A movie like Brainscan is unique. The characters in this film only exist in the time that the movie was made. Brainscan can almost be called a period film today due to its embracing the troubled...
Its a fun to play with friends, find fun quest and just have a blast! I have been playing for several years and i keep going back. always new things to do or find! Just wish there wasnt so many...
TLDNR REVIEW: “Amazing Spider-Man” is almost good, just like powdered mashed potatoes are almost real.
Look, guys. I realize that anyone that is reading this review has already made up their...
What's funny to me is that every time I see him do something silly or cool like this, I'm thinking he might be fucking some terrorist leader's shit up halfway around the world at that very moment.
That's such an awesome point.
Boy, did I blow the call last night; it's a good thing I didn't have money down on the results. Somehow it had escaped my notice that Missouri was one of the states where Newt failed to even qualify for the ballot. I don't know how something that hilarious managed to escape my notice. A lot of the postmortem op-eds I'm reading this morning see serious trouble for Gringich, who appears to be genuinely struggling to make his South Carolina second wind sustain him until Super Tuesday, when a lot of the southern states where he's strongest will hold their primaries.
This is Santorum's first sign of a heartbeat since Iowa, and in the wake of last night's clean sweep we might see Romney turn his ad attack machine Santorum's way as he did to Newt after South Carolina. I want to see Romney try to fight Santorum for the Religious Right vote so bad that it's making my dick hard. This must be what the couple in Crash felt. Edited by Reasor - 2/8/12 at 1:13pm
What's funny to me is that every time I see him do something silly or cool like this, I'm thinking he might be fucking some terrorist leader's shit up halfway around the world at that very moment.
"Ho ho! Let's go look at the marshmallow, see what happened!" [cut] "Wow. Ha ha -- hey, Joey, you know whose face looks a bit like that marshmallow right about now?"
Originally Posted by Reasor This is Santorum's first sign of a heartbeat since Iowa, and in the wake of last night's clean sweep we might see Romney turn his ad attack machine Santorum's way as he did to Newt after South Carolina. I want to see Romney try to fight Santorum for the Religious Right vote so bad that it's making my dick hard.
"Rick Santorum CLAIMS to be for family values."
"But there's something he doesn't want you to know..."
"If Rick Santorum is so committed to preserving traditional marriage..."
"Then WHY is his name synonymous with a homosexual act SO vile, we can't even describe it here?"
"Google 'Santorum.' Learn the truth today."
(By the way, you are meant to read that in Adam Scott's voice. I would also accept Will Arnett.)
Three fucking states. I can't stop laughing when I think about it. This is Monty Python levels of comedy. TDS, The Colbert Report and The Onion are going to go out of business. The CNN twitter account can easily take over.
After watching that video of the President and the marshmallow cannon, I can't fathom why his approval ratings aren't at 900+% just on personality alone.
Oh, that's right:
He's just so god damned likeable. Whenever I'm a bit "disappointed" with him for whatever reason (stupid or otherwise), he does something like that and wins me back.
(hey, someone has to post YouTube clips now that Barry is gone).
When did attacking the rights of women become analogous with "religious freedom"? Sometimes it's hard to believe that this conversation is even happening in 2012. Do the people of this country -- even the super-religious ones -- really want the U.S. to go the way of countries and territories where women have no rights, no education and no birth control? It really does seem like that's the direction they're pointed. Talk about decline. Holy $#!&.
When did attacking the rights of women become analogous with "religious freedom"? Sometimes it's hard to believe that this conversation is even happening in 2012. Do the people of this country -- even the super-religious ones -- really want the U.S. to go the way of countries and territories where women have no rights, no education and no birth control? It really does seem like that's the direction they're pointed. Talk about decline. Holy $#!&.
I would say that in the case of many of the hardcore fundamentalist MEN, they would LOVE to have women 'put in their proper biblical place'.
I mentioned this subject over at Ron Paul land. Some people are terrifed of women's reproductive rights because it gives a woman the theoretical power to look her husband in the eye and say "I don't want your seed."
The thought of this is like ripping a bible in half. It makes these guys foam at the mouth. They're all about colonizing women's bodies with their dynastic urges.
A lot of what passes for "morality" is really just born out of men's fear of having their sexual power threatened. Abortion? Women in control of their reproductive parts. Homosexuality? Either dealing with the idea that there are men who find other men sexually attractive -- and fearing they might be one of those "other men" -- or dealing with women who find them completely unnecessary.
