en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/351530 Comments by danebramage http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/kschlichter/2010/06/10/sting-and-soros-hook-up-for-a-duet-of-pro-drug-stupidity/#IDComment79476440 If Drugs are an evil so great that they should be withheld from free people, then what the hell is Leftism? Many millions more have been killed by Leftists than have ever been killed by Drugs. Thu, 10 Jun 2010 14:53:44 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/kschlichter/2010/06/10/sting-and-soros-hook-up-for-a-duet-of-pro-drug-stupidity/#IDComment79476440 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ggutfeld/2009/10/14/daily-gut-why-the-white-house-hates-fox-news/#IDComment38796600 Because in Leftyland, counting is a skill reserved for the gifted. Thu, 15 Oct 2009 08:46:40 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ggutfeld/2009/10/14/daily-gut-why-the-white-house-hates-fox-news/#IDComment38796600 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ggutfeld/2009/10/14/daily-gut-why-the-white-house-hates-fox-news/#IDComment38795921 They should make a 1980-82 reunion mega-concert featuring Loverboy, Survivor, April Wine, and Billy Squier. They could call it Monsters of Suck. Thu, 15 Oct 2009 08:34:36 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ggutfeld/2009/10/14/daily-gut-why-the-white-house-hates-fox-news/#IDComment38795921 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/10/12/russell-simmons-god-will-destory-us-if-we-dont-follow-barack/#IDComment38514176 More than you think, Old_Tom, if Hannibal Lector is right: According to him, we covet what we see every day... Tue, 13 Oct 2009 11:43:52 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/10/12/russell-simmons-god-will-destory-us-if-we-dont-follow-barack/#IDComment38514176 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/10/12/russell-simmons-god-will-destory-us-if-we-dont-follow-barack/#IDComment38507842 I can't understand where that comment is coming from? Are you a director who just knows he could do better? Are you a bigger-than-his-britches film school student trying to awe everyone with your teacher's sophistication? Are you an amateur film fan who thinks anything more substantial than B-grade zombie flicks is pretentious and boring? It's difficult to judge whether you're even worth engaging on the subject unless you give us some clue. In any event, you couldn't be more wrong (in my opinion, of course). ApNow isn't the best film ever made, but it's absolutely ridiculous to rank it among the worst. If it happens to be on TV somewhere (un-hacked), I'll generally choose watching it for the gazillionth time over watching practically any movie made today for the SECOND time. It may be that I just have lousy taste in movies, but I have a DVD library that I think would pass muster with most serious critics. And ApNow is definitely in it. P.S. Sorry, can't let this pass. You're right that Duvall was great, but he also played a particularly flamboyant and memorable character in a movie full of them. When I look at ApNow I can't spot a bad performance in the bunch, with the possible exception of Brando, who chews up the scenery, spits it out, then picks it back up and chews it a little more. But Colonel Kurtz is intended to be an enormous, pompous, twisted train wreck of a man, so in the end he fits, or can be made to fit, the story. P.P.S. I like the original cut. I don't care for the longer version at all. If that's the one you're talking about, I'd be more inclined to agree with you, although I still wouldn't go that far. Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:09:01 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/10/12/russell-simmons-god-will-destory-us-if-we-dont-follow-barack/#IDComment38507842 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/10/12/russell-simmons-god-will-destory-us-if-we-dont-follow-barack/#IDComment38505360 It actually makes perfect sense...when applied to the Left. Whether you call their fictional account of the world a "narrative" or a "story," they *will* in the end be very abruptly de-storied and given that non-refundable membership to the swim team down in Fire Lake they all seem to want so badly. Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:17:09 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/10/12/russell-simmons-god-will-destory-us-if-we-dont-follow-barack/#IDComment38505360 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/09/28/round-up-of-hollywoods-polanski-supporters/#IDComment36495649 I imagine Mumia Abu Jamal must be pretty pissed off right about now that Polanski's stealing all his supporters. I mean, cop killers are one thing, but a child rapist? Now there's a man all good libertines can really get behind. Sorry Mumia. I see marchers marching, pasty fists punching at the sky: "Free Roman!" "Free Roman!" Candles sway to and fro in the twilight: "We shall overcome..." The patron saint of Baby Boom leftists is invoked: "Imagine there's no rape laws..." Sigh. Hollywood is so fond of remakes... Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:38:34 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/09/28/round-up-of-hollywoods-polanski-supporters/#IDComment36495649 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/bighollywood/2009/09/28/whoopi-defends-polanski-it-wasnt-rape-rape/#IDComment36486959 I think dum-dum needs to get a brain-brain so her ass won't be so fat-fat from holding all that hot air-air. I wonder if anyone can dig up any of Whoopi's commentary on the priestly abuse scandals? For some strange reason, I don't recall her drawing the same distinctions or demonstrating such magnanimity in those cases, even though they were similar in many ways, and in many (most?) instances lacking in the whole drugging aspect that makes Polanski's particularly vile. Tue, 29 Sep 2009 14:08:02 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/bighollywood/2009/09/28/whoopi-defends-polanski-it-wasnt-rape-rape/#IDComment36486959 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jziegler/2009/09/28/why-were-the-emmys-not-racist/#IDComment36348501 It seems to me you're making an argument for the NEA and public television, John, if private enterprise and the profit motive tend to produce the fragmentation you decry. Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:24:31 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jziegler/2009/09/28/why-were-the-emmys-not-racist/#IDComment36348501 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jziegler/2009/09/28/why-were-the-emmys-not-racist/#IDComment36347715 Seems to me you're forgetting Jimmy "Dynomite!" Walker, Flip "Here Comes Da Judge" Wilson, Rerun & Company from "That's My Mama," etc. I don't have anything against these performers, I just think you've got your rose-colored glasses on if you think there weren't self-consciously black characters on the networks during that time period (or maybe I've misunderstood your point?). They certainly weren't stereotypes (although Redd Foxx in Sanford & Son came distastefully close), but it was pretty hard to miss the fact that they were black--sometimes militantly so. I think things are much better and much healthier today. There's not much "Us and Them" left on TV. For the most part, blacks on television have assimilated into the mainstream of society and no one thinks much about it any more. Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:19:54 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jziegler/2009/09/28/why-were-the-emmys-not-racist/#IDComment36347715 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2009/09/27/ny-times-public-editor-discusses-papers-slow-reflexes-on-acorn-scandal/#IDComment36326568 In her "things are not what they seem" explanation, what I take Miss Abramson to be saying is, they've got ten people assigned to scour the liberal blogs for news, but none available for the conservative blogs. Therefore, it's simply a manpower problem. As soon as they can scrape up the money for ten special-abilities, high-school part-timers, they'll be all over it. Mon, 28 Sep 2009 07:01:10 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2009/09/27/ny-times-public-editor-discusses-papers-slow-reflexes-on-acorn-scandal/#IDComment36326568 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2009/09/27/ny-times-public-editor-discusses-papers-slow-reflexes-on-acorn-scandal/#IDComment36325435 It will be interesting to see what happens if they try it, since the only conceivable way they could turn into profitable businesses would be if they abandoned their biased practices. But to do that would no be in Obama's favor, so it's not likely he'd push them in that direction. What's left? The Internet excuse? Most papers already have an Internet presence. If iit's failing them now, how's it going to save them after a bailout? There's also the First Amendment question. Assuming a government bailout brings with it strings attached, how far is that legal? Can Obama order a paper to do anything? In any case, no sane American is going to credit a single word such a paper has to say, so again there's no real possibility of a turnaround. Seems an awful tough sell to me...of course, that's if they bother to ask us. My ammo's ready, too. Mon, 28 Sep 2009 06:36:03 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2009/09/27/ny-times-public-editor-discusses-papers-slow-reflexes-on-acorn-scandal/#IDComment36325435 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2009/09/27/ny-times-public-editor-discusses-papers-slow-reflexes-on-acorn-scandal/#IDComment36324638 It's not a trinity, it's a gang of four: you left out Rich. Mon, 28 Sep 2009 06:17:42 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2009/09/27/ny-times-public-editor-discusses-papers-slow-reflexes-on-acorn-scandal/#IDComment36324638 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2009/09/27/ny-times-public-editor-discusses-papers-slow-reflexes-on-acorn-scandal/#IDComment36324022 I can't speak for all conservatives, but it's certainly not true of any I know, and I live in a suburb of Lalaland. No one I know preferred Obama over Hillary--and don't start in with any of that "yeah, because she's white" crap. It was because Hillary's a liberal (an unmasked and spayed, somewhat domesticated leftist) and a known quantity, while Obama was clearly a sleeper, aiming to slip into office under false pretenses, unchallenged by the press, before springing his trap. And that's what happened. Mon, 28 Sep 2009 06:04:52 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2009/09/27/ny-times-public-editor-discusses-papers-slow-reflexes-on-acorn-scandal/#IDComment36324022 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ckozlowski/2009/09/27/big-hollywood-interview-quentin-tarantino-a-glorious-basterd/#IDComment36279045 I was just being a smartass. I haven't seen it, but I might someday. I'm not a huge Tarantino fan. Word that Russell's in it is a big plus in its favor, though. Sun, 27 Sep 2009 20:42:46 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ckozlowski/2009/09/27/big-hollywood-interview-quentin-tarantino-a-glorious-basterd/#IDComment36279045 