If that cord had been one day longer I would have been on time.

Anyway, Happy Birthday!

nittany ram wrote:

PA Ram wrote:
Spock was never a nazi.

For the record.

Wrong, hockey puck.

Fair enough.

But Star Wars had the Stormtroopers.

Okay–I gotta post this one more time:

2003 The Big Book of Lesbian Horse Stories

Well, I refuse to read it. I’m waiting on the film.

So Spanos met with the San Diego mayor:

San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer and Chargers Chairman Dean Spanos met on Sunday and afterward announced that a mayor’s advisory committee will speed up its work and present a stadium plan to the team within three months that could keep it from moving to the Los Angeles area.
The one-hour morning meeting at the Padres’ Petco Park came after a surprise announcement last week that the Chargers and Oakland Raiders are planning a joint stadium in Carson outside Los Angeles if they fail to get stadium deals in their hometowns.

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/san-diego-chargers-stadium-mayor-kevin-faulconer-meets-with-team-president-dean-spanos-after-carson-project-announced-022215

Some comments:

Weird show…waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long.

Simmons won for “Whiplash” No real surprise. Well-deserved.

Arquette won for “Boyhood” No real surprise. Didn’t see it but she invested 12 years in it and frankly the other performances were nothing special.

Original screenplay to “Birdman”. Lots of dialogue. I thought it was an “okay” film more about the acting than the story itself…but I suppose the dialogue was good.

Adapted screenplay” “The Imitation Game” Not a bad film but nothing special. Not particularly memorable.

Director: Inarritu for “Birdman”. This was a well-directed film. It was dominated by its tracking shots.

Actor: Redmayne for “the Theory of Everything”. It really is a great performance. The guy becomes Hawking. I just wanted Keaton to win–don’t think he’ll get another chance. And he was also really good.

Actress: Moore for “Still Alice”. Good for her.

Film: Birdman. Can’t say I would have voted for it but I am not a member of the Academy so…what can you do?

I do NOT want the Rams in the AFC. That would just be weird.

The Seahawks have an AFC history. They should go.

I’ve seen a lot of these films but I haven’t seen the ‘gimmicky” “Boyhood”. I just have no interest in it.

That said, it’ll probably be between “Boyhood” and “Birdman” for Best Picture.

Out of the nominees, “Whiplash” gets my vote.

I agree on Moore–just for her body of work I’d love to see her win. But I didn’t think that the role in “Still Alice” should win over Rosamund Pike’s in “Gone Girl”.

I want Keaton to take the actor award.

And I know it’s a lock but I definitely want J.K. Simmons to win for supporting actor for “Whiplash”. I think that would be the most deserving of the actors I think will win.

• This reply was modified 9 years, 10 months ago by PA Ram.

This is an interesting subject to me.

One of the books I just go was , “The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap” by Matt Taibbi. I look forward to reading it. He’s excellent on these topics.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Divide-American-Injustice-Wealth/dp/081299342X

As a side note, I just began binge watching “Orange is the New Black” on Netflix. This is an outstanding show. It’s based on a true story but the stories are very well written and certainly touch at a variety of problems within the system and attempt to show the prisoners as human beings. There are big problems with the system and what do we send them back to when we release them?

We have a long way to go.

zn, I’ll just make this last post on it and give you the final word.

At this point it’s clear to me we’re talking past each other.

We’ll just have to agree to disagree and move on to the new Avengers film in May.

I really don’t know what else to say about it. I just don’t know how else to say what I’m trying to say about it.

Have you seen the film?

If you saw it did you go in looking for this AFTER it became a big deal in the press? I only ask because that’s not at all what I got out of the film. I truly didn’t even notice that because I looked at the film and took something completely different from it. Maybe that’s part of what I brought to the theater with me and my expectations. I don’t know.

I understand why you would be frustrated with this but we both look at this two different ways, for two different things. I really can’t explain this any better. I just can’t.

I want to be clear that I am not arguing that this film represents THE truth. I don’t think I ever said that and if I did I didn’t mean to. I always said it represented HIS truth and that’s the point that I think we disagree about. I find that acceptable for this film and you do not.

I thought there were things about the film that were very realistic and some things that weren’t.

