bnw wrote:

J.R.R. Tolkien had more than a few.

Yeah, I’m not riding with you in this posse.

I think Tolkien’s interesting characters begin and end with Gollum.

Everyone else is just a Type, imo. No complexity of character.

I think Tolkien’s genius/appeal was in the History he constructed for everything. He is the first writer to really create an alternate world.

And. I think that if Tolkien published his books for the first time today, they would largely be ignored. He did some ground breaking fictional work, but he wasn’t a great writer. He was merely the first writer to open the door to an alternate reality that had bones.

zn wrote:

“It is now clear that policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence and assessments. … They were not challenged,” Chilcot writes in his statement that accompanied the report’s release.

Flawed.

There it is right there. That’s the fig leaf the establishment has put on this tragic debacle.

“Flawed” suggests that “Hey, we did the best we could, but we are only human, and humans sometimes get things wrong. We trusted our Intelligence apparatus, but for some flukey reason we wouldn’t like to specifically investigate, they made some mistakes, and gosh darn it.”

It wasn’t flawed. It was falsified, and exaggerated. Outright fabrications. Lies of omission. False narratives. And the burden of proof was placed on Iraq to prove a negative – like prove to me you’re not cheating on your wife. You can’t prove that. You can’t prove you don’t have something.

We also knew that even if they did have WMD, they were no good because they were well past their expiration date. We also knew there was no evidence that Iraq intended to use them even if they had them.

The burden of proof has to be on the government that starts the war. And the world recognized that which is why most of the planet opposed the invasion.

Flawed.

I like Shaw a lot.

But he sure did have a case of penis envy when it came to Shakespeare.

That is ridiculous. Shakespeare had faith, hope, courage, conviction, and he did a lot of it in iambic pentameter. “Death made sensational?” Where, in theatre, is death NOT sensational? I don’t even understand what that is supposed to mean, or why it would be a criticism.

Ah, fuck him.

ZN is right. The characters. The characters.

Go ahead and think of the greatest writers of all time. How many great characters can you attribute to them?

Mark Twain had Huckleberry Finn.

Hawthorne had Hester Prynne. Steinbeck had a handful. Tennessee Williams, Arthur Miller, August Wilson, GB Shaw. These guys all had a few.

Shakespeare…where to start? He created distinct, individual characters who are not just “types,” who endure forever. Hamlet, Falstaff, Mercutio, Portia, Shylock, Iago, Macbeth, Lear, ohmygod, I could keep typing for ten minutes. While most great writers are happy with one or two characters that leave a lasting impression, Shakespeare probably has 100. The only writer I think who could fill all ten fingers is Dickens. Dickens created a lot of memorable characters. His stories sucked, but he had characters.

I often introduce Shakespeare to my students by telling them that I thought Shakespeare was over-rated when I started college. I thought he was just romanticized by the academic elites who loved the pumpkin pants, and the extended pinkie finger, and the Queen, and crumpets and stuff. And then I started to study him. And I slowly came around to believing in Shakespeare. And then I started REALLY studying Shakespeare when I had to teach his plays, and that’s when I realized that – if anything – the greatest writer in the world is Underrated. I think he is better than people credit him for being. Shakespeare isn’t just the greatest writer who ever lived. He is the greatest writer by a spacious distance.

Anyway.

Don’t trash Shakespeare around me.

I hate rude behavior in a man. I won’t tolerate it.

My son really liked the books. Nobody in my family has seen the show, probably because we don’t have HBO, though my son is expert at piracy.

I’d like to read them, but there seems to be about 1,000 hours required to do that, and I do not have that kind of time.

The thing is…if 9/11 was an elaborate inside job…and ELABORATE is what it would have been…they would have made it look like Iraqis did it. How easy would that have been? And that would have been that.

Instead, it inconveniently involved Saudis (our allies) and the trail led to Afghanistan, a country that is a complete waste of time to invade economically or strategically.

I mean…if you are going to go the monumental effort of working through the logistics of demolishing the WTC, it would have been small potatoes to frame somebody worth framing.

PA Ram wrote:

It’s times like this I wonder why I had kids. I love them and would never regret having them–but I feel for them and what looks like a dismal future.

This generation is an incredible failure.

This is how I am feeling.

This has been a singularly depressing week.

What movie is she showing clips from near the end of that?

bnw wrote:

BS. Trump employs common sense not emotion.

Even if that is true, it is irrelevant.

Racism is about policy, not “feelings.”

And his policy proposals are racist. Clearly. Emphatically.

bnw wrote:

================

Trump has been out front in promoting women and minorities yet he’s constantly called a racist. Thats why.

Oh, for chrissakes. He has said that the Mexicans coming here are the worst society has to offer. “When Mexico sends you its people, they’re not sending their best…They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.”

Never mind that Mexico isn’t “sending” anybody, that statement is appalling, and there is no way to get out of the fact that it is racist. And inflammatory.

He wants to ban ALL Muslims from coming to the US. There are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world, and estimates are that 70,000 – 100,000 of them support ISIS. That is racist.

So he employs some Latinos.

That’s supposed to exonerate him from charges of racism?

Hell, plenty of plantation owners employed black people after the Civil War.

NewMexicoRam wrote:

bnw wrote:

The best gift ever to the Trump campaign. The hypocrisy of the insider for all to see. And it is so easy to see. Trump will ride this latest outrage to victory.

