to slavery." I can't wait to see what the heyday of conservative democracy brings us.

On the global scale, both republicans and democrats are considered liberal. When republicans are in power we still have a liberal democracy for a government.

So, instead of suggesting that liberals support pro-slavery policies, Janice Rogers Brown was indicting the entire American political spectrum as being pro-slavery?  I don't understand how that makes her statement any better.

-Autistic Angel

To answer your first question, yes, I believe you can return to Tien's Landing after leaving.  I didn't have any reason to try it, but it remains a visible location on your travel map.

-Autistic Angel

I'm afraid I don't have any suggestions.  I just completed Half-Life 2 earlier today, and those drivers have been working fine on my GeForce 6800 Ultra.

You may want to try regressing to the previous drivers if those were working okay.

-Autistic Angel

I'm hoping for a sneaky nominee. Someone who pretends to be hardcore conservative so Bush will appoint him(I'd frankly be shocked into suspended animation if he nominates a woman). Then, during the grilling by Democrats, he gives the knowing wink.  They confirm him.

George W. Bush is not going to make the same mistake his father did with Souter, or even that Reagan did with O'Connor.  His choice is going to be someone he's known for years as having a long, proud history of ruling strictly on ideology.  S/He will be resolutely pro-conservative, but much more importantly, rabidly anti-liberal, and will deliver the pro-business, anti-civil rights rulings that conservatives have been longing for all these years.

This country is going to become an even more interesting place over the next twenty years.  Anyone who sees this a being purely an abortion issue or purely a gay marriage issue is vastly underestimating the conservatives' interest in seeing anti-monopoly and anti-trust laws weakened or even struck down entirely as being "unconstitutional."

Bush's judicials appointee Janice Rogers Brown once said, "In the heyday of a liberal democracy, all roads lead to slavery."  I can't wait to see what the heyday of conservative democracy brings us.

-Autistic Angel

No, that would be "Luthor."

-Autistic Angel

I just re-read the transcript of the presidential debate where Bob Scheiffer asks Bush and Kerry whether or not they'd ever appoint a Supreme Court Judge in an attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade.  John Kerry responded that he would never appoint a judge who would overturn a constitutional right, and George W. Bush calls that "a litmus test" that he strongly disagrees with.

-Autistic Angel

[EDIT:]

Her retirement was just announced.  This, plus Renquist, means at *least* two Supreme Court nominations for George W. Bush.

Reactions?

-Autistic Angel

EDIT: News story from MSNBC.

Still, outside of the darker tone I fail to see how we're getting anything a Firefly fan could dislike.

I have *not* seen Serenity yet so I can't comment on the movie specifically, but Joss Whedon has said that the character of Malcolm Reynolds was originally supposed to be quite a bit more grim and humorless due to the events at Serenity Valley at the end of the war.  It's possible that the "darker tone" you're referring to in the movie could reflect Whedon's original vision for the tone of the series, or perhaps what the series would eventually have evolved into.

-Autistic Angel

No, although thanks to all the secret preview screenings, everyone except me has already seen the movie.  

-Autistic Angel

So you felt it was acceptable to wander around the board antagonizing someone because no one actually came out and said it was inappropriate?

Devil, for the record, please do not infect the forum server with a malicious virus, spam the forums with empty threads, or post enormous pictures in an attempt to crash the forums.  Those things would also be inappropriate.

-Autistic Angel

This case is centered on a town in my home state, and people on both sides of the political spectrum.  The idea that the government can choose to take your home because it wants to replace you with a business that will bring in higher tax revenue is scary, scary stuff.

I don't know of any specific defense fund for this issue.  As far as I know, this Supreme Court decision was the last avenue open to the homeowners.  If I come across any helpful information, I'll pass it your way, mytocles.

-Autistic Angel

Well, I win this round. You are player number 4 to pick Ellen Pompeo from Grey's Anatomy, and what a clever choice it was! You almost had me for a while, but you let your guard down. Don't worry, it happens to all of us sooner or later. Please play again, and next time I'll be ready for you, Ellen Pompeo from Grey's Anatomy.

-Autistic Angel

Umm... as an on-topic comment, Batman didn't change much as a result of Crisis.

Perhaps not, but my understanding is that he was rather reforged by Frank Miller into the dark character we see today in Justice League Unlimited, Batman Beyond, and, of course, Batman Begins.

God, did I love Batman Beyond!  Now that was a great show!

-Autistic Angel

I'm still sad that my Creature from Black & White won't be in Black & White II.  

Look how cool he is!







