Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Coaxial

WHEDON/KERRY PARTY!Hannigan! Brendon! Acker! Denisof! Fillion! Benson! Richards! Lenk! Strong! Busch! You!

I am – Hercules!!

Sunday! Sunday! Sunday!

October 24, 2004!

This Sunday's “High Stakes” L.A. is suddenly and officially a much bigger deal than last year’s “Buffy Bash.”

Joss Whedon is coming!!

The mastermind behind “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” “Angel” and “Firefly” is himself making a non-telephonic appearance at the Los Angeles “High Stakes” event. He will make “the conference call” to all the other “High Stakes” parties around the nation from the L.A. party at 2 p.m. PT/5 p.m. ET.

It gets better.

Joss is bringing:
* Alyson Hannigan (Willow Rosenberg),
* Nicholas Brendon (Xander Harris),
* Amy Acker (Winifred Burkle/Illyria),
* Alexis Denisof (Wesley Wyndam-Pryce),
* Nathan Fillion (Caleb/Mal Reynolds),
* Amber Benson (Tara Maclay)
* J. August Richards (Charles Gunn),
* Tom Lenk (nerd of doom Andrew Wells),
* Danny Strong (nerd of doom Jonathan Levinson),
* Adam Busch (nerd of doom Warren Meers),
* probably a bunch of the shows' other big-deal writers,
* and more!!

You may be able to come to the L.A. event too, if you RSVP before 6 p.m. Saturday.

(You can still show up on Sunday, but if you do so without a response to your RSVP, there's no guarantee you're getting in ... )

RSVP here already!!!

Some background:

“High Stakes,” for those who missed our post last Sunday, is a nationwide network of Joss Whedon fans hosting and participating in Kerry-Edwards fundraisers on Sunday afternoon.

At 2 p.m. (PT), all the parties will be linked by Joss’ mighty voice on a conference call. He says he will definitely discuss “X3.” A few lucky partygoers – one perhaps from each shindig - will get to annoy Joss with an intrusive question.

WHEN?
The L.A. version of “High Stakes” runs from 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

WHERE?

CineSpace
6356 Hollywood Blvd., 2nd floor
Los Angeles, CA 90028

CAN I COME?

Yes. Kindly click here for the constantly updated list of all the parties, which range in size from dozens to a hundred (and several hundred in the case of the L.A. event).

WHAT’S THIS GONNA COST ME?

Minimum Contribution: $50 At the Door
Complimentary Light Hors d’oeuvres
Cash Bar

I CAN’T GET TO L.A. ON SUNDAY!! HOW DO I GET INTO ONE OF THE CONFERENCE-CALL PARTIES??

At this writing, there are already more than 30 parties in place across the nation, with new ones popping up by the minute. (One hears “High Stakes Silicon Valley” will be a particularly slamming affair, and at the moment there's still room for a couple dozen more.) Find the constantly-updated list here.

But the “High Stakes” organizers want more. There are sad, orphan-y “Buffy” and “Firefly” fans who do not yet have a party in their city. Quoth the “High Stakes” site:

“We're particularly looking for hosts in the following locations: Albuquerque, Philadelphia, Minneapolis (our party there is full and we need another one), Raleigh, Phoenix, Fairfield, Iowa, anywhere in Nevada, Louisiana, Nebraska & New Jersey.”

Anyone can host a party anywhere (most are situated in residences, and the “High Stakes” organizers want a lot more parties organized. Learn, like Herc, how to have your very own by clicking here.

UPDATE!! If you can't find a High Stakes party near you, you can now email questions@highstakes2004.com and the national organizers will try to match you up.

Jennifer Borse, busily whipping up the big Chicago party, says she's still got room for 50 or more!! Don't waffle, Buffy-loving Chicagoland liberals! You know this is going to be the blast of blasts!!





Have authorities question your worthiness as a parent! Purchase your Herc snapbib here!

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:08 a.m. CST

    Party on!

    by tbrosz

    Sounds really cool. It makes me almost regret that Bush is going to beat Kerry in a landslide.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:09 a.m. CST

    LAY OFF THE POLITICS!

    by stlfilmwire

    If I WANT POLITICS, I'LL GO TO CNN.COM. AND NO, I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:14 a.m. CST

    No, gimme more politics!!

    by Dannychico

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:17 a.m. CST

    Wow, yeah, that's a great idea

    by chrth

    Pro-Kerry bash in California. Where he'll win. Easy. Without anybody appearing. STUPIDEST. CAMPAIGN. EVER. I'm not even a Republican.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:25 a.m. CST

    The Funds can be used outside of California.

    by Hercules

    Like in FLORIDA! PENNSYLVANIA!OHIO! MICHIGAN!! NORTH CAROLINA! VIRGINIA! TENNESSEE! MISSOURI!! WASHINGTON!! WISCONSIN!! ARIZONA!! COLORADO!! OREGON!! IOWA!! YEEEEE-HAAAAAAAA!!

  • Psych.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:32 a.m. CST

    Have you read Bush's tax reform plan?

    by KazamaSmokers

    Do you like your mortgage interest tax deduction? Yeah? Well, get ready to kiss it goodbye if Bush is re-elected, because his tax reform plan trashes the mortgage deduction... suckers.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:40 a.m. CST

    "WHEN WILL HOLLYWOOD NUTBAGS REALIZE NO ONE GIVES A FUCK WHAT TH

    by Voice O. Reason

    Like Arnold Schwarzenneger?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:45 a.m. CST

    ramboman , et al

    by Dr Farragammo

    oh boy, here we go again. ramboman says some remark that shows the maturity level of a zygote. Yeah hollywood nutbags like dear departed Ronnie, who quoted your namesake like he was a real character. Bush is the worst but Ronnie set the tone for all you right wing kooks. I just love the fact you guys are all upset about whedon and his fundraiser. Go have one of your own, oh yeah, your dude has more in his warchest than any candidate in political history. Jeez he could have helped alleviate the debt by alloting half his campaign fees toward the deficit. But this a guy whose own relatives are voting against him, so obviously his has no tact or depth or a fucking clue. but you guys have it all figured out because you've read up on your coulter and hannity hate manuals. morons.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:49 a.m. CST

    i digress

    by Dr Farragammo

    whoops I rushed through that and see some fuckups in my post. Oh well, you guys can have a false sense of superiority with that one. It's my gift to you. Anybody want some wood??

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:07 a.m. CST

    A Bush-lovin Buffyverse fan's brain is going to short circuit an

    by Tall_Boy

    Whats . . .the frequency . . . Kenneth . . .?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:20 a.m. CST

    tall boy....rather quote

    by Dr Farragammo

    Now THAT is a film that needs to be made, a biopic on Rather, That guy has been involved in some of the freakiest , random shit ever. Remember when he used to end his broadcasts by saying "courage", until his boss demanded he quit??Who would you cast? But yeah I look forward to the dvd burnings by these maladaptive freaks. Jesus, how shallow has this society become?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:24 a.m. CST

    SMG wouldn't go...

    by Tenguman

    She and Freddie Prinze Jr are voting for Bush... at least that's what I read.

  • your trade debt is about to explode your national debt is out of control do you have any idea what that means?china is now the worlds power house your US ego blows the rest of the world away man bushes ego every time I see him on tv I can't believe you guys are buying his shit.Do you know why canada always votes liberal because last time we voted in a right wing born again christian he almost fucked our country and we are watching you make all the same mistakes.I love the US but man you guys are heading for a brick wall. it is very hard to watch.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:35 a.m. CST

    I see nothing wrong with a few political talk-backs . . .

    by HarrisonsDad

    . . . I believe its good for the soul. As far as I'm concerned, I think Harry should add a permanent "Ain't It Cool Politics" section to the site. I'd be more than willing to devote a few of my hours each week to reporting on how things are going around the nation (and the world) politically. You guys need to chill out . . . there are plenty of Film, TV, and Comic Book columns to go around.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:47 a.m. CST

    COURAGE

    by Tall_Boy

    We all need that to get through this crap.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:54 a.m. CST

    Damn...

    by Johnny Smith

    ...really wish I could make it to the Brooklyn party. You other NY Whedon fans/Bush bashers party it up for me, OK? I'll be there in spirit.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 2:23 a.m. CST

    did all of you totally ignore that Whedon is going to talk about

    by allnamesaretaken

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 2:47 a.m. CST

    the polls, the polls, blah blah blah...one thing bushies will ne

    by Dr Farragammo

    What about all the new voters lining up in droves to get bush out? What about the democratic registration up thru the fucking roof? What about these polls being meaningless because they won't poll anyone with their cell phone as their primary phone or any newly registered voter. You guys are SO outta touch here it's not funny. I've brought this up a million times and it's never been acknowledged by any of ya.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:07 a.m. CST

    Not SMG or Emma Caulfield

    by EveKendall

    They're not gonna be the mysterious "possible guest actresses" at this bash. I'm pretty sure both of those actresses are Republicans.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:27 a.m. CST

    In the imortal words of Dr. McCoy

    by Falcon5768

    Canabalnun... I'd pay good money for you to shut up.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:38 a.m. CST

    Regardless of who wins...

    by Monkey Butler

    and I now have a very bad feeling that Bush will, Bush still shouldn't be in power. It's as simple as that - democrats/liberals won't be proved "wrong" if Bush is returned, it'll just be proven that the majoirty of voters (why the hell don't you have mandatory voting?), or rather, the majority of the states, actually swallow the administration's bullshit.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:18 a.m. CST

    Bush has NOT "tried his best to serve the best interests of Amer

    by Sidious-1138

    He has ROYALLY fucked up the economy, the war on terror, the war in Iraq, world relations, the envirnoment...man, I can't go on. If any reasonable person still believes in him after the tons of easily found information and facts that have surfaced to the contrary in the past year, then obviously I can't convince them in this post. God help us if he wins, we can't take four more years......And btw, whoever said there are no Team America reviews, do you actually read this site?? There have been several, do a search. And for the record, while liberals are called pussies in the film, neo-cons are called assholes...which would you rather stick your dick in?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:35 a.m. CST

    Spoiler warning?

    by Bart of Darkness

    What???? Also, yet another desperate attempt to mention Joss Whedon I see. Why not go the whole hog and say "Buffy for President?" At least you'd get the Wiccan and Valley Girl vote!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:42 a.m. CST

    HA HA HA! You're killing me!!! "High Stakes L.A. is suddenly a

    by Triumph poops!

    Wow! Is that even POSSIBLE???? You mean a "much bigger deal" than Whedon dweebs and dorks getting together to fawn as unified, tasteless dolts over a TV show that sucked so badly and was such a hack job of writing and acting that it should have been cancelled after the pilot aired? In other words, by "bigger deal" Herc means this latest Whedon lovefest is an event one micron UP...from utter shit. By the way, Libs, Bush IS going to win -- Whedon will once again be shown to be a master of staging events that completely suck and flop (for a future example of this, go see the MST3K-like laughable SERENITY movie which will exude more of Whedon's silly "girl power" or some other ridiculous societal message that this clown is trying to ram down people's throats) -- and the BEST thing about a Bush victory (that is, besides us Republican continuing to rule the universe) will be re-starting the clock and getting a fresh 4 years to mock your worthless, clueless, cowardly, insanely stupid Lib asses all over again. Can't wait!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:17 a.m. CST

    VOTE OR SUCK

    by dr.bulber

    i vote for buffy. yay. the joss vote: 1. bush and kerry angry at each other. fight one another. hate one another. 2. kerry gets elected. 3. kerry goes to washington, bush goes to texas. 4. bush and kerry miss one another. 5. bush and kerry get back together. 6. bush and kerry have make-up sex. 7. terrorists give up, are introduced to female power. 8. peace and love and happiness all over the world. 9. sun goes super nova. 10. i think this whole last one is a "filler"

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 6:45 a.m. CST

    User_Id:

    by Monkey Butler

    You're missing the fire because of the smoke - we have mandatory voting in Australia, and sure, you get donkey voters and people you just don't vote, but the point is, if you have to vote, the people you can't really make up their minds are forced to. They can't just sit back and refuse to commit because they're afraid they'll do the wrong thing... well guess what? By not voting, you're already doing the wrong thing! You want America to not be shit, then do something about it! And since when have Americans ever been able to admit to being incompetant at anything? Acknowledgement of ignorance isn't the reason most people don't vote in the US, it's laziness and an acceptance of the status quo.>>> And why would you expect the bitching to stop after the election (you're probably right though, Bush looks likely to win IMO)? As I already said, just because he's voted in again, doesn't mean what he's done and is doing is right! The problem with people is that they percieve an election to be a competition, where whoever gets into power is automatically vindicated of all their decisions. But it's not like that, and when Bush gets returned he'll still be the same unintelligent, arrogant, xenophobic, environmentally and economically inept puppet that he is now.>>> And finally, how is mandatory voting the first step on the way to socialism? Why haven't any other countries that have mandatory voting fallen to socialism and communism (oh yeah, I forgot, you guys saved us from the red peril in Vietnam)? And what is it exactly that you hate about socialism? The lack of acceptance of individual rights/freedoms/ownerships? Can't be, because they've all been taken away under the democratic US political system too...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 7:16 a.m. CST

    Any Republicans see themselves in this post?

