Open Thread Friday

BTW has anybody seen this yet?

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/beck_obama_boyco...

So which is better "Seven Samurai" or "The Magnificent Seven"?

Alexander was …to say the least a disappointment. It could have been a great movie, but devolved into a politically correct blur.

Horrible movie!! Incomprehensible!! Thanks for the chuckle!!!

and subtitles

Was it as awful as 'Troy'? I haven't seen it.
I did watch 'The Search For Alexander' back in '82, it starred Nicolas Clay and was narrated by James Mason. It was an excellent production in my opinion.

Granted, Alexander was no masterpiece, but the "final cut' released on DVD extends the opening and closing battle scenes, fleshing them out and making them actually quite stunning.

They gave this movie to Oliver Stone for the same reason they gave him that movie about 9/11 — to whitewash it and therefore make it saleable to politically correct foreign markets. No wonder those movies were so much cr@p.

I would have to say "Seven Samurai"…..of course, I'm a HUGE Akira Kurosawa fan

This film sucked fossilized dinosaur eggs. The fight scenes were good, but the plot was beyond deplorable. What else can you expect from Oliver Stone?

Of course, the fact that the posters were of Obama had nothing to do with the zeal of the police to hunt down this 'threat to society', would it?

Cris – end of life counseling is an easy give. Who needs to counsel if you just withold any treatment. The only acceptable health care bill takes the public option off the table and works on the other underlying costs such as federalizing forms, reporting, etc for private carriers. We would do bettter to blow up medicare and medicaid and let the taxpayers assist the poor with partial premium payments.

They can technically remove it from the legislation, but they can't remove the need. If government runs everything, they will have no choice.

I've heard estimates that around 80% of health care costs in America are spent on senior citizens and the chronically ill. In order to "save" money, they can not cut costs of healthy people, because healthy people don't really use health care, they simply pay insurance premiums. The only place to save money is to cut into that 80%. If they don't, the entire system goes bankrupt.

A couple of years ago Tom Daschle wrote (or hired a ghost writer, more likely) a book on national health care reform. That is why Obama initially selected him for health and human services, specifically to implement that plan.

Part of that plan was to appoint a council of so called experts (of course every politician is an expert, just ask them). That panel was to be charged with determining "best practices." Which is nothing more than a euphemism for what the government will pay for, and therefore, what it won't pay.

Currently the federal government has a commission that determines what a person's life is worth for each year of their life. They do that to help generate statistics for all kinds of other federal regulations. So this part is already in place.

I'll use round numbers to make the example easy. Suppose they decide the average life expectancy is 100 years, and a person's life is worth $100, or $10 a year. Which means when you are 20, your life is worth $80 to the federal government. And when you're 80 your life is worth $20 according to the federal government.

What happens when you're 80, worth $20, and you need a health care procedure that costs $50?

That is where this entire mess is headed.

Exactly! Besides do we REALLY believe that they will do what they say they will do at this point?

Unless there is a law against posting ALL posters, I consider this an expression of this person's (and my) free speech. No one ever did anything about all the anti-Bush crap we saw on cars, buildings, poles, etc. If I were this guy, I wouldn't have opened my mouth and got myself a good attorney who knows the constitution.

I haven't.

Every day I look at what's going on in this country and wonder when the dope-smokin' libs are going to wake up from the Obama 'pot party'.
Then I wake up.

Of course we do!

Just like we really believe that the dems and Obama truly care about our health care!

Thanks Jack. I am bringing my camera.

I just listened to Reagan. Thanks for that. He was so right. More videos/audios like this – but from today should be made.

— On Fri, 8/14/09, IntenseDebate Notifications <notifications@intensedebatemail.com> wrote:

Seven Samurai. Not … even … close.

The language in section 1233 in the House bill is so confusing (actually, the whole thing is a maze of legalese) and vague that it won't really matter what is excluded.

In the end, the whole bill gives power to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, who will make those decisions anyway.

The damning evidence against the Bill is the fact that the word "requirement" shows up over and over again, as does the word "adherence." Meanwhile, there's NO verbiage of the patient's right to choose, or deny anything the government says.

