en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/1178434 Comments by Pye_Paget http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/awrhawkins/2011/03/30/cynical-hollywood-throws-obama-a-life-preserver-named-same-sex-marriage/#IDComment146947489 Okay, these comments are making my heart hurt. First off, yes--marriage is between a man and woman, true. I don't deny that. Civil unions work fine for everyone else. I also don't think gays are causing marriage to be ruined--I blame that on the people responsible for making the marriage ruined themselves. You reap what you sow. HOWEVER: Christians are not about hatred. The sign says that and it is true, as far as I can tell. Jesus, what did he do? He let Judas follow him, he let Saul--a murderer of Christians!--become Paul and preach. He is always trying to save people, even if he knows it's perhaps hopeless, and he does save people, change them. However, by your own words--'gays' are lost! Murderers? No, they're good. Abusers? Thieves? You forget our own religion has a 'forgiveness' clause. Whoever so believes in him is saved. We all sin. Why do you only target certain types of sinners? Sure, some make more mistakes than others, but we're human beings in an imperfect, fallen world. Even the first humans sinned--Eve by going against God, tricked, and Adam for going against God out of, perhaps, love for Eve. From now 'til the end of the world people will sin. It's a lie to say otherwise. So we should welcome anyone into our fold, no matter what they have done, at least religiously. We can give in to our humanity and dislike them no matter what, but religiously we cannot hold people apart. Anyone who wishes to be saved or be a Christian deserves it, no matter what. No one deserves Hell. I upsets me that so many people here don't understand. I mean, I'm not supposed to judge you, but, quite frankly, in my own personal opinion all this hate is misguided and wrong. I can't say I agree with much many Liberals do, or what some gay people do, either, but that goes for everyone. I wouldn't not let them worship Jesus with me, though. They're not evil. They're not devils. They're human as the rest of us. (Two cents--compiled. I hope you take some of this to heart. I know maybe I'm too--lenient, but I feel like it's my job.) Thu, 28 Apr 2011 20:25:17 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/awrhawkins/2011/03/30/cynical-hollywood-throws-obama-a-life-preserver-named-same-sex-marriage/#IDComment146947489 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/edulis/2011/03/22/bullying-glee-creator-caricatures-blacks-christians-publicly-trashes-artists-who-dont-want-their-music-on-his-show/#IDComment146880487 THIS.^ You pretty much summed up everything I think about that show now. All I can see is ham-fisted humor and enough tokenism to make a modern day Star Trek about now. Honestly. To double-up my distaste, I'm also an author. People who write general know that you should have a dynamic, big idea, a theme, a plot, an inventive setting, and great characters. There should be a clear beginning and end to every chapter (episode) and every book (season), so that when you know you're finished and the characters need to spend the rest of their lives off stage, you can end it well. In the way Glee is going, they're going to be cancelled. I had high hopes for the show, just because it seemed different than other American shows. But no. I suppose that's why I only tend to watch British television (Life on Mars and Wire in the Blood all the way). If you have kids, though, try to dig up some old Flight 29 Down episodes. D.J. MacHale is an author I admire and he wrote the scripts for it. Perfectly clean. No adult stuff, no immature language, just an innocent teen drama about some kids getting stuck on an island and having to survive (it's a show with survival in it, not just high school shiz). Also, I suggest kids reading. It's usually much better than television. Thu, 28 Apr 2011 16:18:20 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/edulis/2011/03/22/bullying-glee-creator-caricatures-blacks-christians-publicly-trashes-artists-who-dont-want-their-music-on-his-show/#IDComment146880487 http://biggovernment.com/wthuston/2011/04/10/educators-conference-to-get-you-racist-whites-minds-right-coming-soon/#IDComment146874905 Am I the only one who finds racism confusing? Skin color is determined by melanin. Everyone has some amount of it in their skin, unless they're albino. So, basically, from white-to-black we all have the same thing in our skin. So debating whether or not having more or less is "better" has always been stupid. In hot climates, darker skin is more common because it protects you; in colder climates, vice versa. It's not exactly something to complain about. Now, I understand when people have problems against culture. I, for one, hate gang culture--in any form. It's primitive and dangerous--for those in the gangs, their families, and everyone around them. Not liking some cultures has nothing to do with race. For example: 'White middle-class boys' and those 'pitiful, poor black boys' look equally funny with their pants 'round their thighs because, dude, don't they know what that means? It's like begging The Sisters to come at you. Also, there's one thing these people do that really bugs me. They segregate