-Autistic Angel

Doesn't anyone except me have a problem with the idea of Lex Luthor being portrayed as some loner wacko hanging around in an abandoned subway station, ranting to himself and his two lackeys and antagonizing Superman for no apparent reason?  I'm no comic book buff, but Gene Hackman's version of Lex Luthor seems pretty radically different from every other version of the character I've seen -- it couldn't have been much campier if they'd cast William Shatner.

-Autistic Angel

It's also possible that Fox could nullify that contract if Whedon agreed to bring the series back to their network.  Several people have mentioned the resurrection of Family Guy, so let's not forget which network is doing the resurrecting.  If Fox is willing to do it once, they may be willing to do it again.

Would Joss Whedon accept such an offer?  It's no secret how he feels about the network's interference in Firefly, but he also became disillusioned with Hollywood after interference in the Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie -- one of the deal-breakers for doing Serenity was that Whedon would have complete creative control over the project, and the studio agreed to that....

Or maybe I'm just a wishful thinker.  Here's hoping Serenity wows the box office!  

-Autistic Angel

My biggest problem with the first Spiderman was the extreme Power Rangers feel during the Unity Day scene where Green Goblin and Spiderman faced off for the first time.  Subsequent action scenes were much, much better, but you could practically intercut that scene with parts of Big Bad Beetle Borgs and no one would be able to tell the difference.

I've only seen Spiderman 2 once so I don't have quite the same perspective on that film, but my current feelings are that Batman Begins is still a superior movie.

-Autistic Angel

While I didnt really expect anything less, some of the behind the scenes stuff involving the husband, his lawyer, and the judge doesnt seem to pass the smell test.

To what "behind the scenes stuff" are you referring?

-Autistic Angel

It's a shame some people refuse to let others speak. I like having a good, fact-based discussion.

unbreakable, I have as much of a problem with the Bush administration's policies as anyone, but even I would have to side with th'FOOL and Raven that this thread had little chance of ever producing a fact-based discussion...or even anything civil enough to qualify as a "discussion" at all.  Whether you intended it or not, the post that started this thread is exactly the sort of thing that conservatives will use to suggest that liberals are somehow taking pleasure from this *incredibly* destructive foreign policy.

Turn on any conservative pundit, commentator, or talkshow host for fifteen minutes.  Take your pick.  Now try another.  Notice anything?  One of the core principles at the heart of modern American Conservativism is the absolute and unquestioned belief that liberals are evil.

I'm going to say that again because it really bears repeating, unbreakable: the people you're trying to open a fact-based discussion with believe from the start that your political views are founded in a seething hatred for America and a pure, malicious desire to see it destroyed in as painful a way as possible.

Now go back and read your original post.  It's vague, it insults the way Bush speaks, it includes absolutely no new facts, and it cites Al Qaeda as a source of information for how the War on Terror is failing.  In your wildest dreams, what is the best thing you could possibly have expected to happen with people who were already assuming you want the war to fail?

Even if this forum were 100% liberal, this thread couldn't have produced anything constructive.

If you're at all interested in starting up an actual fact-based discussion with conservatives, here are some rules that you need to keep in mind:

1) Cite your facts, cite your source, and be *extremely* specific on your point of view.  Do you think it's a good thing or a bad thing that Osama Bin Laden is still on the loose?  Why?  How does it help or hurt America?  If you leave these sorts of questions unanswered and let people try to interpret your point of view, conservatives will start from the belief that you hate this country.

2) Assume your facts and your source will be called into question, and provide corroborating evidence from a different source whenever possible.  Remember that in the mind of a conservative, the only truthful journalist is one who's saying something good about Republicans and something bad about Democrats.  Our own government publishes reports on a regular basis that conflict with the Bush administration's rhetoric, like the World Terrorism Reports that Fireball1244 cited in his first post -- cite facts from as many different sorts of sources as possible.

3) Learn to read past personal insults.  Mentally edit them out of whatever you're reading.  Do not respond to them, and absolutely do *NOT* respond in kind.  Again: if you're trying to communicate with someone who assumes from the start that you're literally evil, you have to assume that attitude is going to be reflected in their attitude.  Keep the discussion focussed tightly on the facts, and don't say or even suggest anything that might reinforce their assumptions about you.

4) Check out a conservative viewpoint in advance.  Republicans are so reliant on the strategy of "staying on message" that you'll often find that they're all saying pretty much the same thing at exactly the same time.  The best possible way to prepare yourself for your detractors is to check out what Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly are all saying on the subject.