This was not my favorite film of the year(Gone Girl and Whiplash win that)and I don’t particularly care for Chris Kyle. He’s not someone I would have hung around with.

But I think it’s a good film that addresses a subject of interest to me, a subject apart from the events of the war itself. And while that subject may be of no interest to anyone besides veterans, I can’t change the way I see it.

So I’m going to permanently bow out of this thread. I think I’ve made the point I wanted to make and I think I understand your point and that there is a disagreement we will likely never resolve. And that’s okay.

On the truth about the war, I agree with you completely.

wv wrote:

Enh. I didn’t see anyone asking hard questions. It was a bit too fluffy for my taste.
And that tends to happen when Veterans are on the panel. Folks tend to tiptoe around the vets feelings, etc.

I know you are a Vet, Pa, so we probably disagree on that. Just my opinion.

w
v

Maybe someday Hollywood will make the film that you want them to make. Maybe they’ll make a film that SHOULD be made.

We disagree on this being that film.

I like what the Vets said about communicating things. I think that’s very hard to do and do effectively–maybe impossible.

I don’t disagree with you about the truth of the Iraq war at all. I would guess at this point that people either know that truth and accept it or they reject it for some other story. I do think as the years go on it would be an interesting poll question in terms of things like: “Did they ever find WMDs” or “Who was responsible for 9/11” and see what the response is 50 years from now.

There is so much information available today–so many sources, that people can find the truth they want.

Truth may not be subjective, but things like faith prove that doesn’t matter. If someone wants to believe, they will. If someone doesn’t they won’t.

Truth is truth–but how it is processed changes from person to person.

Not everyone will get it right. But in their minds they will be “right”. And that’s more important to them.

I have a weird, stubborn streak that leads me to resist homerism where I live. It always felt right to choose my teams rather than just cheer the locals. I guess I’m a strange case.

Well, you’re certainly not alone.

As for me, I never cared at all for hockey so that doesn’t matter to me. But in baseball I somehow ended up following the Phillies. I did go to their games when I was young so that is probably part of it. I followed the Sixers during the Dr. J years and may have followed that team no matter where I lived because Dr. J was awesome. So I kind of stuck to those two local teams–although I don’t follow them very close any more.

With football–I never even considered the Eagles. They were never on my radar. Ever. And I do have some friends who grew up with other teams but moved to the Eagles(one guy was a HUGE Chiefs fan) but I NEVER considered switching teams. After all the history I have with this team I can’t imagine ever going local(unless Kroenke swaps franchises with Jeff Lurie and the Rams come here–I can dream).

So while I get the fans of local teams, it just did not happen that way for me–at least in the sport most important to me.

Yes, I’ve thought about all of this.

I thought it was certainly a possibility.

The “Oilers” have disappeared completely.

Could the Rams?

Of course.

If that happened I might just throw in the towel on the NFL. I haven’t been thrilled with it the last few years and I get aggravated by it’s constant need to create “EVENTS” (a four day draft, schedule release, Combine special, special awards shows for all year end awards, etc.)and it seems a bit mismanaged from a fan’s perspective. That NFL owners seem capable of moving anywhere, anytime for–oh–the hell of it. It bugs me.

Who knows what happens IF London gets a team in 10 years. Maybe Kroenke likes it over there better and he sells the L.A. stadium to the Chargers, or rents it and moves again–but THIS time London wants its own name. At least L.A. has a “Rams” connection.

London doesn’t.

I’m uncertain about the future of the NFL and am a bit concerned it might reach itself out of existence–at least for die hard fans. Who knows?

I don’t get that the NFL particularly loves or cares about its fans.

If the Rams cease to exist, I won’t care very much about the NFL. I may still watch games but I doubt, after having built myself into this particular brand of fan for over forty years I’d do it again. I’m not sure I have that kind of time left.

I’d watch it in a different way.

• This reply was modified 9 years, 10 months ago by PA Ram.

wv wrote:

I for one am quite pleased.

I hated the idea of the
Olinemen, TE’s, RBs, WRs, and QBs having to learn
a New System.

Geez, its year four. Fer cryin out loud
no more system changes.

w
v

I agree with that.

This team is what it is, and it is somewhat built for this system.

Let’s see what happens.

A big shakeup and system overhaul was not what this team needed right now.