    by ol' painless

    Scored this articale at www.salon.com "Even if they don't like to say it out loud, lots of Democrats think that George Bush's supporters are a horde of ignoramuses. Now comes evidence that they're right! A remarkable new report, titled "The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters," from PIPA, the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, suggests that rank and file Republicans are more benighted than even the most supercilious coastal elitist would imagine. Analyzing data from a series of nationwide polls, the report finds that a majority of Bush supporters believe things about the world that are objectively untrue, while the majority of Kerry supporters dwell in the reality-based community. For example, Bush backers largely think that the president and his policies are popular internationally. Seventy-five percent believe that Iraq was providing "substantial" aid to al-Qaida, and 63 percent say clear evidence of this has been found. That, of course, would be news even to Donald Rumsfeld, who earlier this month told the Council on Foreign Relations, "To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two." Though its language is dispassionate, the report lays responsibility for this epidemic of ignorance at the White House's door. "So why are Bush supporters clinging so tightly to these beliefs in the face of repeated disconfirmations?" it asks. "Apparently one key reason is that they continue to hear the Bush administration confirming these beliefs." Indeed, it says, "an overwhelming 82% [of Bush supporters] perceive the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63%) or a major WMD program (19%). Only 16% of Bush supporters perceive the administration as saying that Iraq had some limited activities, but not an active program (15%) or had nothing (1%). The pattern on al Qaeda is similar. Seventy-five percent of Bush supporters think the Bush administration is currently saying Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda (56%) or even that it was directly involved in 9/11 (19%). Further, 55% of Bush supporters say it is their impression the Bush administration is currently saying the US has found clear evidence Saddam Hussein was working closely with al Qaeda (not saying clear evidence found: 37%)." These people aren't going to be swayed by the argument that Bush has alienated America's allies and left the country isolated in the world, because they don't believe this to be the case. "Despite a steady flow of official statements, public demonstrations, and public opinion polls showing that the US war against Iraq is quite unpopular, only 31% of Bush supporters recognize that the majority of people in the world oppose the US having gone to war with Iraq," the study says. Bush supporters also think that world public opinion favors Bush's reelection. In a poll taken from Sept. 3-7, the study says, "57% of Bush supporters assumed that the majority of people in the world would prefer to see Bush reelected, 33% assumed that views are evenly divided and only 9% assumed that Kerry would be preferred." In fact, a PIPA study released in early September found that a majority or plurality of people from 32 countries preferred Kerry to Bush. PIPA surveyed 34,330 people, ages 15 and above, from regions all over the world. A Pew poll released this spring similarly found that "large majorities in every country, except for the U.S., hold an unfavorable opinion of Bush." Bush supporters are also mistaken about the president's own positions (a pattern of misapprehension that an earlier PIPA report also documented). "Majorities incorrectly assumed that Bush supports multilateral approaches to various international issues -- the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (69%), the treaty banning land mines (72%); 51% incorrectly assumed he favors US participation in the Kyoto treaty -- the principal international accord on global warming ... Only 13% of supporters are aware that he opposes labor and environmental standards in trade agreements -- 74% incorrectly believe that he favors including labor and environmental standards in agreements on trade. In all these cases, there is a recurring theme: majorities of Bush supporters favor these positions, and they infer that Bush favors them as well." According to the report, this reality gap is something new in American life. "So why do Bush supporters show such a resistance to accepting dissonant information?" it asks. "While it is normal for people to show some resistance, the magnitude of the denial goes beyond the ordinary. Bush supporters have succeeded in suppressing awareness of the findings of a whole series of high-profile reports about prewar Iraq that have been blazoned across the headlines of newspapers and prompted extensive, high-profile and agonizing reflection. The fact that a large portion of Americans say they are unaware that the original reasons that the US took military action -- and for which Americans continue to die on a daily basis -- are not turning out to be valid, are probably not due to a simple failure to pay attention to the news." The analysis says that the roots of this denial could lie in the trauma of 9/11 and people's desire to hold on to their image of Bush as a "capable protector." It offers no guidance, though, on how ordinary Republicans might be coaxed back to reality. And while "The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters" may be perversely satisfying to Democrats in its confirmation of blue-state prejudices, it carries a pretty disturbing question for all rational Americans: How can arguments based on fact prevail in a nation where so many people know so little?"

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 7:27 a.m. CST

    ol' painless makes good points

    by Bart of Darkness

    But when you're dealing with people so blinkered by their own fanaticism as the Bush supporting cretins on this forum, I doubt if reality can make any headway with them. Speaking as someone from "the rest of the world" the last thing I want to see is George "puppet on a string" Bush back in the White House. The man's an imbecile.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 7:39 a.m. CST

    Whomever wins-

    by RenoNevada2000

    It's going to be by a gnat's asshair. Those who think Bush is going to win by a landslide are living in a fantasy world. Drink your Kool-Aid kids.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 7:40 a.m. CST

    Transcript Herc?

    by RenoNevada2000

    Any chance there'll be a transcript posted of the teleconference with all the geekery details about X3, etc?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 7:50 a.m. CST

    I'm a Democrat, and I disagree with that Salon article...

    by SmarkJobber

    ...or at least this part: "Even if they don't like to say it out loud, lots of Democrats think that George Bush's supporters are a horde of ignoramuses." I happen to love pointing out the idiocy of Bushites -- though I will contend that those who are still undecided about this election are even stupider for not being able to recognize the evil of Rev. Bush.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 8:01 a.m. CST

    "I happen to love pointing out the idiocy of Bushites"

    by zacdilone

    And in that quote, ladies and gentlemen, we find a wonderfully succinct example of what's wrong with America today.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 9:17 a.m. CST

    Canadian question

    by m2298

    Skiff -- Being a blinkered American, I'm really not up on my Canadian politics. The only "right wing born again christian" type I can think of is Stockwell Day, and he didn't win the 2000 federal election. So who exactly "almost f***ed" [your] country"?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 9:37 a.m. CST

    Only Way I Vote for Kerry

    by Itchy

    Only way I vote for Kerry is if Whedon can convince Sarah Michelle to come tag team me with Michelle Trachtenberg. Even then I probably couldn't do it. I love these events because the more these under-educated, out of touch freaks get out their bullhorns and spout their non-sensical liberal tripe, the more "real Americans" vote Republican .... so bring it on, morons !!!!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 9:42 a.m. CST

    by TheDarkShape

    Thanks Itchy, for the funniest post in a long while.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 9:44 a.m. CST

    "Pro-Kerry bash in California. Where he'll win. Easy." Um...i

    by minderbinder

    Fund raiser. They're raising money, which will be used for ads in swing states. And I don't get why people say it will be a landslide. If it were, why have the polls been so consistenly close? Sure, I'll admit Bush has the edge at this point, but just barely. And historically, last minute undecideds tend to vote against the incumbent - the incumbent virtually always does worse in the election than in the polls leading up to it (whether he wins or not). If you think your guy's gonna win, that's nice, but making predictions like 60/40 just sets you up to look like an ass.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 9:59 a.m. CST

    Really, whatever Cannibal Nun is on, I'll have some to......

    by Big_Bubbaloola

    That man has to be on some really serious crack!!! That first post here, what a trip!!!!!!! It is true what it said eariler, most Bushites still think Saddam had something to do with Al Queida (sp!). He didn't...ok!! There has been exactly zilch evidence to prove he has. Same eith the WMD's. And please don't trot out that hoary old excuse that the reason we went to war was because it was to save the people of Iraq. I would love to see Bushie Baby punted out of the Oval Office, but with it being too close to call, and Kerry increasingly being made to look a 2 stone weakling, i'm afraid it looks more than likely it's gonna be 4 more years!!!! You gotta hand it to the Republicans, they do know how to campaign and stirup the shit!!!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:02 a.m. CST

    zacdilone...

    by SmarkJobber

    Exactly what is wrong with confronting Republicans with facts that conflict with their misguided beliefs? It hwurts pwecious fweelwings? I consider snapping the ignorant out of Bush's trance a public service.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:12 a.m. CST

    "will celebrities keep up this same fever pitch of uncreative, u

    by minderbinder

    ...when does Arnold's term expire again?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:24 a.m. CST

    ol' Painless . . . .

    by HarrisonsDad

    Its almost pointless to even try with Republicans, the PIPA findings were reported on another forum with no response whatsoever from the Bushites. Some of them will say "we don't believe anything Salon.com says." Others will just ignore it. They do live in a separate reality. However, for those who really want the truth, they can find the complete report on the PIPA web site. There you can download the report in Adobe format or you can look at the actual questionairre and the responses. It was done very scientifically. Here is the address: http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_9_29_04.html#1

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:27 a.m. CST

    anyone ever notice kerry looks and soulds just like the news cas

    by The_Dude_77

    i love how edwards is nowhere to be seen now, i guess its true about rats deserting sinking ships huh?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:27 a.m. CST

    Use your own damn money!

    by Mad Barchetta

    I am so sick of this election year crap where celebrities, who make much more money than I do, ask me and people like me (The All-Important Middle-Class) to fork over our money to support their political causes! Just like Bruce Springsteen and his dipshit buddies (most all on the down-sides of their careers I might note and probably desperate for media attention - we're all aware that the concerts were the idea of agents, aren't we?) getting together for their concerts. Here's an idea, produce the concerts for free and use them as rallies, rather than having millionaires ask others to "donate" their money. I'm even more sick of the Democrats promoting themselves as the benevolent "here to help the little people" party when they have generally the same goals as the Republicans - "Power for Our Party above all else!" They have no more interest in what's best for the country than the other guys, they just swim in a deeper pool of hypocrisy. This country seriously needs an alternative to the two-party system and campaign financing reform.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:31 a.m. CST

    liberals

    by ZO

    will never learn i think some of these hollywood types just do it for the free publicity

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:31 a.m. CST

    I guess who Skiff means is Brian Mulroney.

    by jim

    He is Canada's last non-Liberal PM (unless you count Kim Campbell, but she wasn't an elected Prime Minister, she just took over the party leadership while the Conservatives were the Government, and didn't last 6 months). But I've never heard him referred to as "...a right wing born again christian...". And is that necessarily a bad thing to be? How is it relevant to how he ran the country? Looking at his politics and his legacy, how does Free Trade and the GST relate to his religion?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:32 a.m. CST

    Politics

    by MichaelMooreSux

    More entertainment news, less political views. Oh, Michael Moore still sucks.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:39 a.m. CST

    Very informative...

    by Childe Roland

    ...post, painless. I would love to see more fact-based political debate when these topics pop up (all too frequently, I'm afraid), but as the staggering lack of rebuttals to your post has so amply demonstrated, there simply aren't facts to back the other position. I will chalk up one for the conservative team in this talkback, though: Whedon really should decline X3 and any other Fox project if he feels strongly about his politics. But I'm sure his conservative critics crying "hypocrite" can understand his need to say one thing and do another when his profit margin is on the line. I just wish everyone could step back and see that Kerry doesn't have to be the greatest candidate in the world to be a better alternative than Bush. Hell... I'd vote for that nut, Perot, again if he were the only other option, just because the nation can't afford to continue on its current path: financially, morally, politically or environmentally. It's time for a change and, in the case, the devil we don't know would have to be a pyroonecrobestial pedophile with sociopathic tendencies to be worse than the devil we do.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:50 a.m. CST

    I'm hoping that my scrotum gets enough signatures to get on the

    by prof1971

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11 a.m. CST

    I think Michael Moore put it best....

    by Big_Bubbaloola

    and i'm paraphrasing here: 'The Democrats screw you but don't tell ya they're screwing you; the Republicans however tell you they're screwing you, and screw you with a smile on their face. At least they're being honest about it'

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:02 a.m. CST

    oh about the whole 'if Kerry gets in, we're gonna be made defenc

    by Big_Bubbaloola

    erm, who was in the White House at the time of 9/11? Oh that will be George W Bush then.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:07 a.m. CST

    Bush and Kerry make me want to Ralph!

    by wraith777

    www.votenader.org

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:07 a.m. CST

    FUCK! Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck!

    by ejcarter9

    I hate it when this happens. You respect someone and then they go and show that their politics are all fucked up! Dammit!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:14 a.m. CST

    who's politics?????

    by Big_Bubbaloola

    Nice Nader gag by the way....

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:21 a.m. CST

    why republicans ignore pipa

    by FedericoZ

    You might be wondering why us conservatives don't really seem to care if a connection between Saddam and Al Queda can be proven or if WMDs were found. I'll tell you why: The bottom line is better. We look at these questions: Is the world better off without Saddam? Yes. Was Saddam friendly to terrorists and unfriendly to the US? Yes. Do we believe that Bin Ladin is next on the hit list? Yes. So, I really don't care if we went out of order on the terrorism hit list. There are several groups in the world that need to be 'addressed' and Saddam was the low hanging fruit and the easiest target. If tried to build consensus before acting, we would have zero results. Consensus really means inaction, since half of the UN really doesn't mind if the US is terrorized. So, screw consensus and follow an agenda that provides results that benefit the US. It works for me.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:33 a.m. CST

    FedericoZ, you're missing the point of the report

    by HarrisonsDad

    It's not that Republicans agree with Bush's policies . . . The problem is, even though they've been told there are no WMDs in Iraq, they still believe we have found them. Even though Iraq did not fund or have contacts with al Queda before 9/11, they still believe Iraq was behind the attacks. Even though the rest of the world is against George W. Bush, they truly believ the world is in favor of George W. Bush. The point of the report is that Bush backers (not all of them, just the majority) live in a fantasy world. An alternate reality. They see the world through rose (Bush) colored glasses. When the latest report came out that there were never any WMDs, the majority of Bushites honestly believed the report said there were WMDs. That is the point behind the report. The report also found that Kerry backers see the world as it really is. We know there are no WMDs. We know Iraq had nothing to do with al Queda before 9/11. We know the rest of the world hates America. We can see the truth, but since this is a Movie web site, let me put it in the words of the great Jack Nicholson, "You can't handle the TRUTH!"

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:35 a.m. CST

    This news makes me want Bush to win even more!

    by ejcarter9

    Hollywood elitism. Fucking Hollywood elitism. You people live in Fantasyland so long that you think you should be dictating policy from there! No wonder you love that lying sack of shit running under the Jackass party banner. God forbid something REAL happens and Mr. Wafflehead won't know how to handle it.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:37 a.m. CST

    "i love how edwards is nowhere to be seen" Huh?

    by minderbinder

    What are you talking about? He's been campaigning every day. And it seems like he gets mentioned in the press about the same as Cheney (which he has no control over). About the "admitted war criminal" thing...I keep hearing this, but can't find a reference. Can someone provide a link to where he admits being a war criminal? Thanks.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:44 a.m. CST

    Amy Acker wants me to give money to who? Sure no problem, I'll d

    by Big Bad Clone

    I'm actually headed off to do early voting in about an hour. How much of a difference will my vote make? Bush is getting all of Texas' electoral votes, but at the very least he doesn't get my vote. Even if Kerry loses, Bush didn't get my vote. Hell, maybe he doesn't care, but he didn't get my vote. I haven't a lot of money to make a big dent in getting others to vote but I'm using the most powerful tool I have in this election, I voting for who I want in office (actually all the political offices that apply to my district).