5) Check out conservative viewpoints on other similar topics in advance, too.  If you think conservative principles conflict with liberal principles, watch what happens when you try to apply two different conservative principles to the same topic.  Was Terri Schaivo about a culture of life, or about Big Government infinging on individual rights?  Is our incredible federal deficit necessary in a time of war, or does it demonstrate an incredible level of fiscal irresponsibility?  If America is supposed to be a Christian nation that cherishes life and the virtues of charity, why are we slashing federal programs with a proven record of helping the poorest Americans to justify a tax cut for the wealthiest 0.1% of Americans?  If you can identify a "strong conservative value," odds are pretty damn good that you can find a "good conservative policy" that is diametrically opposed.

6) Finally, the only reason you should ever attempt a debate like this is if you're trying to change your own mind.  If you're not prepared to hear the other side out and really consider their point of view, you're wasting your time.  You'd never waste your time trying to debate someone else into giving up their religious faith, so don't bother trying to convince someone else to give up their belief in a vast liberal media conspiracy.  Instead, spend your time looking for valid points from the opposition you hadn't considered before, and if you can't address them, be prepared to admit that you hadn't thought about the issue that way.  Your opposition may believe you're evil but don't ever make the mistake of thinking the same about them.

-Autistic Angel

I've been thinking about whether Batman Begins is a better movie than Spiderman or X-Men, and the more I do, the more I agree with aussie77.  It's phenomenal.

-Autistic Angel

I don't want to sound like the ugly American but why should I care about terrorism in another country besides the U.S? I pay taxes to the U.S. gov't to provide security to this coutry (not another country). What choice targets where conveniently moved to the Middle Easter sphere? Do you mean U.S. soldiers? So you think we should have left the U.S. soldiers in the U.S. so that the terrorists could fight them in the U.S. and blow up U.S. citizens? How exactly would that make you feel about winning the war on terrorism?

That's a good try, MrZubbleWump, but I already wrote a bunch of posts that parodied some of the cold-hearted, selfish, ethnocentric, and bigoted ways conservatives view the world, including the way they'll rationalize the incredible loss of life by equating it to having to pay taxes.  I appreciate the way you condense Bush's foreign policy down into, "Let's get the terrorists so busy killing our troops overseas that they forget to kill our civilians," but the people on this board are already on to you.

For future reference, I think you're going a little bit over the top when you (as your conservative caricature) suggest that you're happy about offering up the lives of our troops and dooming a country full of innocent people to a full-on terrorist onslaught.  It's true that I have my problems with the conservative worldview, but even *I* wouldn't go quite that far.

Try reigning it in a little bit, and don't forget to use the words "liberty," "freedom," "patriotism," "democracy," and "September 11th" at least three times in every post.  It helps create the illusion that you actually believe in what you're saying, no matter how heartless or short-sighted it might be.

-Autistic Angel

I liked Batman Begins a *lot.*  Aside from one Batmobile scene that's eerily reminiscent of a gag in The Simpsons -- and which has no effect whatsoever on how the scene plays out -- I'd have a lot of trouble finding fault with this movie.

Highly recommended for fans of the Dark Knight.

-Autistic Angel

After a particularly emotional breakup with your significant other, you realize that several of "your" possessions are now beyond your reach.  Who would you most trust to slip in and out of your S.O.'s home and retrieve the assigned things without being detected?

The Pink Panther



Garrett



Hudson Hawk



Sly Cooper



Thomas Crowne



Mission Vao



Gwen Raiden



or Ellen Pompeo?

In fact, that friend I have who is so supportive of securing our borders said, when I told him of this idea, "It was worth helping Europe and Japan, because they are hard workers. Mexicans and those other people down there are lazy and it would be a waste of time trying to do anything with them.". He doesn't see that as a racist stereotype, he sees it as a simple statement of fact, and he isn't the only one I've say heard something like that.

So, in your friend's mind, Mexicans are too lazy to do any work in Mexico, but they're not too lazy risk their lives illegally crossing the border and then perform back-breaking labor for extremely low wages here in the United States?

I'm either easily impressed or a die-hard optimist about the human condition, but it never ceases to amaze me when people make such blatantly self-defeating arguments with such sincerity.

-Autistic Angel

I think this is a much more compelling way for Raven to explain his views on illegal immigration than his previous thread complaining about giving people emergency medical assistance.  I may not object to saving people's lives, but I do object to the drain illegal immigration puts on social services, including our overcrowded prison system.

I would like to know, however, if 30% of the federal prison population are illegal immigrants because illegal immigrants are more likely to be violent offenders, or because illegal immigrants lack the money to secure adequate representation.  Prison demographics are frequently invoked by people who wish to suggest that minorities are dangerous, when the real connection is simply the fact that poor people are much less likely to get good legal counsel.

