Republican bullies

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Mon May 16, 2005 11:20 am

joel the ornery wrote:
theCryptofishist wrote:
joel the ornery wrote:and some people wonder why i drink.
Thirst?
nope, try again.

Because highly silly fishes make too many lame jokes in your presence?

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Mon May 16, 2005 11:26 am

theCryptofishist wrote:
joel the ornery wrote:
theCryptofishist wrote: Thirst?
nope, try again.
Because highly silly fishes make too many lame jokes in your presence?

much closer to the mark than the previous guess.

i drink 'cause it is there... and/or otherwise the voices tell me to clean my weapons.

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Mon May 16, 2005 11:30 am

Joel
I'm sorry. Just because I'm playful, and I'm guoshe (sp) more often than I like, I'm not trying to get your goat. We may disagree on certain subjects, but I think you're a fine human being and if I go too far, please (gently--I've got thin scales) correct me.
Fishy

Badger · Post by **Badger** » Mon May 16, 2005 7:34 pm

Posting again from another board...

I'm listening to and remembering why Bill Moyers is such a crucial voice in discussing media in America today. I'm also reminded of just how much fucking class and insight he brings to the issue. He is fucking ON IT in this talk he gave this past Sunday. It saddens me to think he won't be around much longer. He's still making princes and priests uncomfortable.

"In an historic speech on Sunday, legendary television journalist Bill Moyers blasted Kenneth Tomlinson of the Corporation of Public Broadcasting (CPB) for launching a partisan witch hunt at PBS and called for a series of town hall meetings across the country."

"I simply never imagined that any CPB chairman, Democrat or Republican, would cross the line from resisting White House pressure to carrying it out for the White House," Moyers told a packed room at the National Conference for Media Reform. "And that's what Kenneth Tomlinson has been doing."

In his first public statement since the controversy at PBS emerged, Moyers endorsed a call by media reform groups for a series of town hall meetings nationwide so that Americans can speak directly to station managers and policymakers about what they want and expect from public broadcasting.

"That great mob that is democracy is rarely heard, and that's not just the fault of the current residents of the White House and Capitol," Moyers said. "There is a great chasm between those of us in the business and those who depend on TV and radio as their window to the world. We treat them too much like audiences and not enough like citizens. They are invited to look through the window, but too infrequently to participate and make public broadcasting public."

Pour a glass of wine, sit back, and be reminded that there is still some integrity and sanity in the world by media professionals. Kinda long but most definitely worth it.

Audio of the speech here:

Find it here:

http://www.freepress.net/conference/audio05/moyers.mp3

If you wanna make an evening of it check out one of his last speeches made before retiring http://www.stanford.edu/~rruss/graphics ... _media.doc

d6 · Post by d6 » Mon May 16, 2005 8:56 pm

i thought that the "w" had inserted yet another cronie as the new pbs spokeswoman. did it happen yet?
OR
IS
IT
that i have been closing my eyes and hoping to wake up as a non-brazilian time-traveler to emerge as a neolithic cave dweller....

NPR being razed to the ground,
PBS groomed to feature "approved Republican telecasts"

I thought it was the responsibility of the population-at-large to fact check whatever is being dung-slunged. masquerading as "News".

How offensive does the propaganda have to be before a decision is made to act out against it?

I'm tired of being lied to.
I'd better photograph my phlebitis now.............

db,
idiot-bot 2005

dr.placebo · Post by **dr.placebo** » Tue May 17, 2005 3:41 am

It used to be that "conservative" meant smaller government, fiscal restraint, and a reluctance to be involved in foreign adventures. I don't see any of that in the current administration. Rather, I see a corruption of every available governmental mechanism to advance a radical, narrow, and religious ideology.

The current CPB mess is actually one of the smaller sins. The Bush campaign against the environment is likely to have far more egregious effects. The war against the judiciary is aimed at removing numerous protections, and the next Supreme Court will side with corporations against citizens. The reckless use of force in Iraq has increased our risk and decreased our credibility for years to come. The list goes on and on.