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:50 a.m. CST

    Republicans hate celebrities . . . unless they're running for o

    by HarrisonsDad

    Fred Thompson, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Ronald Reagan, Sonny Bono, Fred Grandy, Shirley Temple Black, Jim Bunning, Jack Kemp, Steve Largent just to name a few.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:57 a.m. CST

    Way to go Big Bad Clone.....

    by Big_Bubbaloola

    that's the spirit. I hope that all of you who post here, Demo or Repub are gonna vote come election day. Come on, put ya money where ya mouths are!!!!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, noon CST

    Hey Norm....

    by Big_Bubbaloola

    Don't care really but good point all the same. I was behind the war in Afganistan but not Iraq. Just feels that the charge against Kerry is flawed thats all. By the way, no need to be nasty about it, dickhead!!!!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:02 p.m. CST

    You know what would totally crack me up?

    by Super Person

    If we had this discussion in person, face to face, all of us... that would be funny...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:16 p.m. CST

    ELEPHANT HUNTING SEASON STARTS IN 10 DAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by bushsux

    There is nothing tastier than a conservative double-standard. It's okay for celebrities to voice their opinions if they're conservative but if they're liberal, forget about it. That's why you'll never hear a conservative complain about Schwarzenegger being governor. Ronald Reagan, the hero whose administration originally gave chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein, was also a celebrity. By the way, there are 1.7 Million American Veterans who don't have health insurance right now. Who is more likely to help these people with this predicament? Kerry or Bush. My money is on Kerry since the republicans are the ones responsible for this shit in the first place cutting medicare and medicaid in the 90's.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:22 p.m. CST

    Yes, we liberals have such WILD beliefs

    by HarrisonsDad

    Affordable Health Care for everyone (how ludicrous is that, only the rich should have good health care) . . . A healthy clean environment (don't be ridiculous, Our Oil and Timber companies should always come before the environment) . . . A Ban on Automatic Assault Weapons (once again, the liberals are out of touch, everyone knows you need an AK-47 to go squirrel hunting) . . . Secure borders (now you've gone too far, who's gonna clean our toilets and pick our grapes?). Yes, we liberals are trying to force our ridiculous doctrine down your throats. Hey, somebody hold that guy down while I read the constitution to him!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:25 p.m. CST

    Fuck you HERC, you liberal commie fuck

    by Lamerz

    And fuck Harry and the rest of the leftist fucks around here. Do they have a right to their own fucking opinions? YES! Of course they do. But goddammit, I come to this motherfucking site for entertainment news and scoops, not leftist propaganda. I'm this close to not ever visiting the site again, because I am sick of the anti-Bush, anti-Republican sentiment spewed out by the writers on this site. If Harry wants to spew liberal bullshit, then open a damn political bulletin board. Trash. This site is turning into pure trash.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:26 p.m. CST

    conservatives are like lemmings, they'll follow anybody off a cl

    by bushsux

    What on earth has this administration done to earn 45% of the vote? Let's see, Bush is the first president since Herbert Hoover to post a net job loss. Over 1,000,000 Americans have lost their jobs since Bush was inaugurated. Over 1,100 soldiers have died in a useless and poorly planned war in Iraq. The deficit is currently at a record high, $413 Billion thanks mostly to Bush's tax cuts for the rich and the war in Iraq. The price of oil is $55 a barrel, up from $35 at the end of the Clinton Administration. Unemployment is currently 5.4%, up from 3.3% in 2000. The Supreme Court is one conservative justice away from banning abortion. Scientists can't receive funding to continue Stem Cell Research. It goes on and on. When will you conservatives wake up from this dream world you people live in?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:31 p.m. CST

    The people who are now complaining that this site has too much p

    by lettersoftransit

    Some of them sense they may have failed to do so, and instead have only energized the right (as in correct) minded people, so they are hoping to limit the damage by complaining there is too much political discourse on a fan based site. If you want to vote against your own interests and against the interests of everyone else with the exception of a small group of pathologically selfish scumbags intent on unravelling what is great about this country, then vote for Bush.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:32 p.m. CST

    hey bushsux... you are a moron

    by Lamerz

    you say: "conservatives are like lemmings, they'll follow anybody off a cliff as long as it's one of their own". How fucking asinine is that? Like you stupid ass libs are so tolerant of differing opinions? Then why are Colin Powell and Condi Rice called Uncle Toms by the left? Why are people like Larry Elder called sellouts? Why is Bush compared to Hitler by the psychos at moveon.org? Can't they legitimately have beliefs that are different from yours and not be sellouts and evil MF's? Sure doesn't seem like it when you hear the pure HATE spewed by a lot of the left. Yeah, that's right. A lot of the left can do nothing but spew HATE about anyone they disagree with. Fuckers.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:33 p.m. CST

    You're right, Bush isn't Hitler, He's just a bad president

    by bushsux

    You conservatives are all acting like a bunch of kids. If someone disagrees with you it's because their a commie weed smoking soviet America-hating tree hugging hippie. A real American welcomes disagreement. Wave the flag all you want, you're not in Iraq, you don't know the mess that was created. Just sit back, relax and continue to be the close-minded conservatives you are because, at this rate, that's alll you'll ever be.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:33 p.m. CST

    Canadian Conservatives

    by m2298

    I don't think that Brian Mulroney, who led the Progressive Condervative party (the name is sort of an oxymoron) was a right wing fundamentalist at all, and it seems to me that the party as a whole is much more liberal/centrist than the American GOP.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:35 p.m. CST

    See Team America and you will realize the truth. Bush wants you

    by lettersoftransit

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:38 p.m. CST

    Remember -- of the two candidates, KERRY IS THE ONE WHO HAS ACTU

    by lettersoftransit

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:39 p.m. CST

    If bush wants to kick terrorist ass so bad...why is he looking i

    by minderbinder

    Just wondering.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:39 p.m. CST

    Hey Lamerz, That's a Very Fitting Name You Gave Yourself

    by bushsux

    I have never called Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice Uncle Toms, I also don't know anybody, liberal or conservative who has ever done that. Has a liberal ever said that? Maybe, but that doesn't mean all, or even a significant amount of liberals agree with that. Lamerz, your argument about liberals being hate-spewing is based on generalizations. Basically, your taking one thing one liberal may have said and applying it to all liberals. Do you do the same thing to gays? Jews? Blacks? Try to actually talk about the issues and don't call me a moron, that's just lame, like you are.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:43 p.m. CST

    "Bush kicking terrorist ass"? I thought 15 of the 19 9/11 hijac

    by bushsux

    Bin Laden himself is a Saudi and Al Queda's leadership and money is mostly Saudi Arabian. Bush is very hugs and kisses with the Saudi government though. So much for kicking terrorist ass.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:49 p.m. CST

    Orionsangel: I am a deployed soldier in Operation Iraqi Freedom

    by bushsux

    Just because you think America deserves a better president doesn't make you a terrorist sympathizer. Your argument makes no sense whatsoever. Bush is a clown, nobody takes him seriously. We're less likely to win the war on terror with him in office, he is an idiot. I already voted for Kerry with my absentee ballot. I suggest you do some growing up in the next ten days and vote for Kerry.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:51 p.m. CST

    ONCE AGAIN...

    by Halloween68

    I think it's very stupid to assume that everyone who visits this site is going to vote for Kerry. I'm of the mind that it's nobody's business but your own who you are going to vote for. Politics mixes with very little. And it certainly doesn't mix with film talkback sites. You are alienating a huge portion of your readership when you start bashing people for their political beliefs. Leave it alone. I'm telling you. Listen, I'm more annoyed than upset about your little political marketing agenda here...but I'll bet you that there are plenty of people who "are" upset about it. More people will likely protest about it in a more quiet way than you would expect. They'll just stop coming here. I for one like our little talkback arena. It'd be ashame to thin it out over something so stupid as politics.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:52 p.m. CST

    Norm, you're right . . .

    by HarrisonsDad

    The warnings about 9/11 did start late during the Clinton administration. The first warning came from British Intelligence in June of 1999. That report stated "Al-Qaeda is planning to use aircraft in "unconventionalways", "possibly as flying bombs". In early August of 2001, Bush is given another warning from the Brits during his morning briefing. "An Al-Qaeda attack will involve multiple hijackings." On August 29, 2002 there is a report from the Cayman Islands, " Three al-Qaeda agents are part of a plot "organizing a major terrorist act against the US via an airline or airlines." In July 2001 an Undercover agent in Egypt learns and reports that 20 al-Qaeda agents are in the US, four have received flight training. These are justa few of the warnings. Yes, we did learn that they were planning on using airplanes in an unconventional way during the Clinton years. And Richard Clarke made sure this info was passed on to Condi Rice. Although I am sure there was no way anyone could've stopped 9/11 without one of the terrorists actually calling in a tip the day before, the way I see it, either both sides are to blame or no one is to blame

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:53 p.m. CST

    This is how lightly terrorists take Bush, Iran has endorsed Bush

    by bushsux

    Tehran

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 12:55 p.m. CST

    "Saddam doesn't fall far from the tree" So why can't anyone pro

    by minderbinder

    Well?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:02 p.m. CST

    Looking at the division on this TB...

    by RenoNevada2000

    ... I'd like to thank George "I'm a uniter, not a divider" Bush for all the hard work he's obviously done in that department. The asshat.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:05 p.m. CST

    I've noticed the common response from Republicans on this talkba

    by HarrisonsDad

    ... is to follow the model set by Dick Cheney and just use the "F" word. That'll tell 'em!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:29 p.m. CST

    getting saddam won't make us safer and Bush is the ultimate vict

    by Dr Farragammo

    You kooks and your saddam argument. Just realize this is your sides vietnam and it won't make us any safer. And Ilm so sick of you guys blaming clinton for 9/11 and the recession. Did he blame bush 1 for the recession?? No he fixed it, but your guy is too much of a clueless douche to figure it out. Actually that's not true, he's figured out how to help his buddies but hasn't figured out how to make a convincing lie to the american people about the economy rebound. On terrorism he sure fooled ya though. This from a coward that stayed in a school classroom rather than face reality. They HAD ALL the info they needed to work on bin laden from the day Dumbya took office. they didn't do shit, they fucked up, and they used 9/11 as a fear mongering device that has worked on the uneducated and brainwashed sheep. You guys love to talk about liberals bitching and moaning and being the victim, but all W has done is played the victim. He inherited all this shit, yet he's NOT MAN enough to fix it.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:30 p.m. CST

    If Kerry raises taxes...

    by Super Person

    You won't see me complaining... Bush gave us a HUGE deficit... how are we going to make that up? Well, I guess Bush has two choices: either raise taxes himself, or take the money from somewhere else, leading to something else being underfunded... no thanks, I'm fine with raising taxes... I want a good responsible government, and I know you have to pay for that...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:44 p.m. CST

    USER ID if W does win....and by win I mean cheat again

    by Dr Farragammo

    Your party is going to implode. There already people like Hagel, Scarborough, and Buchanan who have mentioned that the Rudy's of the world are going to pull away from the bushies because thay don't like their arrogance and their allegiance to the religious right. By the way why DO YOU LIKE being associated with these sickos that wan't to ban everything? Do you want your programming all pre-approved by Michael Powell and Brent Bozell? If you think that's not a contradiction to being a film,media,etc lover than you give W a close run in the sawdust for brains dept. And your prediction that we'll quit bitching once th election is over is 100% wrong. We'll just get more vocal to the point where you'll wish he lost so you wouldn't have to hear about it anymore. It won't be like last time,marches, protests, boycotts, you name it, your boy will go down like nixon. But keep believing your bullshit. When reality hits it will be a rude awakening for all you bush zombies.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 1:50 p.m. CST

    Funny, funny stuff!

    by splbrg75

    This talkback is a hoot! My fave so far has been "Hey Joss, shut up and direct." Ugh! I love the fact that now more than ever celebs live under a microscope. There are tons of gossip magazines, news shows, and paparazzi giving us a look into their private lives (on the beach, going to the toilet etc. etc.) but when they give an opinion on politics 99% of the public's reaction is: "HOW DARE THEY!" If Homer Simpson were in this talkback he'd say "Look, if they wanted to talk politics they should have never decided to express themselves creatively!" Jesus...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 2:02 p.m. CST

    Orionsangels, uh . . . since I'm such a simpleton, would you exp

    by HarrisonsDad

    Let's see, we know for a FACT that he had no Weapons of Mass Destruction . . . . We know for a FACT that Iraq had no ties with al Qaeda until after we invaded . . . We know for a FACT that Iraq had no way of getting a military jet off the ground because of all the no-fly zones . . . We know for a FACT that they couldn't go to sea without us seeing them . . . We know for a fact that Iraq couldn't go north because of the Kurds and Turkey . . . They couldn't go east because of Iran . . . so just how was he a threat to the American People??? If he killed an Iraqi insurgent, how did that affect us? China, North Korea, and many other Arab countries also kill insurgents. He was planning to eventually get around to trying to maybe obtain the materials to maybe attempt a possible future nuclear weapons program? Uh, Iran is much farther along than that. Korea already has them. So does, India, Pakistan, China, France, Israel, Russia, England, the United States . . . Oh, they wouldn't let us inspect them. Yeah that's a good one . . . except the UN inspectors (including the Americans on the team) had unprecidented access to everywhere in Iraq. But Bush kept telling them to show us the WMDs. Dude, if you're trying to rob me and I have no money, do you think pointing a gun in my face will make me suddenly produce a few dollars? The inspections were working. The embargos were working. he no-fly zones were working. So what is the valid point to the invasion? Bush always said the reason we were going into Iraq was because of the Weapons of Mass Destruction. It wasn't until we didn't find any that the motive for invasion changed. I'm not stupid and neither are most of the people on this forum. Left and Right. Stop trying to belittle people who see the world clearly. Its a difference of opinion, man. Chill out. I firmly believe my side of the argument and you probably believe in your side. We may try to convince you using useless tools like facts and figures, but you can always try to belittle us and use foul language to get us to come around to your way of thinking. Its all part of the process.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 2:06 p.m. CST

    Really, truly

    by Itchy

    this is one of the funniest talkbacks in a while. Herc - your whole post is just made funnier by the fact I just saw Team America the other day. God help us, but whatever side of an issue fuckwads like Natalie Maines and Barbara Streisand are on, I know the other side must be right. And TheDarkShape - thanks, but really no points for humour here ... it's like shooting fish in a barrell.