-Autistic Angel

I would also like to point out that there's a difference between thinking that someone is stupid or thinking that someone believes in stupid things.  For example, conservatives believe that thousands upon thousands upon thousands of reporters, editors, anchors, publishers, and producers working for seperate news organizations around the world are all engaged in some massive conspiracy capable of organizing the spread of misinformation and covering up the truth on a global scale.

That is a very, very stupid thing to believe in.

Does that mean that all conservatives are stupid?  No, not at all -- it only suggests that when given the choice between:

1) abandoning faith in favor of fact, or

2) abandoning fact in favor of faith,

conservatives tend to make the latter choice.  

"Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, but Bush's hand-picked weapons inspectors were just corrupted by liberals!"  "Tom DeLay and Joseph McCarthy and Richard Nixon were all framed!"  "Terri Schaivo was crying out not to kill her when they removed her feeding tube; those liberals just love to see helpless people die!"  Honestly, if these sorts of beliefs aren't arrived at by discounting all available facts and placing all your faith in the Republican party line, how can they possibly exist?

-Autistic Angel

[(1)]

And by the way Austitic Angel, you're awesome. I'm a big fan. Seriously. I'm jealous of your abilities. Not that I'm stalking you or anything

Seriously, everytime I see a post by you in a R&P thread here, I always think "Oh boy oh boy oh boy". It's great, I love it.

I wish I could say that there was any skill or inspiration behind any of the posts you linked to, but the fact is that they're all based on the exact same set of precepts:

1) Conservative Republicans are always right, and any fact to the contrary is actually a lie produced by some vast and poorly-defined conspiracy

2) Liberal Democrats are always wrong, and are motivated exclusively by pure, unfettered malice for America, its military, and its citizens

3) "Strong Core Values" apply only to extremely specific situations and attempting to transfer them to any other issue, no matter how similar, results in a severe logical disconnect that must be covered by feel-good buzzwords and anti-liberal name-calling.

Ergo: "Republicans in congress are right to try and save Terri Schaivo because she has an excellent prognosis for recovery (1), liberals will go to any length to murder her (2), and anyone who suggests that it's highly inappropriate for Big Government to try and take control of our lives just hates America (3)."  

It's the Coulter-equivilent to painting by numbers.

Conservative pundits deserve all the credit for pioneering the precepts -- I simply put them to use to see how long it would take for another conservative poster to call me on it.  Raven finally did in this post where I agree with him that Jesus and the "Culture of Life" would disapprove of offering emergency medical care to people in urgent need.

Just one question though, has anyone ever bit? That is, not recognize the satire?

Not that I know of, but I was also pretty aggressive about discrediting my own argument -- even if someone agreed with the conclusions, the conservative principles used to get there were so steeply opposed to the issue at hand, the end result didn't make any sense.  Again, though: professed conservative values are often so completely contradictory to conservative behavior, pointing out the discrepancy is hardly an achievement on my part.

I'm glad you enjoyed those posts.

-Autistic Angel

To be honest though, I kind of agree with what he says here. Nixon did get a bad wrap.

Richard Nixon orchestrated a burglary targetting the democratic party, pressured the CIA to deceive the FBI into halting their investigation on the grounds of national security, and when independent federal investigator Archibald Cox started getting too close to the truth, Nixon's attempts to get Cox fired resulted in the forced resignations of United States Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus.

I do not agree that Richard Nixon simply "got a bad rap."

-Autistic Angel

What's wrong with the term 'liberal'? I see nothing wrong with it much like being labeled 'conservative'. Commie would have been different....

I think he was referring to the way you characterized liberals as "hate-spewing."  I found it very interesting that Gratch talked about how he disagreed with the conservative Christians' definition of "strong moral values" in the current administration, and you felt it necessary to counter by complaining about "hate-spewing liberals."  That's the difference between discussing the issues or name-calling -- Gratch identified a specific point of view he disagrees with, while you simply indicted liberals as hate-mongers.

Another current example: look at Raven's thread where he uses the "everybody does it" defense to justify hatred of the French -- unbreakable complains about U.S. foreign policy, and Raven immediately slaps him down as "hating America."

This is an *extremely* common problem I have with discussing politics with conservatives.  No matter which of Bush's policies I raise issues with, I'm told that I "just hate Bush."  No matter what area it is that I think America could improve in, I'm told that I "just hate America."  No matter what flaw in Republican logic I point out, I'm told that I'm "just incapable of understanding."  Conservatives frequently complain that liberals won't engage them in "rational conversation" and focus on "facts," but if every news report is biased, every scientific study is flawed, and liberals are motivated solely out of malice, what could possibly qualify as "rational" or "factual?"

-Autistic Angel