so much. I mean, they say they want equality, but you can't just be a person. You have to be 'black' or 'Hispanic' or 'Jewish' or 'white'. Honestly, I really don't know what they'd do with me--being French-Canadian, Cherokee, German, Irish, and my great-great Aunt was mocked for being 'black' back in the day. Ethnicity is flexible, guys. Speaking of which, aren't these the people who supposedly think sexuality is flexible--yet also something you're 'born with' and unchangeable? Wait, I won't even get on that, that topic annoys me too much and I start talking like Greg Gutfield ('cept I don't do unicorns and griffins--genetics and weird Bible translations). To sum myself up: Racism is stupid, it exists, but it's stupid, all forms of racism need to be dealt with (not sure if mentioned), culture-ism is what the real problem is in most cases, and ethnicity slots are cruel and unusual punishments that exist on SATs and ACTs and really just need to flip off (if everyone's the same, we don't need labels, idiots). That is all. Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:56:10 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/wthuston/2011/04/10/educators-conference-to-get-you-racist-whites-minds-right-coming-soon/#IDComment146874905 http://bigjournalism.com/wthuston/2011/04/23/time-mag-does-not-know-what-influential-means-with-top-100-most-influential-people/#IDComment145878816 Gah. I only know that Congresswoman. Everyone else you mentioned--whoosh--right over my head. I find that sad. I mean, influential doesn't mean 'sends X amount of money to charity' or 'did...something' . It should have to do with influence--influence on the world, sure, but also influence on the future--future of art, future of technology, future of the world in general. If you're going to list actors (and TIME will), find not the people who are in the most movies, but are acting well enough to leave a lasting influence. For example, if I wanted to become an actor, I'd look to Robson Green, because he does some of the best method acting I've seen. If I wanted to be a musician, I'd look towards current popular bands, or bands that continue to be popular from the 80's, even--The National, R.E.M., etc. I wouldn't look towards the pop icons that come and go. I'd look for people who'd last, or had done something 'so different' they influenced the future of their vocations. This is more or less the same thing I do when I'm studying fiction--I look for good grammar, a steady flow perfect for telling a story, a good story, and good reviews. I read everything from J.K. Rowling and Scott Westerfield to Mark Twain, Jonathan Swift, and Isaac Asimov--and the books' authors have most definitely influenced me more than some actor I've never heard of. If I, an author, can find the time to do that, also being half mad (as all writers are), they should have the time with all their resources to at least do a good job of /something they only do once a year/. They have a whole year to figure this out. Plus, doing something 'back in the day' shouldn't count, unless (perhaps) it has had a very recent and sudden influence on the world today. So you couldn't exactly go back to R.E.M. or the stars of Wire in the Blood, but find recent people who will influence the future of their vocation. Don't force it, don't go by popularity (only do that partially). Do a ruddy talent search, at least. Perhaps these people have done more than we think (doubtful), but...if we haven't heard of them, how can they have such an influence? Oh well. I'd hate to buy the mag, but I may have to...just to see how hard they failed, honestly. I sincerely hope they at least listed someone I look up to and whose work they enjoy...or who I hate so much they /have/ to be influential. For example, those actors in Skins? Yes. I've almost never seen them act, but I know well enough not to act like them--so they've influenced me in the way of, 'Well...I'll be keeping a close eye on any potential children of mine. A very close eye. And teach them the horrors of drug use early on. Uh huh.' Yeah. I don't know. This just... I suppose this is why I have never read TIME magazine before. Always avoid those magazines at the grocery check-out. I mean, if they're with those fake-ghoul mags and tabloids and idiots who put 'Reverse Diabetes' on cooking mags without realizing that is /another medical condition/ TIME can't be too brilliant. ...But I'm biased. Mon, 25 Apr 2011 15:08:22 +0000 http://bigjournalism.com/wthuston/2011/04/23/time-mag-does-not-know-what-influential-means-with-top-100-most-influential-people/#IDComment145878816 http://biggovernment.com/eyeblasttv/2011/02/24/union-thug-attacks-freedomworks-tabitha-hale/#IDComment130373439 I want to argue with you, but I can't--mainly for the fact you're such an idiot I can't even do much else but shake my head in half-sympathy. Let it be known the only racists I've had to contend with are the people who flip because I'm German. Yeah. And they would be what you deem 'African-American'--which is stupid because why do they bloody need a hyphen? I mean, some of my best friends are Kenyan for chrissake's. But these bloody gangbangers all strung out on meth think it's okay to attack a thirteen-year-old girl because her mother's white. And none of them are Tea Party people. They're just on meth. Though, I