  • .... i don't understand this. why shouldn't ANYONE who has strong beliefs and a means to fight for them take advantage of it? I respect anyone famous, Republican or Democrat, who feels strongly enough to publicly voice their opinions. ANYONE who has the opportunity should. It's our right as Americans, and I think it's great that someone beyond arrogant talking heads and rich businessman are letting their voices be heard.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 2:32 p.m. CST

    Bush's rationale

    by RenoNevada2000

    Bush's new rationale for the invasion of Iraq that Saddam was sorta thinking about how nice it would be to maybe plan the development of a program to find out how to build a nuclear weapon is about as weak as they come. Under that reasoning, my landlord could evict me from my apartment under the "No pets" clause of my lease simply because I thought, "Gee I'd be cool to have a goldfish." Get a grip folks.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 2:37 p.m. CST

    Fuck "Buffy", watch "Hex"!

    by borisF

    First, fuck you all fucking, stupid cunt liberals. Second, I know why I stopped watching "Buffy" early and never liked "Angel". They are fucking liberals. Now, UK produced show that looks like "Buffy Cunt Slayer", but is actually better. It is still idiotically liberal(pop references), but it is fresh idea and well written. I even forgot about British accents. So watch "Hex"!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 2:40 p.m. CST

    Huh?

    by Super Person

    "Pop references" = Liberals now? That's just weird man... wow, these political talkbacks are just broken records, aren't they... what's the point everyone?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 2:43 p.m. CST

    Lou C.

    by splbrg75

    Amen brother!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 2:50 p.m. CST

    The rest of the world can piss up a tree...

    by KryptonsLastSon

    "In fact, a PIPA study released in early September found that a majority or plurality of people from 32 countries preferred Kerry to Bush. PIPA surveyed 34,330 people, ages 15 and above, from regions all over the world. A Pew poll released this spring similarly found that "large majorities in every country, except for the U.S., hold an unfavorable opinion of Bush." Bush supporters are also mistaken about the president's own positions (a pattern of misapprehension that an earlier PIPA report also documented). "Majorities incorrectly assumed that Bush supports multilateral approaches to various international issues -- the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (69%), the treaty banning land mines (72%); 51% incorrectly assumed he favors US participation in the Kyoto treaty -- the principal international accord on global warming ... Only 13% of supporters are aware that he opposes labor and environmental standards in trade agreements -- 74% incorrectly believe that he favors including labor and environmental standards in agreements on trade." Guess what, we don't give a shit what the world thinks. If I wanted to vote for President based on what France thinks of the candidates I'd be a fucking idiot. I'm American, and I'm in this to see America at the top of the heap, the rest of the world can be pissed and go hang themselves.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:01 p.m. CST

    "...I have to talk to these people like kids now - Very Bad man,

    by Kurutteru Yatsu

    Yeah, like bin Laden. But oh wait, that's right, he called for the Iraqis to rise up and overthrow Saddam because he was a secularist and not a devout enough Muslim. Now it is true that Iraq's near the Saudi Arabia, where 15 of the 9/11 hijackers came from and where a number of terrorist groups were obtaining funding, oh and there was that whole thing about offering rewards to suicide bombers. Oops. forgot about all their oil and their close personal relationship with the Bush family. Hmm...Iran? Well, as another post on this board pointed out, they're behind Bush too! None of those pesky human rights complaints to worry about with Republicans in power is part of their reason for supporting him, I believe? (I will say though that if they think Bush is "too smart" to attack a bigger, badder contury like Iran, well remember, our administration has labeled the war on terror a "crusade" in the past, and GW believes he's doing God's work. Add in the fact that he doesn't believe in dealing in a "reality-based community" and you get the feeling that common sense doesn't go over too well in Bush country. Just sayin', Iran, just sayin'.) Moving on. Orionsangel, you may not agree with Bushsux, but if what he says is true and he IS stationed in Iraq right now dodging bullets from insurgents that this war created, then callig him a traitor is about the most unpatriotic thing you could do. Sean Hannity would be most displeased. Except for when Clinton had our troops in Bosnia and Kosovo, then it was all a huge mess and we should never have gone there and how can anyone support this president, ol' Seanny-boy would say. Ahh, golden memories. Wrapping up: Conservatives, Bush supporters- if the best attack you've got agaisnt Kerry is that's a flip flopper who looks "French" (and let's not forget to throw in plenty of "You lib commie FAGS!"), then please, just take a step back. Look at the man you're supporting and what his policies have done to this country, to its reputation, and ask youself, "Is this guy REALLY the best man for the job?"

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:03 p.m. CST

    Wow, so now the argument against Iraq has been whittled down to

    by minderbinder

    If that's all we have against him, why did we tackle the VBM in Iraq who wasn't capable of attacking US soil, instead of the VBM's in Iran and Korea who have nuclear weapons and other WMD's?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:06 p.m. CST

    "Winning" the WAR ON TERROR!!!!

    by Kurutteru Yatsu

    War On Terror is fought, for reasons just or otherwsie. War creates terrorists, thus need for War On Terror to continue, raising deficit, oil prices, and American deaths. Meanwhile, corporations like Halliburton and Lockheed Martin make huge profits, which they contribute to this adminsitration either personally or politically, therefore helping to perpetuate the cycle. Discuss.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:09 p.m. CST

    Uh, Kryptons Last Son . . . did you even bother to read what you

    by HarrisonsDad

    The PIPA report says that the majority of Bush followers (IN THE UNITED STATES) have a misconception about what Bush is really for or against. But no, we shouldn't care what the rest of the world thinks . . . after all, we don't really need their help or intelligence if we want to fight terrorism. We can pay for all of our "incursions" with the help of the American taxpayer. Why I'm sure we have enough troops to handle, Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, Iran, the Sudan, Haiti, etc. all by ourselves. No, its okay for us to say who we want to be the leader of Iraq, but its wrong for the rest of the world to have an opinion about us! 'cause (cue music) "WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS OF THE WORLD . . . AND WE'LL KEEP ON FIGHTING . . . "

  • ... polling bears that out. Fairly recent polls showed half of America believes Saddam was linked to al-Qaida, and something like a third believed there were WMDs in Iraq. Why is this? People are stupid, people lap up what they're told by misleading politicans and talking heads, and people simply do not care to hear the truth. The scary thing is, while all of us are debating issues on here and understand different things, there are a shitload of uninformed people who are basing their opinions on WRONG information. If you believe Bush was correct in going to war despite there being no WMDs and no al-Qaida connection, OK, I'll discuss it with you. But it's disturbing that the Bush Machine and Fox News (and others) have been able to trick the stupid people into falling in line. A scary country, indeed.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:23 p.m. CST

    it's even scarier than i thought ....

    by Lou C.

    This is from the Program on International Policy Attitudes: Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%). Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points. Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commision. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions. SO, WHAT DOES THIS SAY? It probably speaks for itself, but it shows Bush, Fox News and other outlets have been successful in brainwashing the American public. Four more years? God, I hope not.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:32 p.m. CST

    Joss should have cast John Kerry as El Diablo Robotico

    by Whedon

    I could totally see Kerry lumbering around claiming to be the devil's robot while being beat down by mexican luchadores. Hey Herc didn't you say you get paid by the talkback? Keep these Buffy/political talkbacks coming, not only are they hilarious but they can make you a rich man.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:37 p.m. CST

    we'll see who's laughing on the morning of nov. 3rd

    by neckbone

    in the interest of disclosure - i'm a republican, voting for kerry (or more accurately, against dubya). i have never been more concerned about an election in my life. don't buy this faux news crap about 'bush is leading, bush in a landslide, blah blah blah'. none of these polls is included the newly registered voters or the HUGE break of undecideds that go to the challenger and NOT the encumbant. you want the real unbiased poop? how about a university prof's statistical analysis. - http://synapse.princeton.edu/~sam/pollcalc.html and click on the 'probability map'. the neo-fascists camp will undoubtedly scream - it's got an anti-bush bias. WRONG! fellow kerry supporters, don't be disheartened by the bogus national polls. fellow republicans, wake the hell up! what has happened to our party since 9/11 is nothing short of embarassing.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:37 p.m. CST

    "Who cares about WMDs! "

    by minderbinder

    Well...just before the war...that would be Bush.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 3:43 p.m. CST

    Orionsangels, so let me see if I understand . . .

    by HarrisonsDad

    If we THINK someone MIGHT possibly be a threat IN THE FUTURE, its okay for us to attack them. So if we have it on good authority (a forged CIA document for example) that Canada is possibly planning to attack the United States, then we should invade Canada right away???? Orionsangels, you still haven't explained to me how Iraq was an imminent threat to the United States.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:13 p.m. CST

    What makes these people any more informed than non-celebs about

    by LoneChicken

    I don't care if you're Patricia Heaton, Gary Oldman, SMG, or writing genius Josh Whedon. You're not political or policy geniuses, so SHUT IT!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:17 p.m. CST

    IRAN is supporting Bush for re-election!!!

    by Backtalk

    Remember them you asswipe liberal haters. Part of Bush's "Axis of Evil". What both candidates called during the debates as the biggest concern was Iran's proliferation of nuclear capabilities. THEY WANT BUSH IN OFFICE!!! Don't give me your bullshit about Bin Laden suports Kerry. Liars!! Bin Laden shouldn't be able to support anything, but then again BUSH didn't catch the guy. BUSH didn't catch the guy responsible for 9/11! HELLLOOO YOU AWAKE! For that alone he shoudn't get a single vote. Anyone who supports what Bush has done in office is a complete idiot. You might as well write in Osama Bin Laden if your thinking of voting for Bush.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:23 p.m. CST

    LoneChicken, thanks for the advice

    by HarrisonsDad

    Now, all of us should stop using our Constitutional right of free speech. After all, none of us is smart enough to make sense out the gibberish we read in the newspapers or watch on television. Come to think of it, none of us is smart enough to make an informed decision, so we should just stay at home on November 2nd and just let the policy makers and politicians vote. GREAT IDEA! I only took two semesters of Political Science in college. And all that cramming I did in all my civics classes were for naught. I'm just one of the uninformed masses. Maybe I should just stick to what I learned in Business and Telecommunications and forget about pre-law and American and World History. And maybe we should stop teaching social studies in schools and stick to literature, math and foreign languages. You've really made me rethink my education LoneChicken. Its been an epiphany reading your post.

  • ... it's nice that we can have calm, reasonable discussions about politics. All I'm saying here, is that a good portion of the American public is formulating opinions without the proper facts. Your opinion is your opinion, that's fine. But the facts also show a large portion of America is forming them on misinformation. Let me ask you guys this: Say Bill Clinton is president, and he tells us there are WMDs in Iraq, so we're gonna go in and bomb the fuck out of the country and take out Saddam. Then, we find out later that there are no WMDs, and the country is getting progessively more dangerous. So, you're telling me the Republicans WOULD NOT be all over Clinton and what a liar and fuck-up he was? Are you seriously telling me that going in after Saddam did NOT take away the efforts to stop al-Qaida and find bin Laden? Are you telling me Saddam would have launched an attack at some point against America? Are you telling me Saddam was a bigger threat than Iran or North Korea? I'm not asking these questions to be sarcastic, I'm seriously interested. And, does it not scare you that Americans are basing their opinions on beliefs that are based on information that is utterly incorrect? But since there apparently cannot be an adult-like trading of opinions here, perhaps I should just call you guys zombie-douchebags and be done with it. so, there ya go.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:29 p.m. CST

    WHO IS JOHN KERRY? IS HE A COMIC BOOK ARTIST?

    by stlfilmwire

    Does he work for ILM? Is he an actor that has been cast to play Perry White?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:30 p.m. CST

    HOW CAN ANYONE LIKE TEAM AMERICA AND STILL POST THIS ON AICN?

    by stlfilmwire

    Was anyone at AICN paying attention? Enough said.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:43 p.m. CST

    "So what are they doing after the Bush victory?"

    by Voice O. Reason

    Build a bunker, like the rest of us should.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:49 p.m. CST

    Way to support your fans, fucktards

    by KCMOSHer

    You have to love that the Buh-Bye Buffy Bash had a grand total of three Buffyverse players in attendance (if you count the littlest slayer who had all of 30 seconds of screen time) yet as soon as the opportunity arises to suck Kerry's cock they're coming out of the woodwork. So, I guess it works like this: come out for your fans, no. Come out to score political Hollywood points, yes. Nice, nice form, asshats.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:52 p.m. CST

    Farragammo, "Ronnie, who quoted your namesake like he was a real

    by Immortal_Fish

    But... he was a real character. ;-) You're correct that Whedon certainly has the right to do this. But as with the Dixie Chicks, folks have the right to their opinions as to how he exercises that right. Free speech comes at a price. The left has Moore with his movie, the Bash Bush Book of the Week authors, 80% of the 527 groups, ABC with their documented bias, CBS with their 20/20 disgrace, and even Springsteen with his touring in battleground states. Doubtless you support their efforts as a proponent of free speech. Despite that, you continue to harp about Sinclair. Fact of the matter is that The McCain/Feingold Act was a crime against free speech. As would be the Fairness Act also if Kerry gets in, thereby regulating equal time down the middle for broadcast radio. I wonder what Stern would have to say about that?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:52 p.m. CST

    OR, it comes out like THIS:

    by Super Person

    Come out for something frivolous and ultimately unimportant, no... come out for something that you feel is important to the future and wellbeing of the world you live in, yes...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:52 p.m. CST

    About the polls

    by Immortal_Fish

    They mean nothing. Weren't they the same tools that had Howard the Doc securing the Dem nomination? That aside, the newly registered aren't necessarily new voters. It'll be interesting to see how many of them actually show up.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:53 p.m. CST

    Sir Loyne, "I hear John Kerry has some kind of 'plan.'"

    by Immortal_Fish

    No, he has a plan to hold a summit to formulate a plan. Get your facts straight!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:56 p.m. CST

    ol' painless, re: salon.com

    by Immortal_Fish

    Do you honestly propose that it is now no longer enough to call Bush stupid? That his entire base is as well? Bush is no intellectual genius and struggles with the language. That's a given. But what you mention is not the sign of a confident campaign. The same holds true both ways and Dems wouldn't be so warm on JOhn KErry were they to get to know the real deal. If he's the second coming, then why is Massachussetts, long under Dem control, in such a mess? It's the only state where the public works are funded by other states.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:56 p.m. CST

    Norm, about Rock the Vote and the draft

    by Immortal_Fish

    Anyone fearing Bush reinstating the draft obviates their ignorance. First of all, that power lies with Congress, not the administration. Second, a draft bill was recently introduced by Charley Rangel, a Dem, who (thankfully) lacked the intestinal fortitude to vote for his own bill. Bush has stated in black and white terms that there will be no draft. All JOhn KErry does is fearmonger, stating all the reasons why the draft, as he would say, "positively might be" necessary. Why anyone who fears the draft would vote for this guy is beyond me.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:57 p.m. CST

    bushsux, "You conservatives are all acting like a bunch of kids.

    by Immortal_Fish

    You use 'bushsux' as your user ID. Do you honestly believe this encourages congenial discourse?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:58 p.m. CST

    The facts of Kerrycare

    by Immortal_Fish

    Anyone look into what he intends to do to health care? You're out of luck if your combined family income is higher than three times the poverty level. At $18k (current poverty level), 3x that is $54k. So if you and the wife are salaried at $30k apiece, you can forget about entitlement. Considering what the average person earns and that most families need two incomes to stay afloat, this doesn't help many honest, working people. What I find reprehensible is that benefits extend to illegal aliens. I guess JOhn KErry finds it more important to ensure them than reservists and veterans.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:58 p.m. CST

    About the fighting in Iraq

    by Immortal_Fish

    JOhn KErry has criticized Bush for going into Iraq, claiming that it has made us less safe. Or, in the fearmongering words of his murderous buddy, Senator Teddy Kopechne, closer to a mushroom cloud. They, and many of you, claim that Iraq sidetracked the war on terror, and that redirecting our military from Afghanistan into Iraq allowed OBL to escape. This makes sense on the surface. Then again, much of what JOhn KErry says makes sense on the surface. Yet if you take the time to scratch through the veneer of his words, you can clearly see misleading catchphrases and contradictions. First of all, no one knows for certain whether or not OBL is still alive. It's speculation at best and claiming he was allowed to escape wrongly stretches the point further. Furthermore, a logical person would conclude that it's not only US forces that were shuffled from one place to another, but also al Qaeda forces. Take into account that a staggering 80% of their number is gone. Do the Dems honestly believe that the US military with all of our resources can't hold our own on two fronts against a terrorist group with significantly fewer numbers and far less finances? The US once took on Italy, Germany, and Japan all at once, yet we can't handle "bullying" two poverty stricken nations?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:59 p.m. CST

    Lies! Lies, I tell you. And deception! Deceptive lies!

    by Immortal_Fish

    The other L-word is a favorite for lefty book titles. "Big Lies: The Right-wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth" by Joe Conason. "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right" by Al Franken. And then there's the D-word - "Weapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush's War on Iraq" by Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber. "American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush" by Kevin Phillips. Finally, there's the twofer - "The Lies of George W. Bush: Mastering the Politics of Deception" by David Corn. Why is it that the Dems feel so pressured into calling the other side a pack of liars in order to make their point? It's one thing to quibble over the facts. It's quite another to stick your fingers in your ears and shout, "Liar!"