This movement in US politics is based both on expediency and fanatic beliefs. They will do whatever they believe will further their agenda. The documented lies pile up every day, with the smirking barely articulate C-student from Yale providing the folksy figurehead.

In short, they are without honor. Don't think that there is any tactic they will avoid on the basis of principle. And even if some of their positions today agree with yours, don't count on them staying that way. For everyone is expendable in this crusade, this jihad, this mad war.

Jesus wept.

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Tue May 17, 2005 6:34 am

"It has been 20 years of work but at last we got our rights. It is about time."
LULUA AL MULLA, general secretary of the Social Cultural Women's Society in Kuwait.

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Tue May 17, 2005 9:58 am

dr.placebo wrote:Jesus wept.

That's right, my savior can whip your savior.

dr.placebo · Post by **dr.placebo** » Tue May 17, 2005 10:58 am

Actually, I tend to think of Jesus as a compassionate reformer, not as one third of a god (or The God, to some). I used the phrase "Jesus wept" to imply that Jesus would have been quite distressed at the actions taken in his name. It's not a very new thought, perhaps, but is still valid.

Also see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_wept

synchronicity · Post by **synchronicity** » Tue May 17, 2005 7:37 pm

[quote="dr.placebo"]It used to be that "conservative" meant smaller government, fiscal restraint, and a reluctance to be involved in foreign adventures. I don't see any of that in the current administration[quote]

I agree. Force more decisions back to a lower level - state at highest. Cut more social programs and federal funding, Stop dilly dallying in the Middle East - Bomb them into submission and get out......Or cut our ties with Israel and get it over with. Now this is a Republican party that I can really get behind.

GamBoozer · Post by **GamBoozer** » Wed May 18, 2005 10:45 am

[quote]Bomb them into submission and get out....[/quote]

Is that what the republican party is all about? Reigning death and destruction to people that have the misfortune of being born in the wrong time and place?

Just fuck them up and let God sort them out? That is why I hate republicans, what the fuck are you doing here then? You should be leading the charge to kill these Iraqis yourself, instead of doing wholesome american things like BM.

God I hate these people, in fact why dont you show me that attitude on the playa, your warlike attitude, condemming people to death through your political beliefs, you wont mind then if I beat the piss out of you for being a stinking republican warmonger.
[/quote]

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Wed May 18, 2005 11:00 am

hate republicans, eh?

and you know so little but what the media has fed you about republicans.

let me see... what phrase is appropriate here...

oh yeah.

<plonk>

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Wed May 18, 2005 11:04 am

John Kerry said. "As Americans we are united in our determination to destroy, capture, kill Osama bin Laden and all of the terrorists. They are barbarians, and we are going to hunt them down and we will make America safe."

yeah, all that violent talk... republicans every one of them.

EvilDustBooger · Post by **EvilDustBooger** » Wed May 18, 2005 11:44 am

joel the ornery wrote: yeah, all that violent talk...

...yeah...and be real glad it`s mostly Talk....

....and Democracy slowly plods on, grinding away at itself...
....the right hand and the left hand clasped in a struggle for
survival.....so different and opposing, yet so dependent on
each other..........and Jesus Slept......

safetythird · Post by **safetythird** » Wed May 18, 2005 12:14 pm

GamBoozer wrote: God I hate these people, in fact why dont you show me that attitude on the playa, your warlike attitude, condemming people to death through your political beliefs, you wont mind then if I beat the piss out of you for being a stinking republican warmonger.

Does anyone else see the irony here?

Extreme liberals, winning the hearts and minds of America through lies, intimidation and now threats of bodily harm. LMAO!

As I said earlier I simply feel no sympathy for extremist idiots like you.

Get over yourself.