suppose you could say that proves your point--because since they aren't Tea Party members, that makes the Tea Party racist (conclusion-jumping time!). Or you could accept the fact that racism goes both ways and no one should attack a girl for the reason her skin color is 'wrong'. Whites aren't the only racist ones. Anyone can be racist. Calling the Tea Party racist is absurd. Which sort of racism is it, then? White-on-black? Then why haven't we had any big stories of white people ganging up on blacks who tried to join? There have been none--none I've heard of. I suppose my point is: pics or it didn't happen. Send me a link. Something. Just don't make vague points. I can back up my argument with the fact--oh, yeah--I've been ostracized in a community before because my skin color was 'wrong'. ('White people downtown? Poor white people? What are you ruddy talking about?') I knew that girl--I was a year younger than her when it happened. Racism is horrible in any form, but you're showing bias against people just for their beliefs? Now that's wrong, too. You're being ignorant. I don't want to feed the troll more than I have to, so I'll stop now. But seriously? I thought you Liberals were all about 'understanding' people. I don't feel understood. I'm not even part of the Tea Party and that offends me because you don't have facts--you have ignorance. It's--I don't even know. I try not to be ignorant. I look at things from different angles. I'm a gray area person. But seeing someone just say 'you're this so you're racist'? That's how my old neighbors used to think! 'You're white so you're obviously racist--we'll beat you up now.' Can you see the irony? I can. Thu, 24 Feb 2011 17:33:32 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/eyeblasttv/2011/02/24/union-thug-attacks-freedomworks-tabitha-hale/#IDComment130373439 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/hollywoodland/2011/02/21/just-in-case-you-forgot-hollywood-hates-you-kathy-griffin-to-play-tea-partier-on-glee/#IDComment129659009 O.O One thing: they better not get home-schooling wrong. If they get home-schooling wrong, I will send them a creepily-polite letter that shows just how much I detest them. I mean, I already just got chewed out by a forty-something man for being home-schooled and told that I was never going to college after I said that. And we'd been talking for five seconds. Ugh. I was hoping Glee would come around because, well, it can't be too bad (I say this because my parents like to watch it--weirdly enough--and they're normal enough). I mean, they had an R.E.M. song on there (even if they did ruin it--saw that bit). But this? It's not her, it's just the fact they aren't using a conservative actress. It's like a slap to the face. It's like someone said: "Conservatives can't be trusted around gay people; they hunt them for sport!" Who knows? This is just making my brain hurt as I wonder how bad they are going to mess my lifestyle up. I was trying to go with the trend and watch recent-like (first two episodes or something), also because I heard there was some decent acting, but seriously. This is why I watch British crime dramas. At least I know they just deal with the dead and criminals, rather than politics. And--Robson Greene. He doesn't look like much, but his acting skills could blow just about all chumps in Hollywood out of the water. By the way, can we assign a phobia to people who fear home-schooled people? Then I can yell it if they get mean. I heard this is highly effective. Either that or I need some sort of scent that repels bigoted forty-something teachers. Mon, 21 Feb 2011 18:45:26 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/hollywoodland/2011/02/21/just-in-case-you-forgot-hollywood-hates-you-kathy-griffin-to-play-tea-partier-on-glee/#IDComment129659009 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/hollywoodland/2011/02/21/just-in-case-you-forgot-hollywood-hates-you-kathy-griffin-to-play-tea-partier-on-glee/#IDComment129656695 Weird. I...pretty much completely agree with someone here. o.o Amazing. And if they mess up home-schooling, I will rave at them to my best ability. I mean, honestly--see? I can type. I have Internet. I know how to find things. And I was home-schooled. By Liberals perspective, I must be a hoax--because, you know, I'm literate. ...I'm even from Alabama. But, yeah. The show only caught my attention because I was told an R.E.M. song was going to be on it. They did not "kill" it. Bah. And I don't think they realized "losing my religion" is a Southern term for "being at the end of your rope". They thought it was literal. It's like when this Northern Dad called his daughter something I don't even think I can repeat. In the North it's a form of "sweet" endearment, obviously, but if he was from the South I'd have called the cops on him. *shakes head sadly* Might have still called the cops on him if he didn't look so bloody stunned when he was informed of what that means. Total deer-in-the-headlights expression. Mon, 21 Feb 2011 18:32:12 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/hollywoodland/2011/02/21/just-in-case-you-forgot-hollywood-hates-you-kathy-griffin-to-play-tea-partier-on-glee/#IDComment129656695 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/02/19/smacking-down-tavis-smiley-why-unlike-jon-stewart-i-have-some-respect-for-bill-maher/#IDComment129654851 