I won't sleep well until the whole public option is scrapped. Even then, Obama and his cronies will work in some kind of incremental attack on our freedom.

I'm weary of his face in any form.

and if that didn't really exist, what else is in that bill that doesn't really exist?

OK, two thumbs up for Sarah Palin in a chainmail bikini with a wolfskin cloak.

The only other elected official I'd pay to see dressed like that is Barney Frank. Well, that isn't really true. John Kerry would be pretty hilarious as well.

you've brought back fond memories of Judo training in my early years. Imagine a scrawny little 8 year old in class with much bigger 14 year olds. LOL story of my life.

Good, clear analysis. Thanks.

OK, three's the charm.

I just wrote, "Good, clear an_alysis, thanks" (without the spaceholder), and my post disappeared for admin approval. Twice in a row. This is idiotic.

Indeed, several ancient world movies were out at the time and this one stank all the way through. One makes good, "Gladiator", and Hollywood thinks it can get just throw together alot of crap and repeat the success.

Hey, leave Brad alone. Who would you have cast as 'Achilles'? That's pretty nearly an impossible role to play, I would think.

True. They can take out whatever they feel is a liability now and then just add it back in during reconcilliation. It is better not to give on anything and force them to kill this idea altogether.

What the heck kind of town do you live in? I've never heard of throwing paint on people, except in Key West during Fantasy Fest. And that's…different.

That's how Hollywood operates…..one film does well, and several copycats come out. Remember "Volcano", and then "Dante's Peak"? "Armageddon" versus "Deep Impact"? "A Bug's Life" versus "Antz"? Hollywood swings on "flavor of the Month" genres.

That's how Hollywood operates…..one film does well, and several copycats come out. Remember "Volcano", and then "Dante's Peak"? "Armageddon" versus "Deep Impact"? "A Bug's Life" versus "Antz"? Hollywood swings on "Flavor of the Month" genres.

Major Garrett is a modern warrior who is fighting the good fight against the evil pumpkinhead !

True, but when one is a machete-wielding stay-at-home-mom, it's still fun to watch

alot of this seems to be corporate spies or "Looking over the shoulder" rip offs.
It happens a lot wher two movies with similar topices come out in quick succession

it's good to chop things up in battle.

Better yet Florentine style!!!

Which is why the SIMPLEST "fix", to get those allegedly 50M un-insured (actually probably 25 M voluntarily-uninsured and 5M truly "uninsurable") into a program is not what they're working on.

This is about control and everyone except the ideologues KNOWS it.

Let it stay forgotten. It's not a good movie. Go see Titus Andronicus instead.

Samurai. Mag 7 is kitsch in comparison.

"Any Given Sunday" is still a lot of fun to me…one of my top guilty pleasures. Over-the-top Pacino is great, support by Ann-Margaret and Charlton Heston, and the revelation at the time that Jamie Foxx could actually act…ok, I LOVE that movie!!

I've only seen that one of hers. Great sets, great interpretation, excellent casting. Felt a little sorry for Anthony Hopkins, though- got another role where he's serving up human flesh to unsuspecting guests!

Very, VERY true…..I'm still gagging over the way my sister ordered a cosmo a few months back: "I saw the drink on 'Sex and the City' and I just HAVE to have one!"

That was the first time I ever ordered Knob Creek, straight….

Hah! Grey Goose, straight up, for me. Keep it simple, baby.

For BH"s Proud Texans!

http://corner.nationalreview.com/

'Political Correctness,' Texas style [Michael Ledeen]

A friend e-mails to say that Texas A & M has an annual contest for the best definition of a contemporary expression. This year it was "political correctness." And here's the winner:

Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

It wasn't 'The Iliad'. It was "inspired" by a work of Homer or something like that.

I'm one of those people who just doesn't "get" the Beatles. I respect their success, and I respect other people's appreciation of them, but personally, their music doesn't do anything for me.

I like the use of music in Donnie Darko. And the "sequel", Southland Tales. O Brother, Where Art Thou? was inventive also.

Hear, hear!

I have NEVER heard that expression, but I will certainly use it whenever possible!