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 4:59 p.m. CST

    I think it's a tie...

    by Childe Roland

    ...so far as to what's the funniest thing I've read in this talkback. This line from Lamerz: "Yeah, that's right. A lot of the left can do nothing but spew HATE about anyone they disagree with. Fuckers." or Orionsangels calling anyone a "madman" and then spouting about how it's okay to take massive, violent, lethal action against a nation based on what one believes it might eventually do (specifically his justification for attacking Iraq being that Saddam would've teamed up with a terrorist eventually). Look up paranoid schizophrenic and then re-check your rationale. Or don't. It's funnier when you don't see the irony.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:01 p.m. CST

    stlfilmwire, "How can anyone still post after seeing Team Americ

    by HarrisonsDad

    Let me guess, you're really Dan Quayle! You think a movie by the guys who make South Park should make us vote for Bush???? Uh, dude (or dudette) it was just a fictional movie. Team America doesn't exist. If I'm going to pay political attention to a movie this year, it's Fahrenheit 9/11. Wait let me guess, you really believe Michael Moore is a suicide bomber??? You really believe that actors are part of a conspiracy with North Korea??? Go to Paris, the Eiffel Tower and Arch de Triumphe are still there. So is the Louvre. And last time I checked the Great Pyramid of Giza and The Sphinx are still standing. And if there are any Dakota residents reading this will you let stlfilmwire know that Michael Moore didn't destroy Mt. Rushmore. Dude, Matt and Trey were just being equal opportunity offenders with that movie. They were not just making fun of Celebrities who espouse political beliefs, they were also pointing out that our policing actions in the world cause real damage to the people we purport to free or protect. No keep repeating "It's only a fictional movie. Murphy Brown is not a real person. It's only a fictional movie. Murphy Brown is not a real person."

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:04 p.m. CST

    Thank you Immortal_Fish

    by ejcarter9

    For bringing some sense and sanity to this site.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:07 p.m. CST

    About Medicare

    by Immortal_Fish

    In the never ending quest to instill fear in every US citizen, JOhn KErry's campaign has released a new commercial claiming that Bush will instate the biggest increase on Medicare premiums ever. If you dig into the subject, you'll find that this increase is actually a part of the Balanced Budget Agreement signed into law by Clinton, and scheduled to take affect during the Bush administration. Was Bush expected to set precedent and reverse a bill voted into law by the previous president? The best part... JOhn KErry voted for the bill!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:10 p.m. CST

    Popularity?

    by Super Person

    I've never understood the argument that what the rest of the world thinks and feels about America, its citizenry, and its government, just doesn't matter... of COURSE it matters... we're economically dependent on the rest of the world, as they are on us... our economic interdependence alone should convince everyone that we need to get along with these people... secondly, I don't know about the rest of you, but during my lifetime I SURE would like to be able to travel and SEE the rest of the world without being spat upon, getting into fights, and/or having to tell people I'm Canadian so they don't ride me on a rail out of town... now Americans have been getting a bit of a free ride up to this point... the rest of the world hates Bush and says so, but they separate us from our government generally... however, if we vote him back in, they'll KNOW where we as a nation stand with regard to our President Bush, and they'll take it out on us again... America's a great place to travel around and visit, but so is the rest of the world... personally I'd like to keep things congenial with other nations, because (A) it's economically smart, (B) it's militarily smart for the next time we need a REAL coalition to help us police the world, (C) I'd like to be able to travel unharmed through this world of ours, and (D) it's just the reasonable thing to do...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:11 p.m. CST

    About the post "proving" Republicans are dumb and ignorant

    by godric

    The stat is given that Republicans feel our policies are popular with the world, and you say that's patently wrong. Granted, Europe hates our policies. But Europe is NOT the end of the world! Fact of the matter is, in Central Asia and large parts of Africa, America's policies are very popular. I heard a talk by an Uzbek leader, thanking George Bush for helping open that country for more religious freedom. And honestly, I care more about what the 3rd world thinks of us than the snotty Europeans.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:12 p.m. CST

    " . . . that's where the 9/11 attackers came from and there was

    by HarrisonsDad

    So let me get this straight. If I live next door to a murderer and someone says that because of the way I dress I'm probably beating my wife, that instead of going after the murderer, the police should knock down my front door, ransack my home and arrest me? Yeah, that makes sense. And if some Mexican goes into Oklahoma and rapes a woman, that Oklahoma should make a pre-emptive strike against Texas? Wow, stop listening to Steely Dan, "Pretzel Logic" was just the name of a CD, not a philosophy!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:13 p.m. CST

    what will they do in 08

    by The_Dude_77

    what the hell is the left's platform gonna be in 08 i mean you can't base your whole party's policies of "Bush Sucks" when he won't be running again.... also i cant wait till Kerry comes up for re-election in the senate.. if he runs again then, edwards saw the writing on the wall and all this jobs crap, unemployment is lower than when slick-willy(clinton) ran for re-election, and he didn't have to deal with 9-11 fallout or the Clinton-Gore recession either.. you dumbasses its not like there is a switch in the oval office that says good/bad economy and that bush flipped it to bad,

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:16 p.m. CST

    Excellent, wraith777

    by Immortal_Fish

    I'm not happy with Bush, but ain't no way I'm voting him out given his competition. Homeboy's going to take my state anyhow, so I'm voicing disgust by casting my vote for Darth Nader.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:17 p.m. CST

    Fear

    by gujjer

    There's an interesting documentary series by the BBC that recently started called THE POWER OF NIGHTMARES, which goes on about how people use fear to their political advantage. Regardless of your politcal leanings, it's essential viewing to ANYONE trying to make sense of terrorism, the current state of the world and what caused 9/11. One of the strands it covers is neoconversatism - the idea of people in power providing a false or exagerated threat in order to keep the people in line. They go into extensive interviews and old footage to showcase the best example of neoconservatism in action; back when america and Russia settled their differences, neoconservatives set out to "prove" Russia was in fact still building weapons and had DEFINITIVE plans to use them against America. The CIA was watching Russia closely and said this was all nonsense. The neo's demanded their own investigation though, and naturally came back with their own conclusions. They said "we can't find the weapons, but this only means they have new technology that isn't picked up by our intelligence"...i.e. the fact we can't find them only proves they exist. Thus, they reasoned, Russia was a threat and needed to be destroyed. Where am I going with this? Well the guy in charge of that fabricated neoconservative investigation was none other than Donald Rumsfeld. Wake up people, he's doing exactly the same thing in Iraq. Don't believe me? Track down the documentary for yourself and make up your own mind - scour the newsgroups and torrent sites if you must. Don't take the word of these neoconservatives as gospel, do your own research. 'Cos believe me, they have an agenda.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:20 p.m. CST

    f*ck the rest of the world

    by The_Dude_77

    its ok for us to go to war to save europe's asses but hey when its americans being killed shame on us for trying to protect our citizens Tell you what next time someone invades france maybe we should just sit it out, see if those frogs are bitching about us when they want us to save they're asses again....

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:22 p.m. CST

    Nun again

    by Super Person

    Ahhh here you are again.. I keep forgetting you pop your head up to make some outrageous grab for attention, no doubt desperate to "take another thread hostage" or whatever it is you used to do... pathetic screams for attention is what your posts are, it's that simple... As for your point, no I am not Canadian... I'm referring to the common practice American tourists now use to deflect harassment at the hands of resentful foreigners the world over (NOT just Europeans) who believe we have single-handedly dragged the world into an era where no one is at peace... so yes, MANY Americans pin Canadian flags to their luggage or otherwise represent themselves as Canadians because they do not want to have to put up with that... myself, I'm from Texas... my state will unfortunately go to Bush, but again, I will cast my vote otherwise, simply so it will count in the sadly irrelevant popular vote... sad, in that no "popular vote" should be irrelevant in a democracy...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:23 p.m. CST

    Dude,

    by Super Person

    If the French are being attacked by someone who poses no threat to us, then no, we probably won't go... don't forget that we didn't get directly involved in WWII until someone attacked US... it's not like France got attacked by the Germans and we said "oh no, not France, let's go!" Pearl Harbor got bombed, German U-Boats were attacking our ships at sea, and we got involved then...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:24 p.m. CST

    Orionsangels, you've convinced me

    by HarrisonsDad

    We need to live our lives with maybes and possibles instead on the Truth and Facts. After all, truth and facts along with a nickel won't even get you a bus ticket. So if we think someone might attack us in the distant future, let's take 'em out. If some country could possibly get WMDs, blow the hell out of them and every living person who lives near their borders. After all, we have to play it safe. Yes, our national policies should always be based on WHAT IF. Since you don't want to deal in facts, I will no longer respond to you. If you want to call that a victory, go ahead, it MIGHT POSSIBLY be one.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:26 p.m. CST

    godric, I can tell you didn't actually read the report

    by HarrisonsDad

    The report didn't say EUROPE, it said THE WORLD. And there was a lot more to the report than what other countries think of us. It was basically about Bush's followers being out of touch with reality.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:27 p.m. CST

    Orion...

    by Super Person

    Public Enemy would HATE what you're doing with their concepts and lyrics...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:30 p.m. CST

    "Iraq has always been an imminent threat to the United States. "

    by minderbinder

    Well, they didn' have WMD's. No nukes, no bio, no chemical. So what "imminent threat" did they pose? Were they going to fedex us a box of grenades or something? Fly over here and put flaming paper bags filled with dog poop on our porches? SPECIFICALLY. What could they have done to hurt americans on american soil?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:31 p.m. CST

    Nunny

    by Super Person

    It seems like an awful lot of your identity revolves around "being a man"... I mean, I'm a man, believe it or not... but you don't see that fact being the central core value of my identity... I like to think my REASON is... but I guess that's what separates us from you... brains vs. testosterone...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:32 p.m. CST

    Sadly OrionsAngel our troops have died in vein

    by Knightmare187

    The reason i state this is because even though we got rid of a mad dictator the ideals of the people will not change. At least for a vast majority of them. Once we leave the country will revert back to the way it once was. The peoples of the middle east have been fighting against one another for centuries. This war in iraq was not the only time we tried helping. Everytime we helped someone else gets pissed and ends up hating us more. Which eventually lead to 9/11. What america needs to do is leave the middle east alone. Stop trying to fix the world when the world doesn't want to be fixed. thats my opinion I felt with what everyone was saying that wasn't being said clearly enough. Bush, Kerry, it doesn't matter if we don't learn from history and our mistakes. It costs too many lives when we don't learn.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:37 p.m. CST

    Just to clear up a point...

    by Super Person

    This consistent question of "why didn't Iraq play ball when we had inspectors in there if they had nothing to hide?" Well, yes, they did at one time have WMDs, which they used on the Kurds, but those were gone after the coalition beat them back and imposed the no-fly zones and the inspections and all that... however, Iraq was not about to allow their lifelong enemy Iran to think they were powerless against them, so they had to maintain the image of still possessing these deterrent weapons to keep the Iranians from thinking of jumping on them... this is not MY theory, this is what the majority of people studying this conflict have come to believe, and it is what Saddam himself has said...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:38 p.m. CST

    neckbone & immortal fish

    by Dr Farragammo

    neckbone: Thank you for putting the truth out there that the bushzombies don't wanna face about the new voters and the useless polling. Immortal: If you don't wanna listen to the dixie chicks or buy their shit (as a life long loather of country music, I could care less) that's fine. But when they blacklist them or when Toby Keith , the biggest idiot in the music industry, puts a picture of one of them next to Hussein it is beyond voting with your wallet, it's called censorship and a new era of mcarthyism. Sure Keith has the right to do his dumbfuck ugly american shtick, but Clear Channel aren't the voice of the people. they're a corporate industry that wants Bush in the White House and what they do has nothing to do with a consumer's right to choose, as it does with their need to silence them permanently.And as for Sinclair, if they want to broadcast their film with a forward about how the owners of sinclair want bush in office and this a purely poltical ploy, instead of saying it's entertainment, that's FINE by me, but they are violating equal time laws, and everybody knows it. Stern makes no bones about why he wants Bush out, Sinclair won't be honest about their intentions. Also Sinclair needs to explain why they wouldn't show the NIGHTLINE honoring the American soldiers who died in Iraq. Because it showed iraq was going badly, and they'd rather shut it down then let Koppel honor those who died fighting a war we can't win. So yes Immortal I AGREE we can all vote with our wallet, but corporations SHOULDN'T be doing it for us.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:39 p.m. CST

    yes i think so

    by Knightmare187

    However it is probably to late for that. I would still give it a try.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:40 p.m. CST

    HarrisonsDad, "explain to me how Saddam was a threat to the Amer

    by Immortal_Fish

    Did anyone ask this same question of Clinton when he toppled Slobodan Milosevic, a man who killed fewer people, threatened America less, and violated fewer U.N. sanctions than Saddam ever did? Not that I had a problem with Bosnia, that is. I hate pointing at the actions of one side to explain the actions of another anyhow. Look, short of war, sanctions are the only action that can be taken against a hostile nation. The Oil for Food scandal exposes the double-standard of nations on the take which erode the affectiveness of sanctions. The Deulfer report explains how Saddam had a plan to reinstate his weapons programs once sanctions were lifted. And they were on the fast track toward it. Saddam may not have been a direct threat if you consider his ties to terror. Churchill was begging the US to help stop Hitler before he mutated into worse and look at how that turned out.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:41 p.m. CST

    Orionsangel

    by Super Person

    I can give you my opinion on that, because I agree with him... I believe we were drawn into this because of the early 20th century desire of the Brits to colonialize the area, which included divying it up into the nations as we know them today... western influences creating western-style national demarcations and governments, as we were wont to do in the days of rampant imperialism... and this is where imperialism gets you... decades of resentment at the West forcing itself on them in the first place... now, will they leave us alone if we leave them alone? Maybe not at this point... we may have stirred up the hornets' nest too much... maybe so though, who knows? I will say this, if we'd stayed out of their business and left Israel to defend itself, I do believe they would have never bothered us.. one thing I absolutely REJECT is this tired bullshit about "they hate our freedoms"... BULLSHIT... they don't give a damn about us, we're half a world away... they only care when we start bullying them around... THIS is why what the rest of the world thinks matters, because if they get pissed enough, they start flying planes into buildings and then no one's happy...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:45 p.m. CST