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ckozlowski/2009/09/27/big-hollywood-interview-quentin-tarantino-a-glorious-basterd/#IDComment36232591 Um, no. I believe Tarantino was the other one. Sun, 27 Sep 2009 15:02:05 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ckozlowski/2009/09/27/big-hollywood-interview-quentin-tarantino-a-glorious-basterd/#IDComment36232591 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/sright/2009/09/26/latest-nea-controversy-isnt-the-first/#IDComment36187244 Only a leftist creates art to "enrich the culture"--i.e. for the sake of the collective. A true artist creates for himself--simply for art's sake and beauty's sake--and would do no differently were he completely alone on the planet. The true artist feels compelled to express something he perceives within himself that is inexpressible in words alone. The leftist, on the other hand, trades in the mundane and the ordinary, getting it all backwards, or perhaps sideways. He begins with what is easily expessible in words (e.g. "capitalism is evil") and then attempts to render that profound by dressing it up in colors and sounds. In this way he hopes to impress the more stupid and shallow among his fellow citizens and thereby bring about political change. In contrast to the true artist, were the leftist alone on the planet, such activities as he calls "art" would never even cross his mind. This just points up the inherently leftist roots of the NEA. No true conservative could have ever conceived of such an agency, because the very notion flies directly in the face of nature; that is, of the nature of true art and the reasons (the necessary conditions) for its existence. Sun, 27 Sep 2009 04:57:50 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/sright/2009/09/26/latest-nea-controversy-isnt-the-first/#IDComment36187244 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/bshapiro/2009/09/25/new-white-house-guidelines-are-pathetic-revisionist-history/#IDComment35909542 I find it remarkable that the Constitution of the United States is such a dead letter today that no one even bothers to point out that what's going on at the NEA is one of the primary reasons the Federal Government was and is STRICTLY PROHIBITED FROM CREATING SUCH AN AGENCY IN THE FIRST PLACE. Now, I realize that, as much as we might wish that the Supreme Court would back us on a challenge to the Government's authority to openly and with utter contempt defy the law, nevertheless I would have expected people calling themselves "conservative," presumably with a straight face and no sense of irony, to have picked up Ronald Reagan's fallen standard by now and begun clamoring for the NEA be shut down posthaste. Such clamor would, as I say, almost certainly come to nothing and be "just for show," but show is important where first principles of the law are being violated. To let the point pass in silence is to concede victory to the enemy--that selfsame enemy which the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constutution were intended to protect us from. Conservatives--true conservatives--understand implicitly that men cannot be trusted to wield the awesome power of government justly and according to the law. Conservatives have always been baffled by the existence of their opposite number--liberals--who appear completely incapable of admitting so basic and obvious a truth. Yet when a teachable moment arrives--a clear and present opportunity to show the world what happens when great power is waved before the noses of low people--conservatives say nothing, instead aping their opponents and talking about refoming the institution and whatnot. Why? Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:20:06 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/bshapiro/2009/09/25/new-white-house-guidelines-are-pathetic-revisionist-history/#IDComment35909542 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/pcourrielche/2009/09/24/statement-on-the-recording-of-the-august-10-nea-conference-call/#IDComment35890190 Lol! Yes, Pat, be afraid. Be very afraid. Remember what happened to Fredo when he betrayed the Family, But this Donkey Party tool posing as a police officer does make a good point: left-wing sophists and their allies on the bench have succeeded in corrupting the laws in this country to the point where the innocent are often punished and the guilty protected. This is true tenfold in areas dominated by leftists in government, such as California, which means you could very easily find yourself on the receiving end of a Soviet-style political prosecution. On the other hand, only the most deluded of wishful thinkers could possibly still believe, given every indicator to the contrary, that the American people are in either the malleable condition or the mood to be persuaded that the real bad guy in all of this is you, Pat. Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:39:33 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/pcourrielche/2009/09/24/statement-on-the-recording-of-the-august-10-nea-conference-call/#IDComment35890190 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jmeath/2009/09/19/tina-fey-downright-mean/#IDComment35127242 "It's because of Tina Fey's charicature on SNL." No way. Fey doesn't have that kind of reach. Even granting all the publicity she got from the MSM, it was the MSM itself and its toadies in the opinion journals and on newspaper editorial pages who were most responsible for the "Sarah Gump" narrative's success. Sat, 19 Sep 2009 22:25:03 +0000 http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jmeath/2009/09/19/tina-fey-downright-mean/#IDComment35127242