S3
Who will gladly give you his playa address so that you can either come by, have a beer and we can talk like gentlemen or you can come to beat down* on someone revolted by the garbage you just spewed. The choice is yours. I'll probably have BudLight or CoorsLight.

*I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that this will be the actual outcome.

GamBoozer · Post by **GamBoozer** » Wed May 18, 2005 12:23 pm

Hay Joel,

Why do you think that because i hate republicans I am aligned with democrats? I dont belong to either party.

To me democrats are even worse than republicans because they are spineless cowards (john kerry), who talk about being progressive and for the people but then they vote in torture advocates like Gonzalez, overwhelmingly support the bankruptcy bill and endless military appropriations, and bow down to pressure from christian fundamentalists. At least with republicans you know exactly what you are getting.

And you can take your silly little elitist "plonk" and put it in your ass, seriously.

GamBoozer · Post by **GamBoozer** » Wed May 18, 2005 12:27 pm

I can only see the irony in that a liberal would be condemmed for threatening bodily harm on a single person, but a right-winger would not be condemmed for threatening near genocide on an entire nation.

Where is the logic in that?

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Wed May 18, 2005 1:02 pm

joel the ornery wrote:let me see... what phrase is appropriate here...
oh yeah.<plonk>

GamBoozer wrote:Hay Joel...And you can take your silly little elitist "plonk" and put it in your ass, seriously.

I think both you two need to take a breather.

synchronicity · Post by **synchronicity** » Wed May 18, 2005 8:56 pm

And political beliefs affect appreciation and creation of art, the joy of life,
and the ability to communicate with each other in a fair and honest manner exactly How?

edired to add: It looks like I'm trolling, but I am really trying to make a point.

Badger · Post by **Badger** » Wed May 18, 2005 11:03 pm

And political beliefs affect appreciation and creation of art, the joy of life

Sure as hell seemed to be the case with Robert Mapplethorpe a while back.

montana wildhack · Post by **montana wildhack** » Thu May 19, 2005 6:41 am

i have a pretty good idea of what <plonk> means from the preceding exchange, but can anyone tell me what it refers to? In my family, 'plonk' is a big ol jug of wine!

yeah, it took me years to figure out 'wOOt' too....oh the humanity.

EvilDustBooger · Post by **EvilDustBooger** » Thu May 19, 2005 6:48 am

<plonk>
The sound of an AssHat hitting the bottom of your kill-file/ignore list.

I could never plonk you sweety.

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Thu May 19, 2005 7:02 am

Badger wrote:
And political beliefs affect appreciation and creation of art, the joy of life
Sure as hell seemed to be the case with Robert Mapplethorpe a while back.

i saw a Mapplethorpe (a photo of an enormous penis sticking out of a pair of really nice trousers) in Amsterdam... i am not sure if i appreciate his art... yet he is entitled... yet, as much as i am not sure i appreciate his art... i am sure that federal dollars shouldn't have been used to entitle him to make it.

montana wildhack · Post by **montana wildhack** » Thu May 19, 2005 7:09 am

Sure as hell seemed to be the case with Robert Mapplethorpe a while back.

yeah, i think that the biggest argument that i have ever had with my conservative parents was over Andreas Serrano's "Piss Christ" .

I could go on and on about NEA/NEH funding...
ironically, and I can hardly believe this, but the Bush administration (if approved by Congress) is actually raising the Endowment's budget this year by about 15%, from $121 million to $139 million. This is up from an all-time low in the mid-nineties (thanks to a republican congress who got all pissy about so called obscene and objectionable art) of $99 mil.

any thoughts?

montana wildhack · Post by **montana wildhack** » Thu May 19, 2005 7:12 am

I could never plonk you sweety.

thanks baby! you inhabit a plonk-free zone with me too

montana wildhack · Post by **montana wildhack** » Thu May 19, 2005 7:18 am

i am sure that federal dollars shouldn't have been used to entitle him to make it.

actually, federal dollars never lined Mapplethorpe's pocket. He was a savvy businessman and enormously successful photographer, and his estate was worth millions just from gallery and private sales. The show that raised the controversy "the perfect moment" was an NEA funded show, but the work was not for sale, and actually Mapplethorpe had died about a year before the show hit Cincinnati.

he lived in a pretty high tax bracket (puttin' cash into the federal coffers), but never received federal funding to make his art.

not trying to be pissy, just getting the facts out there.