    Nun, your answers

    by Super Person

    1) Probably in the long run, sure, but he would've never done it while we were breathing down his neck... my point? Containment was WORKING, even Colin Powell thought so... 2) Of course not, but there are a lot of nations that don't love us, and we're not attacking them are we? No, because it's okay not to love us... but this argument holds no water for you or people like you, because you honestly think we have a right to rule the world and say fuck it to everyone else in it... 3) Some of them yes, but not Saddam... I don't think he cared about us really... he just wanted to be the big man in his part of the world, and we stepped in to stop him... I still don't think he cared about us enough to work with terrorists to attack us, as we all know at this point that he had NOTHING to do with 9/11 whatsoever, but again, containment was working, and I don't think he really had enough of a global mindset to think outside of his own borders and security...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:47 p.m. CST

    Regarding PIPA

    by Immortal_Fish

    I'll have to read it in detail at a later time, so thanks for mentioning it, HarrisonsDad. Breifly, an unpopular decision doesn't mean it isn't a just decision. As Norm mentioned, Spain's population switched for the opposition in answer to Iraq and they still got hit by terrorists again. The fact that France wants JOhn KErry elected is reason enough alone to send me in the other direction, wherever it may lead. Does this PIPA report also mention how Hammas holds distribution rights in the Middle East to Moore's movie?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:47 p.m. CST

    Cannibal_Nun - The America of today is not the America that grac

    by Pumpkinsboy

    Or re-built the European infrastructure. Clinton called himself an `Eisenhower Republican`. Modern Conservatism, from which the roots of the de-regulated economy and foreign policy were sprung, can be traced to Goldwater. The America that helped build the UN and which acted pluralistically in the post-war world arena is not the America of today. Also, why do you hate Europeans so much? I'm guessing you could probably trace your lineage back to a European country. It seems silly to be xenophobic about a people you originate from.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 5:54 p.m. CST

    Something about cleaning a toilet? And putting words in my mout

    by minderbinder

    I didn't say they never had WMD's, I was responding to a post that said they were "always" a threat to the US. Wrong. When we invaded, when Bush insisted they were an "imminent threat", they were not, and had no WMD's. (funny, maybe the sanctions were doing some good?) And even when they had WMD's, how could they have used them to attack US citizens on US soil? Give me specifics. When they did have poison gas (a decade ago) how would they have got it into the country? " Seems to me you're the kind of person who would have been scratching his head on 9/10 and saying "but what could a few Arabs with box cutters do to us, huh?" Um...that's what EVERYONE had said on 9/10. And Bush's "war on terror" has done zilch to prevent further attacks of that sort. "that's why we had to watch our own people jumping out of the WTC on 9/11. " Um, WHAT's why? Because I'm a twat? I don't follow.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 6:24 p.m. CST

    No, I DID read the report...

    by godric

    And I realize what the point of it was. I was merely making the point that the report implies that "the world" is NOT supportive by Bush, and I was accusing those who did the report of being western and European-centric. My job requires me to be in a lot of different countries, and I can tell you from experiences in Africa and Central Asia that that part of "The World" IS supportive of what Bush is doing. Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of Kurdish people saved from Sadaam's plan to kill them by Bush. Check out the non-partisan documentary, "Saddam's Mass Graves", made by an Iraqi filmmaker who wanted to show what his country was saved from. (In an interview with the director, he specifically mentioned his decision to not be political by cutting out a scene showing Kurdish women in northern Iraq who named their baby boys with the first name "Bush", mistakenly thinking that was George W.'s first name and not his last, but so named because he is their HERO). Also ask any civilian who has traveled in the 75% of Iraq that is safe(comparatively) and peaceful what the locals think of the President. People, the media is feeding us one side. To continue this ramble, my boss has traveled through Iraq and tells a great story about being at a press conference--this was about a year ago--in Iraq where the person giving the conference was telling about all the things being rebuilt, the medical supplies distributed, all the building going on, and the reporters sat and did not write down a thing. Then when it was time for questions, it was all about the one explosion here or the one problem there. WAKE UP, PEOPLE! The press is INTENTIONALLY giving you an imbalanced picture of the Iraq situation. Yes, there is blood and tragedy there, in parts, but there is ALSO great rebuilding, stability, and freedoms unknown under Saddam in many parts of the nation. But don't believe me, believe the President of Iraq, who, in a message to Congress given about three weeks ago, called the western media irresponsible for their portrayal of his nation, and claimed that all but two of the provinces in the country were safe enough to hold an election TOMORROW. But I don't think most people want to take a balanced look at the situation. They want to believe that it was a horrible deed on Bush's part, and that the richest country on earth (the only country where the poor own cars) should not use its power, might, and influence to set oppressed people free. Jerks.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 6:25 p.m. CST

    A call for civility

    by HarrisonsDad

    I believe there have been some very intelligent posts on this talk back. People like Dr Farragammo, ol' painless, minderbinder, bushsux, Super Person, gujjer and Pumpkinsboy have all posted thoughtful well-researched facts, and to some degree, so did Knightmare187. And oddly enough, I have to give credit to FedericoZ and Lamerz to not resorting to the demeaning and pure party-spouting pabulum of the extreme right-wingers. We all have an opinion about what this election is all about and we all feel very strongly about what we each believe to be important. I will continue to respect those who use more than rage and emotion and those who will at least look at the other side

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 6:40 p.m. CST

    Godric - America the only country where the poor own cars? Are y

    by Pumpkinsboy

    Such a ridiculous comment makes it difficult to take your post seriously, no offence. Also, the Iraqi president may have made positive comments - but a) he is not a democratically elected leader and b) he is Bush's stooge, and his speech was written for him by white house. As for the negativity of the press - it's kinda hard to get excited about a new water cleaning project when women and children civilians are getting blown to pieces in Falluja, y'know?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 6:41 p.m. CST

    McDonalds! Fuck yeah! Wal-Mart! Fuck yeah! The Gap! Fuck yeah!

    by Tall_Boy

    Fuck yeah! Rebox! Fuck yeah! Fake Tits! Fuck yeah! Susihi! Fuck yeah! Taco Bell! Fuck yeah! Rodeos! Fuck yeah! Bed Bath & Beyond! Fuck yeah! Fuck yeah! Liberty! Fuck yeah! White Slips! Fuck yeah! The Alamo! Fuck yeah! Band-Aids! Fuck yeah! Las Vegas! Fuck yeah! Christmas! Fuck yeah! Imigrants! Fuck yeah! Pomp-Pomps! Fuck yeah! Democrats! Fuck yeah! Republicans! Fuck yeah! Sportsmanship! Fuck yeah! Books!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 6:58 p.m. CST

    just read dr. bulber's post, and...

    by joe brady

    ... Bush and Kerry having make-up sex? Thanks for the fresh nightmare fuel, man. From now on, you get all my therapy bills.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 7:50 p.m. CST

    Ah well Nunny

    by Super Person

    Good thing you don't have anything to say about it...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 7:58 p.m. CST

    Hehe

    by Super Person

    Canny, I doubt he's going to need people like you anyway... ;)

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 8:04 p.m. CST

    :)

    by Super Person

    Good thing Kerry's not a "You're either with us or you're against us" kinda guy, Canny, because if he was, you'd be against him, and that'd be downright unAmerican!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 8:25 p.m. CST

    Bobby Peru

    by HarrisonsDad

    Just what did I say to you that was uncivil? Do you consider sarcasm uncivil. At best I only post facts or findings of reports. At worst I get a little sarcastic. Eihter one I wouldn't consider uncivil.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 8:44 p.m. CST

    Orion... you seriously need to take a class on the history of th

    by Judge Briggs

    ...which all oppress their own people one way or the other... they are all hotbeds for terrorism because of the oppression from their government and the hypocritical policies of the United States ie. we want to spread freedom but lets get into bed with the Saudi Arabian gov. because of the oil... even though they have an abysmal human rights record and again, breeding ground for terrorist *cough 9/11 hijackers, UBL cough*... or how we support Israel in every fashion even if they are oppressing the shit out of the Palestinians... Iraq was contained. Iran posed a much larger threat and again, if you read your history on the Middle East, you will find that Iraq did not nearly pose as much of a threat as say Iran, Syria, or hell, 90% of the mid-east... read up and then talk up. Till then, stop getting your news from GOP TV...

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 9:03 p.m. CST

    A Pox on Them All

    by pulpculture

    "By the way why DO YOU LIKE being associated with these sickos that wan't to ban everything? Do you want your programming all pre-approved by Michael Powell and Brent Bozell?" You mean like Democrat Janet Reno, who was crusading against "violent television" when I was an intern working at a Washington, D.C., media group? The Dems and the Republicans are equally bad when it comes to free speech and giving the FCC censorship authority. If you must vote at all, vote Libertarian, vote Green, vote Nader or vote Constitution Party, but don't vote for the two-party cabal.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:12 p.m. CST

    I'm not-so-patiently waiting for Cannibal_Nun to pull out his tr

    by SmarkJobber

    C'mon, Can-o'-balls, you're slacking in this thread. When TBers have to turn to the numbskullery of Orionsangels to get a chuckle, it's safe to say you're not fulfilling your duty as AICN's Supreme Wacko. Make with the yuks already.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:15 p.m. CST

    I cant wait till Nov. 3rd...

    by Bullworth

    ...to see all the donkeys crying when Bush wins....Oh that will be sweet!

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:34 p.m. CST

    A scenario for Christians to consider...

    by ZeroCorpse

    This is an open letter to all the Christians in this city, and this country, from a non-Christian patriotic American. I want to pose some questions, and I'd like you to answer them to yourself honestly. In this hypothetical scenario, I want you to imagine that a new religion grows in America. This religion is based on the teachings of a man named "Marthur" and is called "Marthurianism" by the believers, the Marthurians. Arthur is believed to be an earthly representation of the Creator, and thus He is divine to Marthurians, and His word is sacred to them. Among their beliefs are the following eight commandments: 1. Having more than two children is a horrible sin. 2. Blondes are wicked people, because the Creator says so. 3. Breeding with a person who has the same color eyes as yours is wicked. 4. Monday is the day of nudity. You shall not wear clothes on Monday. 5. People who aren't Marthurian are wrong, and will be punished when they die. 6. Life officially ends when you are 120 years old, even if your body dies earlier than that. 7. The game of baseball is indecent and obscene to Marthur's eyes. 8. Astrology is 100% right. It is never wrong. Always do what it says. Strangely, this odd religion becomes the majority religion in America. You, however, decide to remain a Christian and believe as you always have, no matter what the Marthurians try to tell you. Before long, Marthurian churches are on every corner, Marthurians hold public office at all levels, and Marthurian television shows and channels can be found easily. It isn't long before the Marthurians are complaining about the state of the country, convinced that their belief system is the root of all goodness, and they suggest fixing the country through Marthurian ideals. Suddenly, your marriage to your spouse is considered "unnatural" because you both have blue eyes. An amendment is passed making such marriages illegal. Your marriage is annulled. You may no longer visit your spouse in the hospital when they are ill. You may no longer claim your spouse in taxes. You may no longer gain health insurance benefits from your spouse's employer. What's worse is that you're a blonde, and when your spouse dies, their family (all brunettes) consider you wicked and sinful, and cut you out of the proceedings which you no longer have a right to attend. You're ostracized for your blonde hair, and attempts to dye it black meet with looks of pity and revulsion. Of course, even if you cover it up you still know you're a blonde, and it never feels quite right having to lie about it. When you hold your spouse's hand in public, people glare at you and tell you to stop pushing your perverted sexuality on them. If you mention your spouse in conversation, people accuse you of only being about to talk about your sexual preference for other blue-eyed people. If you take stand against being treated like a second-class citizen because of your hair color or your spouse's eye color, people call you an "activist" and accuse you of being part of the "blonde agenda." Your children attend public school, and the new laws dictate that they are taught to base all important decisions on astrology. Also, on Monday most of the other children and all the teachers are naked, and your children are teased for not being naked on Mondays, too. They come home crying because the other kids tease them for being Christian and not participating. You already have two children, and become pregnant after the Marthurian laws go into effect. You are forced, by law, to have an abortion even though you don't believe in them because it is illegal to have more than two kids. The government decides on the size of your family and makes decisions regarding your body and procreation rights, and there's nothing you can do about it. Hospitals won't care for you because it's against the law. The only option is to have an unlicensed back-alley doctor deliver the baby and provide health care for your child and you, with no guarantee of safety. When you go to court to sue your employer for discriminating against you for being blonde, you are dismayed to see the Marthurian Commandments posted in the courthouse. The judge is a devout Marthurian, and you wonder if you're getting a fair trial from this situation, considering you're a blonde Christian and the plaque on the wall says blondes are wicked AND non-Marthurians are wrong. What's worse is that the case takes place on a Monday, and you are the only person in the court room wearing clothes. Your case is dismissed. Your son loves baseball, and he writes a story about a baseball game. He is suspended for writing an obscene paper. People think you're a bad parent because you taught your kids how to play baseball. You are investigated, and when the FBI finds you're selling videotapes of baseball games to other people by mail, they arrest you for violating obscenity laws. You try to explain that to your belief system, baseball isn't obscene, but since Marthurianism is the basis of law, you are convicted. The prosecuting attorney wins an additional charge against in his case by proving you didn't observe your horoscope for that week, which proves you must be mentally unstable. Now... Tell me honestly; Does legislating your religion make sense? Can you honestly say that you're not hurting other people by trying to use your religion as the basis for American laws? Does being the opinion of the majority make something right for all people? Is it Christian teaching to harm other people and strip them of dignity and civil rights? Would Jesus approve of you doing something which is effectively casting stones at other people because you don't agree with them? You have a right to believe what you want in America. That's what's wonderful about being an American. Before you vote for a law based on your religious beliefs at the expense of other people's freedom, consider what it would be like if you had to walk a mile in the sandals of those you're about to condemn. Really think about it. What you choose to do may ruin someone else's life. Is that what Jesus taught you to do?

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 10:41 p.m. CST

    Cannibal Nut isn't dead yet?

    by Holly_Wight

    Jeez. I thought you'd have died in a horrible autoerotic asphixiation accident by now, you sick fuck. I encourage everybody here to completely ignore this nothing of a person. He's obviously an attention-starved piece of shit. Stop spraying him with your spittle and he'll dry up and go away. Hey fucknut, if you happen to find a bar that's tended by Socrates and the Reverend Jim Jones, please do us all a favor and pop in for a drink or two. You certainly aren't here to talk about movies OR politics. You seem to come here just to shovel your hateful crap to a mass audience. Fuck off and die, shitstain.