Women still don't get equal pay. Look up the demographics of most cities and it's pretty obvious. I know that's just statistics and there are many factors (including women leaving their jobs to get married, and/or have children), but it's a pretty clear sign that people still expect "the norm". Daddy works, does whatever he wants, Mommy cooks and cleans, daughter has to be a princess, boy has to be a wannabe soldier. Most women have the bonus of having children. I'm not going to be upset with them wanting to enjoy it. However, if it effects how much money I will make? Yeah, I'm going to be annoyed. I grew up poor and don't want it to continue just because of my gender. It hasn't so far and I'm pleased with that, but don't just say it's a lie. I'm sure it's happening somewhere and a mind that already thinks it's hogwash isn't going to believe when it comes to light; which messes up just about everything, actually. Mon, 21 Feb 2011 18:22:13 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/02/19/smacking-down-tavis-smiley-why-unlike-jon-stewart-i-have-some-respect-for-bill-maher/#IDComment129654851 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/dgagliasso/2011/02/18/history-channel-hypocrisy-when-historys-actually-on-they-usually-get-it-wrong/#IDComment128840881 "There has been a price to pay as older and more traditional viewers have left History in droves, replaced by younger and more female viewers." First off, I'd like to comment on that. Facts are facts, but the fact you find more children and more women watching History Channel a bad thing sort of odd. I don't know. That just didn't sit well with me. I mean, if History was actually playing more shows that had to do with history, I would be extremely pleased. I mean, kids getting interested in history? Awesome. But I see what you mean. The current shows are just guesswork and drama. The Military Channel is much better. Sadly, even when I had cable, I didn't get that channel, which saddened me greatly after all the high praise my grandfather gave to certain shows. However, my television is still getting cable from somewhere (I'm not sure they ever turned it off), so I got to watch a pretty interesting show. It was on the fighting techniques of current and centuries old Cambodians. Very neat. I'm not sure which channel it was on, but I think it was National Geographic? Not sure. Anyway, you might want to check that out. And, even if Monster Quest is totally fake--it's very neat to see where the legends come from and why they think people came up with such things. That's the best part. They almost never find anything (they found a hairless mutant coyote with big teeth once), but it's interesting to hear the history behind the legends. Finally, I'll sum this up with informing everyone I'm that elusive person who, at three, was playing a T-rated war game where you controlled armies to reenact old battles. The game itself had pages you could read on the history behind the wars. I mean, it was just a game--but I've loved history because of it. (I can thank my dad for being lazy and wanting to play computer games while 'watching me'.) I'm still young and female, but I like learning about times past. After all, Uniformitarians have it backwards after all--the present doesn't determine the past; the past determines the present. And I embrace that. So, yeah. I'm not one to want to watch a bunch of old smelly guys doing whatever; I want to learn about the past. And I get that more with reading--hence cancelling the cable. I can thank the author of this article, though; because I just remembered I wanted to get those old papers from my grandfather. I think they were copies of documents from the Civil War. (He's a collector.) Yes. Still need to ask him for those. Anyway, that's my two cents (or, more so, fifty bucks, because I'm chatty online). Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:26:30 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/dgagliasso/2011/02/18/history-channel-hypocrisy-when-historys-actually-on-they-usually-get-it-wrong/#IDComment128840881 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/02/08/more-evangelical-atheism-simon-peggs-new-comedy-a-bigoted-left-wing-attack-on-southerners-christianity/#IDComment127410432 I'm a nondenominational Christian and you've baffled me. For the first two; I have friends who are both. For the third; I hate wife beaters, child abusers, and murderers. Why is that considered wrong? I'm a feminist. And I hate seeing things done to people just because they are different or weaker, especially since I'm so fond of genetics. You can't help being born. And all you can do about any of it is pray for them to come to Christ and accept him as their savior. Because then they are saved. That's it. Repentance is good, yeah. But if you accept Jesus as your savior, you're freed. Do you know any Christians like what you mentioned--personally? Have you heard them speak? Or are you just making assumptions? I have gone to my church wearing neon green eyeliner and no one batted an eyelash. My church has Christian music playing in it. We drink coffee during the sermon half the time. We're not the norm, but yeah. We're not some idiotic hillbillies who just wish to use the Bible's words, incorrectly, to harm our fellow