A lot of what passes for "morality" is really just born out of men's fear of having their sexual power threatened. Abortion? Women in control of their reproductive parts. Homosexuality? Either dealing with the idea that there are men who find other men sexually attractive or dealing with women who find them completely unnecessary.
This, entirely. I see no sign that a sincere practice of faith - loving God and your neighbor as yourself - is losing influence in America. It's individuals and groups that use religion as a guise to mask tribalism and sexual neuroses that are in a state of waning decline.
It's individuals and groups that use religion as a guise to mask tribalism and sexual neuroses
I would really like to trace the development of the heterosexual norm. It obviously was not always this way, when you think of the Greeks and the Romans as forebearers of Western Civilization. At some point, someone or some group gained power and said "Ewww..." and we have been fighting back from that ever since. I want to be able to blame that person.
I would really like to trace the development of the heterosexual norm. It obviously was not always this way, when you think of the Greeks and the Romans as forebearers of Western Civilization. At some point, someone or some group gained power and said "Ewww..." and we have been fighting back from that ever since. I want to be able to blame that person.
Nope. Homosexuality isn't mentioned once in the gospels, and there are some legitimate disputes about the English translations using the term from the epistles.
Yeah, I was making a funny. As in, that must be why so many Christians are against homosexuality. Because of Jesus. But yeah, I suppose he had other concerns.
I hope you're right about civilized society having them on the run. They will turn and snap when cornered, though.
It was always about contraception and the recognition of women as human beings. It was always about our continued development as a post-slavery civilization, still in its infancy. We can see the mask coming off and the Fundamentalists stating that more openly now, and it's cause for hope.
I view the current tone of the Newts, the Michele Bachmanns, the Rick Santora (that's how you pluralize it, right?), and the shrinking number of voters to whom they appeal as a regressive movement in panic mode. The GOP owned all three branches of the federal government at one point in the George W. Bush Presidency, and they couldn't roll back the 20th Century then. It seems as though desperation has been creeping in ever since we elected what turned out to be a conservative, Wall Street-friendly President who happened to be African-American. Fundamentalists were always doomed to be on the losing side of their Culture War, but now we can actually see them losing in real time.
For all the birthing pains of transitioning to a service economy, the agony of the bear market, the military and police state excesses that absolutely have to be stopped, I still find this a hell of an exciting time to be an American.
I would really like to trace the development of the heterosexual norm. It obviously was not always this way, when you think of the Greeks and the Romans as forebearers of Western Civilization. At some point, someone or some group gained power and said "Ewww..." and we have been fighting back from that ever since. I want to be able to blame that person.
That would be the Romans. "The Greek Way' was thoroughly frowned upon in macho masculine Roman society where the idea of a man behaving as a woman might was the realm of Greeks, prostitutes or worse, actors.
Anyone caught practicing the act in the Roman army was castrated, executed or both. That's if they made it as far as getting caught. Often if a cohort thought they may have a homosexual in their ranks they were often butchered the moment they came onto someone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yt
When did attacking the rights of women become analogous with "religious freedom"? Sometimes it's hard to believe that this conversation is even happening in 2012. Do the people of this country -- even the super-religious ones -- really want the U.S. to go the way of countries and territories where women have no rights, no education and no birth control? It really does seem like that's the direction they're pointed. Talk about decline. Holy $#!&.
When did attacking the rights of women become analogous with "religious freedom"? Sometimes it's hard to believe that this conversation is even happening in 2012. Do the people of this country -- even the super-religious ones -- really want the U.S. to go the way of countries and territories where women have no rights, no education and no birth control? It really does seem like that's the direction they're pointed. Talk about decline. Holy $#!&.
I just stumbled across this article over on Slate....
The GOP candidates are still deep in the ritual dance of podium-pounding and posturing to determine who among them will take on Obama. Yet an unexpected display of unity is upon us: The three most viable candidates have raised their voices in harmonious opposition to the federal law that will compel all private health insurance plans—including those administered by religious employers—to cover birth control, as well as the controversial emergency contraceptives. Mitt Romney accused the president of “using Obamacare to impose a secular vision on Americans who believe that they should not have their religious freedom taken away." Newt Gingrich decried the law on NBC’s Meet the Press, complaining that “every time you turn around, secular government is closing in on and shrinking the right of religious liberty in America.” Rick Santorum, a father of seven who has already declared that contraception is “not OK,” called the law an assault on freedom of conscience and free speech. Today the Catholic network EWTN sued the government over the mandate, and evangelical leaders have joined the chorus.