I hear that Wikileaks says they will soon have a major release regarding Hillary and the e-mails.
The bomb could fall yet. If so, that would be especially bad for the Dems if release after the convention.

It’s out.

Published yesterday. 1,258 new emails.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/286444-wikileaks-publishes-clinton-war-emails

Assange says there is enough to prosecute, but expressed his belief Clinton wouldn’t be prosecuted. And either the FBI has already seen these emails, or they have a new investigation on their hands which will take a few more months to investigate. I haven’t heard anything about the ramifications of this yet.

Eternal Ramnation wrote:

I think an indictment after the convention would have been much more beneficial . Anyone not against Hillary at this point is not likely to be swayed by this.Clinton is crushing the Tiny fingered Cheetos faced Ferret wearing Shitgibbon in the poles and will simply manufacture any additional votes needed.Basically it all boils down to we’re fucked.

Yeah, I don’t think Trump gets a boost out of this because all the people who have already convicted Hillary in their minds have already convicted Hillary, and this makes no difference. The independents are more likely to see this from the point of view of “just another example of the right wing making a scandal out of nothing” than as evidence of Hillary’s hypocrisy.

And we are screwed.

Really, it’s Hillary (Nero) staying the course while Rome burns, or Trump (Caligula), a narcissist governed by erratic impulses.

zn wrote:

nittany ram wrote:

I’m no longer voting for the lesser of two evils. I see the logic behind it but ultimately it results in no progress being made towards the type of country I want.

Just tossing in my pennies to the informal poll.

Everyone has to decide for themselves and I don’t figure I will persuade anyone.

But my thinking is, it’s NOW and the prospect of Trump, who really is worse, in there nominating SC and federal judges (among other things) is positively dystopian. I’ve seen worse and worse is worse (Maine had a 3 candidate governors race and a Trump-style guy won with 37% of the vote. People I know said enh, what harm can he do…and, he then showed them what harm he can do).

I will register third party after the election.

Not the kind of thing I want to fight about because no one will convince anyone and no one has to justify their choice.

That’s my motto. Worse IS worse.

….

I watched a 5-minute video on that guy, your governor. There is no denying that he is a colossal dickhead. Just an ignorant, selfish, boorish, POS. When do you get rid of him?

PA Ram wrote:

Zooey wrote:

No. I’m voting for Jill Stein (again).

Both Clinton and Trump, ultimately, are this guy:

Hillary might be Nero but Trump strikes me more the Caligula type.

Good observation.

That’s what we have: Nero or Caligula.

wv wrote:

First off, i didnt even know Pat Buchannon was still alive

Second, i think this ‘free trade / globalization’ issue or cluster of issues is one of the most important topics of our times here on Earth.

I would have loved to see Trump and Sanders have a conversation about it. I’d like to know where they agree and disagree on it.

I like the fact Trump is against the Nafta/WTO stuff. Its why he’s such a wild-card. I cant stand a lot of his ideas…but this Nafta thing is HUGE. It’s what makes me think about the surreal notion that i might prefer Trump to Hillary (which isn’t saying much, but still)

Thing is, i dont agree with his “patriotism” mentality. I dont wanna care more about one human being than another. An american life is not more valuable than a chinese life or a mexican life, or a north korean life or an Iranian life. …Cant we have policies that are good for all-lives ? Yes? No?

w
v
“You’ll never have a quiet world till you knock the patriotism out of the human race. ”
(1919) GB Shaw

Yes, Trump is tempting on trade.

And he has zero chance of building a wall or deporting 11 million humans.

But I cannot have him appointing justices. He has already said he would appoint justices who would restrict liberties. He has said he will appoint justices who are anti-abortion. And he could appoint up to 3 more justices, and roll in right wing authoritarianism for a generation. Trump is no libertarian. He’s an authoritarian.

bnw wrote:

Zooey wrote:

There is no shame in being totally ugly nowadays. I think that has changed. I think society used to bite its lip a bit before saying ugly things. The fault lines were there, maybe the contempt. But it wasn’t said out loud in polite company.

It IS said out loud now. It’s almost a matter of PRIDE to say ugly things now. A bravado that is commonly mistaken for bravery.

And we have congress flat out refusing to do its job, and unabashedly saying things that are demonstrably false.

I heard on the radio this morning a couple of hosts talking about a guy who accosted Izzy Azalea – whoever that is – at an airport terminal. He approached her (him? Her, I think) and recorded the encounter, asking, “Are you Izzie Azalea?” and she said, “Yes, I am,” or something in a polite and friendly way, and he says, “How does it feel to have single-handedly ruined hip-hop?”

Paraphrasing.

And I thought, “What kind of dick would do something like that?” And he must have been so proud of himself that he uploaded it, or these DJs wouldn’t have known, right? So we live in an era when being a dickhead is actually admired.

Do you feel the same about protesters who go into the Trump rally to disrupt it for their own political end? Outside fine but inside no. But wait he’s male, white, rich, heterosexual and republican. Never mind.

Hey, don’t insult me, okay?

I think silent protest is okay. I think counter-demonstrations/rallies are okay. I think disrupting a rally is rude, including disrupting a Trump rally. I think initiating conflict is counter-productive in its own right.