  • Oct. 22, 2004, 11:42 p.m. CST

    the main point I was making in my salon.com post

    by ol' painless

    Was to point out that any real conservatives who back Bush are simply betraying themselves and everything they believe in. I respect real conservatives: the ones like John McCain: ex-warriors who believe in fiscal prudence, not advancing their virulent brand of Evangelical christianity, not giving tax custs to the rich, not starting wars on false pretenses to advance an alternative agenda, not cosying up to thieving bastards like 'Kenny Boy' Lay of Enron, not smearing the patriotism of those with legitimate criticism, and calling them traitors, not turning animals like Karl Rove loose to wage social civil war against liberal Americans for a sake of a few more votes. How can I frame it more clearly to you? Bush is not one of you. He is a vindictive little oaf with barely a single functioning brain cell. He is a neo-conservative chimp who was napping at the wheel on the 11th September 2001. Why did he get no warning? Because he had didn't give two shits about terrorism and cut anti-terrorist funding in order to revive idiotice ventures like Star Wars again. Bush hates real conservatives: they remind him of his daddy. It makes me laugh hearing all these stuggling middle to lower class saying they'll vote for Bush: that's like voting to have your own arm cut off. All I ask is that you take a genuinely good hard look at this guy, and really ask yourself if you made a mistake voting for him the first time. You didn't know him in 2000: you do now.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 12:48 a.m. CST

    Bobby Peru sounds dumb.

    by Voice O. Reason

    Its called a hypothetical situation, moron. Congrats on missing the point.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 1:33 a.m. CST

    Two unrelated observations

    by Vern

    1. Most talkbackers are egomaniacal dickheads who write only to call Harry fat, tell someone to suck their cock, use the word "shite" even though they are american, bring up Star Wars for no reason, announce that everyone else is stupid and they are smart, or permanently embed their stupid celebrity sex fantasy of the day into electronic history 2. Most talkbackers seem to like Bush

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:23 a.m. CST

    I am so sick of this election year crap where celebrities, who m

    by allnamesaretaken

    SHUT UP DOUCHEBAG. Whedon has already donated a few G's to the Kerry campaign.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:23 a.m. CST

    I am so sick of this election year crap where celebrities, who m

    by allnamesaretaken

    SHUT UP DOUCHEBAG. Whedon has already donated a few G's to the Kerry campaign.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:23 a.m. CST

    I am so sick of this election year crap where celebrities, who m

    by allnamesaretaken

    SHUT UP DOUCHEBAG. Whedon has already donated a few G's to the Kerry campaign.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:23 a.m. CST

    I am so sick of this election year crap where celebrities, who m

    by allnamesaretaken

    SHUT UP DOUCHEBAG. Whedon has already donated a few G's to the Kerry campaign.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:23 a.m. CST

    I am so sick of this election year crap where celebrities, who m

    by allnamesaretaken

    SHUT UP DOUCHEBAG. Whedon has already donated a few G's to the Kerry campaign.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:23 a.m. CST

    I am so sick of this election year crap where celebrities, who m

    by allnamesaretaken

    SHUT UP DOUCHEBAG. Whedon has already donated a few G's to the Kerry campaign.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:23 a.m. CST

    I am so sick of this election year crap where celebrities, who m

    by allnamesaretaken

    SHUT UP DOUCHEBAG. Whedon has already donated a few G's to the Kerry campaign.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:23 a.m. CST

    I am so sick of this election year crap where celebrities, who m

    by allnamesaretaken

    SHUT UP DOUCHEBAG. Whedon has already donated a few G's to the Kerry campaign.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:41 a.m. CST

    fuck you too man

    by allnamesaretaken

    My enter button locked up.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:54 a.m. CST

    Hmm

    by ThingsThatTimDog

    Well I just lost a lot of respect for several former Buffy/Angel actors.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 3:43 a.m. CST

    When will the madness end?

    by Mr.FTW

    ANd this sight go back to being about entertainment. I agree with the others who say if they want political information they go somewhere more else. For me I want it to be a source of informed and unbiased information. Not one filled with idealogs (who are dead set in their beliefs no matter what) and fanboy pandering. I like Joss's shows and I like him on X-men but do I give a rats ass about his political views? NO! With all the BS flying from both side of the political spectrum a site like this should be a haven where people can get away from it for 10-15 min. at work or however long when they're at home. We're bombarded by this crap everywhere we look TV, newspapers, radio, on the back of mini vans, billboards and in peoples front yards. The last place I want to see it is a place where I come to check out news and information on things of entertainment. For all the BUsh bashers and the Kerry haters keep you opinions to yourself, nobody cares. People, even the undicided, know who they are going to vote for deep down. Political views are formed through environment and up bringing. People either feel one way or the other and no democrat or republican zealot is going to change their minds.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 3:47 a.m. CST

    Dark Horizons says ANGEL could be back...

    by Barrymore

    In an article on Dark Horizons, a source says that the WB admitted that they messed up when they canceled Angel. If Boreanaz won't come back, why not do a "Spike and Willow" or (as soon as Tru is finally canceled) a "FAITH and SPIKE" or "THE FEARLESS VAMPIRE HUNTERS" (with Spike, Willow, Wes, Gunn, etc.)?! C'mon Joss!!! C'mon WB!!!

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 4:04 a.m. CST

    A few points...

    by DragonHeart

    1. The word is 'intelligence', not 'inteligence' (note the second 'l'). If you're gonna rant about something, at least have the courtesy to not exhibit the same lack that you're complaining about in other people. 2. Political name-calling is one thing, but I am a member of the Haliwa-Saponi Tribe in North Carolina. I consider Cannibal_Nun's (TM) reference to "drunken Injun's" to be tasteless, provocative, and downright racist. I hereby invite him/her/it to a discourse on exactly why it is a pejorative term and, when used to generally refer to Native Americans, is guaranteed to cause tempers to flare. If that doesn't work, I invite Cannibal_Nun(TM) down to NC, where I'll have a case of Whup-Ass (a fine 1972 vintage) waiting for him/her/it. 3. Kerry "...an admitted war criminal..."???? WTF? At least HE WENT!!! 4. Heard on BBC radio tonight that Bush just signed legislation to give US business $140 Billion tax break to make up for the tax breaks they lost over exporting goods. And this is supposed to create jobs, how? 5. "All fuckin protestors must get their asses beat!" Erm, so, like, you don't support the US Constitution? You know the part about Free Speech? Oh, wait. It's only free if they agree with you, right? 6. "...the only defense the Libs have is to try and dumb down the president..." Ah, were you off-planet during Bushes first 100 days? He made himself look dumb! I watched him mangle the English language on international television. People in DENMARK emailed me to ask WTF? Who is this guy? And why did you people elect him? 7. "First thing Kerry will do if he gets in office is raise taxes!" Is that raise taxes, or just put them back to where they were (with a budget surplus that could've funded tons of research) before Shrub took office? 8. Fine, let's kick some terrorist ass. I do happen to think that Saddam Hussein is an evil man and should have been removed from power. But I also think that if the approximate $100 billion (US) had been spent on hunting for the leadership of al Quaeda, THEY'D be the oneS either dead, or in jail and held up to international scrutiny and justice; instead of out recruiting MORE TERRORISTS! Which is more important, catching small groups of people who can travel worldwide to blow stuff up, or a despot who's military has it's hands full controlling the civilian populace? 9. Did anybody else hear about the Bush Administration re-classifying some jobs as "Manufacturing"? "Manufacturing" jobs (in general) pay better than some other job classifications, like "Service" sector jobs. Now the Bushies can proclaim "We brought about a HUGE increase in manufacturing jobs!" Guess what? From what I understand, flipping burgers at a fast food joint is now "Manufacturing". There aren't really any more people working than before the re-classification. And 10. I think it's pretty freakin' cool that Harry let's us take the talkback where-ever we need to take it. I've seen boards where the SLIGHTEST off-topic comment was yanked, the MILDEST 'dirty word' was deleted.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 4:31 a.m. CST

    It's sad to belong to someone else...

    by skitch

    ...when the right one comes along...can't make it living in the armpit of the nation...okay...sorry cheesy 70's song but I have to say that I would love to meet everyone involved with Buffy and Angel even if I wouldn't vote for Kerry...then again, I wouldn't vote for Bush...I must be one of those people who wouldn't vote for the lesser of two evils but still respect creativity in life...vote for whomever you want (even if the electoral college and the public let you down)

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 4:38 a.m. CST

    I have one more thing to add, though no one might read it

    by skitch

    Oh wait...is "allnamesaretaken" done with his/her (have to be PC and cover all the bases) foolish tirade done?...ok...then I really hope the best man (no PC here since there are only 2 candidates) wins...and I respect celebrities for getting people out to vote...I really do...then again, don't let it sway you...vote (or don't) for those who YOU think would be the best PERSON for the job...so far, not impressed with the choices offered...the presidency should be multiple choice (as long as all the other testing is)...where is the "none of the above" choice?

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 5:19 a.m. CST

    Glad its your last post, Cannibal

    by ol' painless

    Because that was the most laugh-free piece of desperation I've ever read. That flop sweat on your brow must be getting in your eyes by now. Get off the stage before people start throwing stuff.

  • I keep asking this question because no conservatives have the balls to answer it. If the war in Iraq is so vital to maintaining our security, and we obviously need more troops, why don't you go?

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 6:21 a.m. CST

    There goes good ol' Bill O'Reilly lying again!

    by bushsux

    Now, I wanted to let you conservatives in on some information about your little hero. My friend back home told me that on October 19,2004 Bill O'Reilly, who is currently the subject of a sexual harassment investigation, lied about chemical weapons in Iraq on his radio show. A caller accused the Bush administration of lying about chemical weapons in Iraq. O'Reily retorted saying: "They did have ricin up there in the north -- so why are you discounting that so much?" That is not true. In fact, the recently released Duelfer Report (the final report of the Iraqi Survey Group (ISG), led by Charles A. Duelfer, which conducted the search for weapons in Iraq following the invasion) indicates that Iraq did not have ricin. In a section on ricin, the complete report (long pdf) stated: "ISG developed no definitive information with which to confirm reports of post-war [first Gulf War] production." There you go, more proof O'Reilly is a liar!

  • As stubborn as you conservatives are, you know this war was wrong. Was Saddam a bad man? Yes. As bad as Hitler, no way. Hitler killed 6 million Jews and wanted to take over the world. As for the conservative happy talk about getting rid of a bad dictator, Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia is just as bad if not worse than Saddam and the Bush administration loves him. Didn't 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers come from Saudi? Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Equitorial Guinea, Zimbabwe, Sudan, China, Belarus etc. These are all countries with dictators just as bad if not worse than Saddam. These are all countries that can attack us and have people who want to. Why don't we invade these countries to then?

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 6:34 a.m. CST

    And good riddance.

    by DocPazuzu

    Cannibal_Nun -- what a fucking loser. It put a smile on my face watching him self-destruct like that. Now if we can only get vikingkitty, GreatOne, GingerTwit and Mace Windex to do the same.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 9:58 a.m. CST

    fools

    by The_Dude_77

    liberals, you ignorant sluts..!!! you act like its so damn easy to get bin laden, he's in a cave in country of caves on top of more caves, oh and how about the fact that Bill(the worst president ever)Clinton had him too but oh-no no chance of lefty media bringing that up or the fact that clinton, gore, the UN, russia, the UK, france, germany all said iraq had weapons, its just that W had the guts to do something about it, and Kerry was on the intelligence committee and had the same reports that bush did and he voted for the war... and weither he had them or not, now he can't get them, stop early (see WWII) FACE IT, LIBERALS. BUSH DID WHAT HAD TO BE DONE, UNLIKE SOME OTHER PRES WHO WOULD JUST LOB A COUPLE OF TOMAHAWK MISSLES INTO IRAQ, BUT ONLY TO COVER UP WHATEVER SCANDEL SLICK-WILLY WAS IN AT THE TIME..!!!!!!

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 10:04 a.m. CST

    "admitted war criminal"

    by minderbinder

    There it is again. Could someone provide a link to the quote where Kerry admits this? Thanks.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 10:13 a.m. CST

    Enlisted folk usually tend to vote Republican, makes sense since

    by minderbinder

    But I'd be curious to see polls specifically of the enlisted and their families...where did you find one?

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 10:18 a.m. CST

    Norm, no fucking idea

    by talbuckin

    I am from Spain. Actually I live at 600 meters from 2 of the bombs. And I was at home when they exploded. And read what you wrote about Spain and the government here, really shows the fucking zero knowledge you have about the matter. Which directly makes invalid any other opinion you have about any other subject. First of all, January 2004, 90% of spanish population was against Irak invasion and the spanish participation in the war. The PSOE promised way before that, that in case of winning the elections the firstm very first gov. decision would be the inmediate retirement of spanish troops of Irak. Why? because this is a fucking George Bush war, not ours. This promise was made long before any bombs and threats and anything. So when they got to power that is the first thing they did. Now, obviously, in your country this has been showed as Spain giving out to Al Qaeda demandings. What a fucking way of seeing the world. The fact is that the government here never took Al Qaeda threats a s a reason for the retirement-. Of course You would never believe that a government does what the people asks for, and even worse, that they actually do what they promise before election. And for the record, Al Qaeda dont care about what mine or your gov. does. they have their own agenda and we had a new bomb a week later and another bomb in the AVE rail tracks the same week. Sure you did not know. Of course you dont. Spain now is not your friend. We are cowards who run out of war. Salon.com report is so fucking true.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 10:40 a.m. CST

    Talbuckin said exactly what 99.9% of the world believes... that

    by Judge Briggs

    ...which by the way the Bushies didn't want ... and the Daulpher (sp?) report... fucking Bush supporters still don't see that attacking Iraq was a mistake (and hell, Bush said even after all of the information that is available now, he would still given the green light to the nation's first pre-emptive war.... THAT IS NOT DECISIVENESS... IT'S FUCKING CALLED BEING STUBBORN.) and now we're paying for it with lives... go read the Salon.com report and you Republicans will finally get a glimpse on why you are perceived as being ignorant and narrow-minded in your views.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 10:47 a.m. CST

    Judge B...

    by ejcarter9

    ...This is the wrong war at the wrong time. This war should've taken place in the early 90s. Oh wait, it did, but it wasn't FINISHED! Saddam should've been taken out THEN. I'm sure the contents of the mass graves would agree with that statement. Everyone who says that we shouldn't have gone into Iraq I just pity now. How can they not think about all of those mass graves full of men, women and their children? I didn't realize that being "more enlightened", more "intellectual" and more "compassionate" was letting people be slaughtered.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 11:03 a.m. CST

    Isn't it a little late int he game for this

    by guerillatokyo

    What good would this money do now? Buy a timeslot during Joey? And why is Joss bringing in the second stringers?