humans. Good sir, I think you're being xenophobic. I wouldn't denounce anyone to Hell. That's God's job. He makes the big decisions. If I were to, I'd need to repent. I mean, I'd be attempting to take over God's job. I doubt that would sit well with Him. Oh, and, by the way, I also read Harry Potter and liked the series when I was younger. Yeah. I'd ask what your problem was, but that would be rude. Just like the guy's comment above; calling people names and such. You get my point as it is, I'll assume. I get my point across with logic. Oh, and... Sins--adultery, murder, child abuse, thievery, greediness, lying, and slander. That's most of them, reworded to make more sense (there have been some shoddy translations of the Bible in recent times). I regret to see how any of this is good. Would you kill someone? Would you sleep with a married person, completely without regret? Didn't you feel a twinge when you lied as a kid? Doesn't everyone think greed is bad? Lying and slander are illegal in some cases--such as in court, on the witness stand, and when talking bad about other people, ruining their career and such. See? It all makes sense. And all of it can be forgiven by saying sorry to Jesus. That is all. No specifics even. Just 'sorry, forgive me for my sins'. Why do you people think my religion is so complicated/wrong? Didn't anyone learn in Political Correctness 101 not to mock other people's religion? Fri, 11 Feb 2011 21:28:31 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/02/08/more-evangelical-atheism-simon-peggs-new-comedy-a-bigoted-left-wing-attack-on-southerners-christianity/#IDComment127410432 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/02/08/more-evangelical-atheism-simon-peggs-new-comedy-a-bigoted-left-wing-attack-on-southerners-christianity/#IDComment127406511 I also doubt they'd take the Lord's name in vain. You actually made me laugh just a bit. Fri, 11 Feb 2011 21:03:04 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/02/08/more-evangelical-atheism-simon-peggs-new-comedy-a-bigoted-left-wing-attack-on-southerners-christianity/#IDComment127406511 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/tslagle/2011/02/07/why-the-oscar-snub-for-secretariat/#IDComment127400989 I must say, I wasn't sure I'd like this movie. The little one in the house wanted to watch it, though, and it seemed fine--so we did. It was actually pretty good. I, being biased, still think the Black Stallion is far more interesting (things you grow up on and such); but Secretariat was a good, wholesome movie. But, hey, as I don't give a darn about Oscars--never have, never will--I don't know if it's 'Oscar worthy' in the first place. By the way, I think we (us supposedly crazed conservative nut-jobs) should all pat ourselves on the back for not mentioning the unmarried, pink-pants-wearing guy in the movie. I mean, I just did--but has anyone flipped out over it? I don't think so. Progress! (I just used the dreaded word--on that note, can we just call them regressive? That would help my mental state.) And I don't think the Liberals made a huge deal out of this either (citation needed). Now that is amazing. Stunning, even. Oops. I just gave them /ideas/, didn't I? I hate it when I do that. Fri, 11 Feb 2011 20:40:26 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/tslagle/2011/02/07/why-the-oscar-snub-for-secretariat/#IDComment127400989 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/tslagle/2011/02/07/why-the-oscar-snub-for-secretariat/#IDComment127396632 "Anyone here"? I'm a Libertarian nondenominational Christian female on a equality kick. Surprise! The fact you think all conservatives are men offends me greatly. Did you flunk Political Correctness 101? I also don't mind people with genetic problems, one of my best friends is a person I should supposedly be racist towards (I won't even mention why--hate those bloody words "black" and "white; I mean, humans' skin varies from cream/peach to dark brownish, I regret to see how that works), I'm a theater person and a biology nerd, I have been helping rescue feral cats since I was a kid, and I love camping. I could keep going, even--just to show off how wrong you are. But my basic conclusion is this: I am not a red-necked male who beats up gays and blacks in their spare time and spits tobacco juice. I doubt any of the people here are like that, mainly because they can type. I'm a lady--one who even wears pants and has short hair. GASP. If your brain just exploded, sorry. That's what happens when you stereotype people. Karma and all that. Good luck with that. Fri, 11 Feb 2011 20:16:54 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/tslagle/2011/02/07/why-the-oscar-snub-for-secretariat/#IDComment127396632 http://biggovernment.com/kolson/2011/02/10/an-epic-failure-detroit-public-schools/#IDComment127147403 Oh gah, you saying the makes me think of my old neighborhood. Everyone worked the corners, did/sold drugs, were illegally there, or otherwise raised heck. Except me. Weirdly, they treated me like some Al Capone. Still trying to find an explanation for that other than they thought I was some circus trick. (I'm serious, they crossed the street to avoid me and stared the whole time until I was out of sight.) Or they hated me (but they mainly hated my neighbor--half white chick; sent her to a hospital). Meth addicts are so weird. Speaking of which, do not attempt to make it--your house will blow up. Ask my neighbors--wait, no, you can't. (Can anyone point me to a good therapist? Person who got A's while living in the hood here. I'm vaguely mental from having my head slammed into concrete once or twice...not everyone was freaked out at the sight of "weirdo"...ears still ring on occasion...) Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:57:53 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/kolson/2011/02/10/an-epic-failure-detroit-public-schools/#IDComment127147403 http://biggovernment.com/kolson/2011/02/10/an-epic-failure-detroit-public-schools/#IDComment127145657 The thing is, in an equal society, you don't have to bring up issues anymore. Everything that has to do with genes, an extra X chromosome, etc. doesn't matter. So, basically, they should be able to teach kids all of those things (math, language, etc.), because inequality is thusly no longer a problem. Tolerance is ignorance. And by the teachers bringing it up in the first place, the kiddies think of it as special treatment--which leads to the kid being called a teacher's pet and bullied more. It shouldn't matter. Bullying just needs to be stopped, automatically, not matter who or what the kids are. It makes the classroom quieter and leads to more hours of progress with work. It also means fewer nurse visits and fewer lawsuits; fewer suicides and better grades. I mean, honestly--by bringing it up, even in a good way, it's harming the kids. If they teach them and just have a no-bullying rule, everything is dandy. It would also help if they could bloody well bring back tag at least; the less energy the kids have, the less agitation and nerves build up. Better grades. Also, fresh air is great for the mind. See? Then Billy can have two Moms, but we don't have problems. Too bad my Utopian ideas are so "off-kilter" no one would ever implement them. (I'm cursed with seeing simple answers to everyday problems. I forget about the people sometimes, but you have to admit something like that could work well. People might call it "cruel" but it's just.) Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:50:10 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/kolson/2011/02/10/an-epic-failure-detroit-public-schools/#IDComment127145657 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/lgrin/2011/01/29/how-tv-shows-get-ruined-human-target/#IDComment126974512 Now, I'm a lady. Obviously. And I know that heels are evil. I see the ladies in this show wearing them in tense situations and want to whack them over the head with my trusty Turkish pistol. I mean, honestly? And Guerrero. He's the best character there, in my opinion. He's tough, even if he doesn't exactly look it, and he's sharp--the character anyway. Fast on his toes and witty. Great. That's my opinion--as a woman. Now, someone went and said (commented that) it is all the females in television's fault when there is a "feminization" of a show. First off, that isn't a word--or it isn't accepted by my spell check. Secondly, I want to see kick-backside characters like G. They don't have to be male, but I like seeing characters dominating the screen, or fitting into a role so amazingly it doesn't matter (Robson Greene in Wire in the Blood, anyone?). But I'm abnormal, so maybe that idea is still legit. But, anyway, if I was to be in the TV business, rather than the novel-writing business, I wouldn't throw in some half-wit female characters who are shallow and can't handle themselves. If they don't help ratings, they should be cut. And, quite frankly, if they wanted to give G an apprentice, they should have chosen a female (or male) ex-gang member. You know, have him take them under his wing or whatever and bring him to the good side. That would be interesting. But petty criminals that don't listen, nor want his help? Toss 'em out. I swear, it's like television is trying to knock females. Coming from a former computer nerd, who loves science, is religious, and is training a dog to hunt--what the heck? Seriously, that's all I can say about it. British television at least had it right with Hermione Norris (D.C.I. Carol Jordan in Wire in the Blood). She wasn't meant to be eye-candy; she had a point and she was an intelligent, efficient person of justice. May I admit one thing? As most would agree, even on the Fox Channel, most television people are Liberals. Entertainers are in general (some of my favorite even are--unfortunately). They say they're ahead of the pack, or whatnot. But they show women as weak and useless--over and over. They show men as stupid and too strong for their own good. It makes no sense. But I guess television isn't meant to make sense. (And this is why I could probably never go into film, because I'm too interested in theme, psychology, and genetics. I say a show with two blond parents and a brown-haired kid and nearly smacked myself earlier. I'd better stick to more classic, thoughtful mediums--like literature.) I'll stop my rant now, but I just wish people would just get over everything and get back to the every man created equal, life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness shtick, things would just be grand. But I'm a dreamer at best. I probably didn't get my point across well, as I seem like I never do here or elsewhere, but I hope that we can stop making things about gender eventually. It's a basic genetic thing. XX x XY=XX, XY, XX, XY. You had just as much chance of being a girl as being a guy, so it's bloody annoying. And, even if psychology tells us men and women think differently and they do, it doesn't make one person less of a person. Imagine if people went around saying "Men are horrible and only live to hurt women". Kind of like they do already. It hurts, doesn't it? Or you want to punch something?