In a campaign riven by sectarianism, this appears to be an issue on which conservative Catholics, Protestants, and Mormons can agree. However, the roots of this alliance are anything but ecumenical. The early battles over birth control pitted Protestants against Catholics and were “culture wars” in their own right, so inflamed by ethnic and religious bigotry that they make today’s partisan debates look like, well, a tea party.
Anyone with a Grindr account can see some heavy traffic in the D.C. area as self-hating gay conservatives from all across America flood into town, looking for some hot, guilty down-low to round out their trip to CPAC.
I know all this contraceptive discussion comes from Santorum (aka brown anal fluid) sweeping this past Tuesday, but it saddens me that we're discussing this. Our country has a major population problem and people like having sex so contraception solves this problem and lowers poverty and assistance from the government since a good chunck of young mother's, especially in my state (New York) have two or more kids and need help regardless if they have a job, so I don 't get why anyone in government would be against this. I can understand a moral problem about this but it's social and health issue and unless they form a sex SS to haul people away for having any sex other than wedlock missionary than I don't see the issue about contraception we're in an educated era where he now realize that potentially bad awful things can result from unsafe sex and people won't readily abstain from any sex, so what's the issue?
President Barack Obama's decision to require most employers to cover birth control and insurers to offer it at no cost has created a firestorm of controversy. But the central mandate—that most employers have to cover preventative care for women—has been law for over a decade. This point has been completely lost in the current controversy, as Republican presidential candidates and social conservatives claim that Obama has launched a war on religious liberty and the Catholic Church.
Despite the longstanding precedent, "no one screamed" until now, said Sara Rosenbaum, a health law expert at George Washington University.
It makes me want to get someconservative girls pregnant and see their parents' faces when they realize the father of their good little girl is some atheistic tv producer from, gasp! New York City. Does that make me a bad person?
From an objective point of view, I don't see how someone could hate Rachel Maddow. She is a rational and smart person, makes sure everything she says is backed up by facts, and is respectful to guests with opposing view points. That crowd hates her because she is a lesbain. They would just look insanely bad if they came out and said that. So they settle for acting like tools.
From an objective point of view, I don't see how someone could hate Rachel Maddow. She is a rational and smart person, makes sure everything she says is backed up by facts, and is respectful to guests with opposing view points. That crowd hates her because she is a lesbain. They would just look insanely bad if they came out and said that. So they settle for acting like tools.
Much of the GOP aren't 'acting' like tools...at their very core, they ARE tools. People like Rove and Norquist are the perfect examples....they embody the word 'tool'.
They hate Maddow because she calls them out on their bullshit using logic and facts....and the GOP HATE logic and facts. (possible allergy)
The also don't like it that she is more than likely a hell of alot smarter than they are...the GOP also HATE smart women....it scares them.
RM being a lesbian is just the icing on their 'hate cake'...to them, calling RM a lesbian is considered an insult. They're petulant 50+ year old boys that had to go to their proms with their cousin or mom.
one one hand he says that Obama's policies are responsible for job loss but just a few minutes earlier, he says he's going to shrink govt. and cut the # of gov. employees (he does love to fire people)....which if I'm not mistaken, would seem to then increase unemployment...??
W T F ?!
also...what a pandering motherfucker....he hit every item on the GOP checklist: "repeal Obamacare", "repeal all the laws infringing on religious freedom that Obama's enacted"(?), "get rid of SS, Medicare", etc.
I know Obama is a really nice guy and probably wouldn't do this but how I would love for him, after winning the election, to take Romney's 'congratulatory' phone call and just....
"Yes Mitt, this is PRESIDENT OBAMA....oh, you want to offer your congratulations?....well, you know what Mitt...remember all that shit you've been talking about me and my administration for the last year or so....oh yeah, you do, don't you.....well, Mitt...."
then I can imagine something along these lines...metaphorically speaking of course.
I read that Santorum is saying that Obama is waging a war on religion and that it will lead to the guillotine. I've never read the Left Behind books, but don't the people who refuse the Mark of the Beast get sent to the guillotine. Is Santorum trying to, not very slyly, suggest that Obama is the Antichrist? I know what I wrote is crazy, but he is appealing to the Evangelical base of the GOP.
It's an unspoken belief among conservatives that tyranny is the natural order of things; if they're not the ones doing the oppressing, they must be the victims.