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Thu May 19, 2005 8:00 am

taking your facts at face value.... i will amend my comment

i am sure that federal dollars shouldn't have been used to entitle him to dipslay it.

had it been a private show, Jesse Helms would not have been able to exploit it.

oh well.

and for everyone's edification...

i was pretty amused to find that Mapplethorpe in the Museum of Modern Art, Amsterdam. I can actually say i saw one (Mapplethorpe), so my life is a little more complete because of it.

i also toured the Van Gogh museum... and Mapplethorpe is no Van Gogh.

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Thu May 19, 2005 8:30 am

One of my favorite of Mapplethorpes works. Did a lot of flowers and sociaty women, too. Adn the female body builder stuff was fantastic. A varied ouevre.

dustdrvr · Post by **dustdrvr** » Thu May 19, 2005 11:52 am

When conservative politicans need to increase their standing with their base, finding a link between "objectional" art and federal tax dollars is an effort worth pursuing.

If the Republican media machine put Bman on its radar, ignoring the link to Harry Reid, but instead making the "objectional" art argument, would Bman surrvive and continue to be held on BLM land? Their argument would not necessarily object to individual works of art, but rather to the whole event.

Never mind the $4 per person per day the BLM receives, never mind the positive impact on the local econmy, political capital trumps all.

Conservative religious groups could grab hold of this and insist Bman be moved off BLM land. Their chant could be "No ten commandments on government land, no Bman on government land." Never mind the Constitution and the Supreme Court decisions.

Am I paranoid? Or is my paranoia based on evidence of an administration that knows no limits in its zeal to crush any outcropping of liberal or progressive thought.

EvilDustBooger · Post by **EvilDustBooger** » Thu May 19, 2005 1:04 pm

dustdrvr wrote: If the Republican media machine put Bman on its radar, ...

I think the Republican Media, with the election over, is probably fixated on it`s narrow agenda, and social engineering ventures...trying to solidify it`s(GOP) foothold in the executive and judicial branches...and instill it`s correct views in the worlds teaming masses....
I`m imagining that they view BM like the rest of the media does...or seems to...as
some unimportant, laughable, offbeat event - attended by tree huggers, hippies, and "other" lunatic degenerates......they are glad we`re in the desert, and not camped-out in DC...reaming their asses....pointing out their hypocracy....
They are too concerned about affairs in other desert regions to focus too
narrowly and get boggled down in local politics (especially with doctors, lawyers, and phd types) in an already "evil-doer" state by radically objecting to "radical expression" .....the David Letterman jokes alone would be enough to turn the GOP into a laughing stock....no, I think they`ll concentrate on keeping America safe in other countries with the same old
logic, our children....and an M16A2+M203gl............

.......not to say that they wouldn`t encourage the ''inland'' armies(DEA/ATF/FBI) to roust those god damned hippies abit......but we all know they wouldn`t do that................right ......?

Republican bullies

Re: lordy lordy lordy, for crying in a bucket

Re: lordy lordy lordy, for crying in a bucket

Women in Kuwait get the right to vote!

what fucking nonsense!

You want violence, you will get violence..

plonk plonk plonk plonk plonk plonk plonk plonk

Re: plonk plonk plonk plonk plonk plonk plonk plonk

Re: You want violence, you will get violence..

go plonk yourself

I'd rather have whiskey

Re: go plonk yourself

plonkity plonk

an enormous penis and pair of really nice trousers

plonk-free existence