* You wouldn't want to be called something you're not, so stop generalizing. Yeah. Rant-off. (Things like this always get me into such a tizzy. Sorry for that.) *I'm not trying to be demeaning or patronizing. The last time I was hit on by a drunk, I shoved him into a wall. He left me alone then. Wed, 9 Feb 2011 20:17:05 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/lgrin/2011/01/29/how-tv-shows-get-ruined-human-target/#IDComment126974512 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/lgrin/2011/01/29/how-tv-shows-get-ruined-human-target/#IDComment126969473 While that may be true, but I think it has more to do with the sort of females they put in it. I mean, whiny, useless rich girls? What are they thinking? They'd do much better with girls like, ahem, me, who at least like to hang out at the Bass Pro Shop shooting things and hate heels (if I want to run, I want to have the proper shoes). Or, say, a post-gang girl. They're pretty bloody brutal. Anything but those useless women characters. Actually, this could go for all television shows. I mean, they keep showing women who can only shuffle paperwork. Where are the supermoms that can handle jobs, kids, and make good wives? They don't exist. They only keep women around on TV half the time so they can strip 'em to get guys to watch, it seems. (American television needs actresses like Hermione Norris.) Oh, and I'm waiting for Guerrero to implode. I mean, he's awesome. He goes against the you-got-to-be-a-bodybuilder-to-be-tough thing and he acts like a guy. Well, no. He is more or less what I aspire to be, except in a non-criminal, more feminine way. Probably just because sarcasm is the language I love to speak. Anyway, can /anyone/ tell me why must they take my anti-heroes away? It's so bloody disappointing. I'll leave you alone now, but realize it isn't the fact they're females--it's because they're shallow characters and cliche females. Useless, fickle, and emotional. (I mean, butting in on the strategy? Do girls not play--oh, wait, no they don't play strategy war games meant for teens and adults at age three. Oops. I forget everything must be dumbed down and no one cares about Joan of Arc or Alexander the Great besides me. Or they're not supposed to--since that's weird.) Yeah. Sorry for my small rant. Did I go too Fem-Nazi on you? Probably. Eh. Wed, 9 Feb 2011 19:47:36 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/lgrin/2011/01/29/how-tv-shows-get-ruined-human-target/#IDComment126969473 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/hollywoodland/2011/02/03/fox-network-rejects-christian-super-bowl-ad/#IDComment126756524 You know, this makes me think of when I was when Salzburg. I was in a McDonald's (don't judge me) and there was a television playing a slide-show of Bible quotes. That is why I keep wanting to go back to Germany, or Austria--other than the weather is nicer, I don't feel like I have wet lungs, my face cleared up, plenty of open are and places to hike, and the food was delicious. Why haven't I moved there yet? Wait, right. It's not America. ...There's something wrong when Austria beats us out at being Christian. I mean, there are plenty of Catholics over there, but still. And they do it so classy. (And they had fun chairs at McDonald's. I will admit to being a kid. It was fun. And everything was clean. And the people who didn't speak English understood what I wanted better than the dead-eyed high school dropouts here. And stuff.) I'm biased, though. I had way too much fun on my last vacation. (But it was Oktoberfest so you seriously cannot judge me. At least I didn't get drunk once or dance on tables or talk to random people.) Yeah. I'll stop this shoddy "commercial" now. Still. (May we petition to get more Austrians to move to America? Or at least get McDonald's food places that have a classy side for coffee--like Starbucks coffee? And that has all sorts of fresh-baked goods? And more places I can go with my dog? And more bike trails? Gosh, I should really just move...) ...But I'm too much of a patriot to move... ...Why is my life filled with so much utter tragedy? (Imagine "utter tragedy" lit up with glittery rainbows and in clear sarcasm.) I have one point: America needs to get with the times. (Why do I have the weird feeling I'm going to get hate mail--just for this? Probably because I used too many parentheses.) Tue, 8 Feb 2011 20:49:38 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/hollywoodland/2011/02/03/fox-network-rejects-christian-super-bowl-ad/#IDComment126756524 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/cftoto/2011/02/07/interview-ptc-president-tim-winter-on-mtvs-skins-weve-only-begun-to-fight/#IDComment126751729 If I could somehow high-five you, I would. I mean, my family doesn't even have cable... And your last point hits the nail on the head. I read somewhere that some teens actually sent a thank you letter, telling a parental group that they were so pleased to have been introduced to the show. (Irony...at its best. Or worst.) Tue, 8 Feb 2011 20:25:05 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/cftoto/2011/02/07/interview-ptc-president-tim-winter-on-mtvs-skins-weve-only-begun-to-fight/#IDComment126751729 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/cftoto/2011/02/07/interview-ptc-president-tim-winter-on-mtvs-skins-weve-only-begun-to-fight/#IDComment126751281 Freedom only continues when people fight to uphold it. You are correct in saying freedom does not equal "Do whatever you want!". You have to fight for your own right to keep it and help others to get it, otherwise you will lose it, sooner or later, and those people you left to suffer will then become your enemies. However, you should remember that Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine were not Christians in the normal sense. One did not believe Christ rose from the dead (because it was "illogical") and the other was demonized by the church because he did not think the same things as they did. Which, going from this--"I believe in the equality of man; and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy." -Thomas Paine--that truly surprises me. Basically, one wasn't a true Christian and the other probably wouldn't be considered Christian in your mind. Yet, one wrote The Declaration of Independence and the other wrote Common Sense, a prewar igniter. My conclusion is this: To have freedom, you have to have a Christ-like mindset. You have to "love thy neighbor as thy self", thieves, murderers, and all else have to be punished. But you must remember Jesus walked among children, lepers, prostitute, and all of the "less liked" of old days. He was and is an equal opportunity savior. He forgives everything. It would be best to be Christian, true. But what defines Christian? To me, that would be accepting Jesus as your savior, believing in God, Christ, and everything from angels and devils (Satan included), and trying your hardest to act like the perfect person--Jesus Christ. However, many would not agree with that, I assume. Many would claim I'm not a Christian, or I belong to a cult, because I'm a nondenominational Christian. Catholics, Baptists, etc. believe in different things. Catholics almost worship Mary; Baptists tend to dislike dancing; etc. Some people, like the Amish, do not like photographs--claiming they're graven images. I'm not sure if I'm making a good point, so I'll just sum up everything: being Judeo-Christian is not simple. There are branches doing things others would find heresy. You can't judge people by your own values and you're not supposed to. God will judge everyone in the end, so just let Him. Turn the other cheek and all. Try to be understanding and sympathetic, if anything. I won't assume you're not, but try and not think that every Christian is "equal". We're equal to God, but I assume quite a few of us wouldn't agree with you. It's all subjective to a point, at least in minor things--especially as the Bible has been translated one too many times, or hacked up, by people who were trying to do "right". (At my church, women are allowed to wear dress pants and jeans; there's Christian music; and our pastor has talked about how the Holy Spirit isn't a spirit, as in a ghost or whatnot, but a helper and that the Latin word has no English translation--they basically just put "Holy Spirit" because it looked nice. We also talk about Revelations on occasion. In this paragraph, I assume you can spot things that bother you, or things you know would bother others.) Yeah. I'll end that here, so I don't get redundant. I just saw your posts and you're making an argument that can't stand, unless you take into account that you, as a person, cannot argue for all Christians. I, personally, do not support the show. I don't even have cable. And, as a kid, I wasn't even allowed to watch Jaws until I was eleven. I don't even understand this insanity half the time, because my parents would never just leave me alone to watch whatever I wanted. Heck, most times I was doing schoolwork, or feeding the animals. It honestly just bugs me that parents themselves aren't taking the time, at 10 p.m., to go and turn off the ruddy TV and talk about their kids about the wrong factor. Actually, they could use the show to show how bad drugs and such are and how idiotic and petty you become if you get caught up in it--use it as a lesson. "Don't do this because you could get pregnant, get your girlfriend pregnant, don't do drugs because you could easily die..." And, if they were my kids, I'd show them my heart medicine and explain how much a tiny little pill does; which is why they should never do drugs... There's so many possibilities to turn it around; make it into an anti-drug, anti-alcohol, etc. message. Oh well. I don't have children, so I can't say anything really. I do have a much younger sister and I try to keep her out of trouble, but that's all. Anyway, I actually will shut up now. (...And hope I don't get random hate mail.) Tue, 8 Feb 2011 20:22:06 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/cftoto/2011/02/07/interview-ptc-president-tim-winter-on-mtvs-skins-weve-only-begun-to-fight/#IDComment126751281