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 11:30 a.m. CST

    When are you simpletons going to realize that "POLLS" mean exact

    by SCYTHEOFLUNA

    And the figures regarding the opinions of the troops have been misrepresented in almost every sense. To think that the troops blindly support Bush is naive. My dad is in the military and he isn't voting for Bush. The division between the candidates is split pretty evenly with military personel as well as civilians. Regardless, even if the majority of U.S. troops did support the president, I don't trust our troops to make policy decisions. You con's need to realize that polls don't mean shit.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 11:32 a.m. CST

    Kerry Game...

    by earthlingdave

    Yo, my company just made a Kerry game...it's a bit silly but...we're trying to help in any way we can. www.imagerymedia.com/kerrygame

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 11:35 a.m. CST

    This war should've taken place in the early 90s. Saddam should'v

    by Voice O. Reason

    Why? So we could've had the same problems then that we're having now? Bsu Sr. knew taking out Saddam was a bad idea in 1991, just like it was a bad idea in 2003.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 12:08 p.m. CST

    EJCarter... please do your homework before making such claims ..

    by Judge Briggs

    The first Iraq war was defined to remove Hussein from Kuwait... NOT TO REMOVE HIM FROM POWER... Why? For many geo-political reasons: first, if we went all the way to Iraq and removed Hussein, we faced the notion of a fracture in the diverse broad coalition that was so succesful....many if not all Arab nations and key allies would not have supported the invasion of Iraq and the removal of Hussein.... Secondly, the Kurds in north would have sought succession and the creation of their own state... Jordan would go berserk if the Kurds were to establish its own state and thus would have no other to choice then seek to invade Iraq and fight the Kurds... third, if you read the Powell-Weinberger doctrine, it states.... that when deploying troops to combat, have the goals clearly stated and NEVER CHANGE THEM. When we got our mandate from U.N. to boot Iraq from Kuwait, that was the only goal we had at the time...we did carried out the mission and was extremely successful... Therefore, people like myself are annoyed because we didn't invade Iraq because of the mass graves... no we invaded because we were told that Hussein was hiding WMDs and intended to hand them to terrorist groups because of his so-called ties to terrorist groups. By the way, remember when Hussein's intelligence angency was caught in a assassination attempt against Bush senior? Welp, when that happened, it was conveyed to Hussein, if that were to ever happen again, buh-bye Hussein and his regime... therefore, as history reads... Hussein got out of state sponsored terrorism... for more reading on state sponsored terrorism, I suggest people read up on North Korea and Iran Sudan. However, don't waste your time with Iraq... oh and those bi-partisans of the 9-11 Commission and the Daulpher report will tell ya the same thing. We now know, that he was not a state sponsor of terrorism nor did he have weapons of mass destruction... fuck sake, he was contained... YET.... Bush would do it all over again FOR THE SAME F'ING REASONS!!!!... Think about it, how many times has the Bushies changed positions on why we're in Iraq? Or should I ask, how many times has this adminstration FLIPPED-FLOPPED on Iraq! Here is a few: 1.) At first Hussein possessed and intended to use WMDs against the US and "the free world" and was an imminent threat. Weapons weren't found! Uh-oh, change positions and make it so that if people don't agree with you, they don't love freedom... secondly, we then get the explanation that Hussein as a dictator was a threat to the U.S and he would have developed the weapons then use them against us... Hussein is captured... shewwwwwww sighs the adminstration, those pesky "limited amount insurgents" should go away about now... NOPE. Uh oh! The violence is getting even worse before Husseiny was caught... change, I mean, flip that position and DENY THAT THINGS ARE GETTING SHITTIER BY THE DAY!!! Because the terrorists are fucking us up in Iraq, it's better to fight them there than fight them at home, on American soil.... Finally Bush believes that freedom is the best way to stop the spread of terrorism.... I LOVE THAT REASON. Anyone who grasps the roots of terrorism will find that it mostly stems from the Israeli-Palestianian conflict and hypocritical U.S. policies. For fuck sake Bush, get a hint... want to solve 90% of the terrorist problem? Start with solving the Israel and Palestianian equation... then maybe, correct the hypocritical policies that are in place, THEN lets start spreading feedom the Dubya way. So please, don't give me that we're there to dig up mass gravs and put Hussein on trial... because of all shitty dictatorships in the world ie. North Korea and Iran, Iraq pales.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 12:37 p.m. CST

    DevilCat, since when is 50 to 41 over-whelming

    by HarrisonsDad

    That's only 4 percentage points outside the margin of error. If you want to consider 4 percentage points over-whelming, then I guess you're one of those people the PIPA report was about. The percentage of Military voters who prefer Bush is 50%, that's like . . . uh, let me figure this out on my toes . . . uh, oh yeah, that means there are half of the military who won't vote for Bush or are undecided. I can't believe the over-whelming majority there.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 12:38 p.m. CST

    Wow the guy from Buffy says to vote for Kerry! By Gosh, I'm gonn

    by jackburton2004

    <EOM>

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 12:49 p.m. CST

    Judge Briggs, please don't call i the Salon.com report

    by HarrisonsDad

    Too many of the Right-Wingers will say it's a left-wing leaning report. The fact is the report comes from the "Program on International Policy Attitudes" which is a joint program of the Center on Policy Attitudes and the Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland, School of Public Affairs, University of Maryland. Salon.com merely reported on the findings of the report entitled "The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters".

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 12:54 p.m. CST

    Why the US has no friends

    by Bart of Darkness

    The insularity, parochialism and just plain ignorance displayed in this talkback clearly shows why the US is antagonising practically everyone in the rest of the world, friend and foe alike.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 12:55 p.m. CST

    Hey, Herc, Charisma Carpenter will guest start on the Nov. 10 ep

    by Jim Jam Bongs

    ...Which will air at the same time as "Lost". :-(

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 1 p.m. CST

    yah, easier just write out Salon.com...haha, lazy me..... i see

    by Judge Briggs

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 1:03 p.m. CST

    Okay, answer this question honestly

    by HarrisonsDad

    Instead of misleading the American Public by telling us we were invading Iraq to look for WMDs and because of Saddam's ties to al Qaeda (which we know now was entirely false), why didn't Bush just say we were invading Iraq to remove a despot and give freedom to the Iraqi people (which is now what Bush says he meant to do all along)? I'll tell you why, because if Bush had told the American people that he was invading a country just to change the geo-political map of the middle east, he wouldn't have gotten approval from Congress, there would've been even more protests, and he wouldn't even have the (tiny) coalition he has now. In other words, he deceived the world and us so he could get his way.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:04 p.m. CST

    Let me tell you a TRUE story

    by HarrisonsDad

    Once upon a time there was a man named George. Now George wasn't the brightest man in the world, but he was world leader. One day George recieved some intelligence that the land of Iraq. It seems someone had it on good authority that Iraq was attempting to buy Uranium ore in the land of Niger in Africa. And that Iraq was attempting to smuggle Aluminum rods to be used in building a very bad weapon. Now in just a couple of months George was supposed to give a big speech before Congress, The Supreme Court, The Joint Chiefs of staff, and the American Public. George decided to have this "proof" written into his speech. However, before the speech could be given, someone from an agency known as the CIA let George know that the information was false. They had proof that the document in which the information was obtained had been forged. George didn't like this. So he decided not to listen. He was told again the information was false, this time by Joe Wilson, a former Ambassador to the land of Iraq. Once again, George ignored the warning. No, thought George, I need this information for my speech. So George went ahead and used the false information in two speeches. After the second speech, which was called The State of the Union, Joe Wilson wrote an article where he informed the public of George's ruse. Now George and his men didn't like this very much. How dare this Joe Wilson reveal their secret falsehood to the world. So one of George's men (no one knows for sure which man did it, but an agency called the FBI says all evidence points to a man called Dick) leaked some secret information about Joe Wilson's wife to the press. It turns out Mr. Wilson's wife was an agent of the CIA. Most of the press knew this information could be dangerous to Joe Wilson's wife, so they didn't release it to the public. But one man called Robert Novak didn't care about Mrs. Wilson's safety. This was a good story, so Robert Novak told the world Mrs. Wilson was in the CIA. All of this happened because one man, Joe Wilson, told the truth about another man, George, (who unlike his namesake) told a lie. Will we live happily ever after? It all depends on what happens November 2.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:18 p.m. CST

    Yeah, I should've proof read that last post . . . Oops!

    by HarrisonsDad

    But the gist of the story is still right.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 2:46 p.m. CST

    New study proves that Bush's supporters don't know what they're

    by Voice O. Reason

    http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/Report10_21_04.pdf

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 3:06 p.m. CST

    woopty shit

    by _Kayser_

    woopty shit. thats all i got to say. woopty shit.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 3:37 p.m. CST

    Is Cannibal Nut really dead...?

    by Holly_Wight

    Because I would like to spit on his corpse. I don't usually come to the point of hating people, but he passed my "ladylike" stage several talkbacks ago. Ebonic is right; WTF Harry, Mori, et al? You've banned other people for questioning Mori's reviews, but you let Cannibal_Nun get away with cross-posting and hate speech, and otherwise being a jerkwad loser. In fact, I think AICN should start giving awards, and the first winner of the AICN Jerkwad Loser Award should be Cannibal_Nun. I'm sorry if I sounded hateful in my last post (or this one) but I can abide people who make an effort to insult every non-white, non-male, non-conservative, non-American person they encounter. We shouldn't be forced to put up with his bullshit, and I would even consider switching teams- temporarily- to thank anyone who beat the living shit out of that asshole. I'd offer to do it myself, but I think he'd probably get off on an attractive 5'6" dyke kicking his ass with her high heels on... (What am I saying? MOST of you would probably dig that.) Maybe I should just stop talking for now...

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 3:39 p.m. CST

    CRAP! I meant "CAN'T abide people who..."

    by Holly_Wight

    My typos are sponsored by the Republican Party: Making the world safe to say the wrong thing entirely and sound like a jackass in public.

  • Oct. 23, 2004, 7:05 p.m. CST

    ADMITTED WAR CRIMINAL

    by minderbinder

    Peru, I'm still waiting for a source on this one. Why do you keep ignoring it? What exactly did he say? And what war crimes did he admit to? Can you back this one up, or is it just more of your bullshit?

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 12:20 a.m. CST

    I'LL SAY IT: FUCK THIS WEBSITE

    by Jeditemple

    I'm tired of this sorry ass Liberal website. Comingsoon.net is better anyway. They're more up-to-date, have breaking stories, and avoid politics. Aintitcoolnews = Moveon.org

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 12:49 a.m. CST

    OMG! ASHLEE SIMPSONS JUST GOT TOTALLY BUSTED TRYING TO LIP SYNC

    by Cletus Van Damme

    They had to cut to commercial after about 30 seconds of her "song."

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 1:52 a.m. CST

    I remember when coaxial had news.

    by Purple Rain

    This is not news. It's Herc jerking off to Whedon again.

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 2:20 a.m. CST

    My simpleton mind is once again confused

    by HarrisonsDad

    I'm a little concerned that there must be some sort of MAGIC SPELL or HYPNOTIC SUGGESTION that makes people click to this story and then proceed to read the forum. After all, if they only want Entertainment news, there's no possible way they could click one of the MANY other articles on AICN. No they are forced against their will. For goodness sake people if you don't want to read about Politics, don't click on an article or forum that might be political. You sound just like the people who are upset that the program they watch on television damages their delicate sensibilities. And what do we tell those people . . . CHANGE THE CHANNEL AND SHUT UP! . . . It really isn't that hard to do. And I'm still seeing more and more people saying they won't support Whedon (or some of the other celebrities) because he supports Kerry. If for some ungodly reason you can't make the distinction between politics and entertainment go spell POTATOE with Dan Quayle and complain about that Murphy Brown woman having a child out of wedlock. Just because Clint Eastwood is a Bush Supporter doesn't mean I'll sell my Dirty Harry DVDs or not watch "Unforgiven" the next time I see it on. It just means that Mr. Eastwood and I have a difference of opinion when it comes to Presidential Candidates. Oh . . . I don't know why I even try. I have an easier time teaching my one year old how to use the potty.

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 2:32 a.m. CST

    THE FINAL EPISODES OF ANGEL SUPPORT THE BUSH WAR ON TERROR!

    by Mike K

    In the final two episodes of ANGEL, ANGEL kills an innocent to infiltrate a secret society of evil beings. Keep in mind, these evil beings were not the ultimate evil he was after (the senior partners). ANGEL then sacrifices two of his team (Wesley and Gunn) and orders another (Lorne) to murder in cold blood Lindsey (who had fought for Team ANGEL in the battle-and had followed ANGEL

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 2:42 a.m. CST

    THE FINAL EPISODES OF ANGEL SUPPORT THE BUSH WAR ON TERROR!

    by Mike K

    JUST SUBSTITUTE BIN LADEN FOR THE SENIOR PARTNERS (THE ULTIMATE GOAL) AND HUSSEIN FOR THE SECRET SOCIETY (THE EVIL THAT MUST BE DESTROYED TO DEFEAT THE ULTIMATE GOAL), AND THE ANALOGY IS COMPLETE! In the final two episodes of ANGEL, ANGEL kills an innocent to infiltrate a secret society of evil beings. Keep in mind, these evil beings were not the ultimate evil he was after (the senior partners. ANGEL realized that a battle must be fought in stages. ANGEL then sacrifices two of his group (Wesley and Gunn) and orders another (Lorne) to murder in cold blood Lindsey (who had fought for Team ANGEL in the battle-and had followed ANGEL

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 5:34 a.m. CST

    ASHLEE SIMPSON FUCKS UP BIGTIME ON SNL AND NO TALKBACK!!!!

    by Purple Rain

    Get it together Herc.

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 8:45 a.m. CST

    ObscureReference Here

    by Dog Of Mystery

    Just a quick message to rub in the fact that I was right all along about everything. And that you should all try and see the BBC's 'Power Of Nightmares' series which exposes the neocon plan to frighten all of you fuckwit yanks into voting away your freedom. We are all caught in a huge publicity stunt, with the Neocons/Christian Right on one side and fundamentalist Islam on the other. Both sides hate democracy. Both sides benefit from a Holy War. The rest of us are cannon fodder. *** And has ANYONE explained what the fuck that bulge was?

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 9:47 a.m. CST

    50 bucks...damn thats a lot of money....

    by Jon E Cin

    Spoken in Chris Rock voice over.

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 9:50 a.m. CST

    Party at my house SUNDAY!

    by Jon E Cin

    I have a television, pinball machine and a xbox. The entire night will have free popcorn and water! Minimun contribution - $30 MY PARTY WILL BE BETTER! Plus all the proceeds will go to me so I can buy more stuff which will make my next party ever better!!!!

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 9:54 a.m. CST

    Holly Wight is totally right. they need to kick the "NUN OUT"

    by SCYTHEOFLUNA

    He is after all a treacherous unamerican racist sexist eletist creep.

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 11:29 a.m. CST

    Actually, HarrisonsDad, Wilson was proven to be a fraud

    by Piccolo Daimao

    A congressional panel confirmed that Saddam was trying to acquire uranium from Niger. In addition, British intelligence stands by the account. Needless to say, Joe Wilson has been proven to be a liar and a fraud.

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 1:32 p.m. CST

    Wheres the SNL page???

    by Audets70

    COme on man, it had the funniest thing on yet.........a true Milli Vanilli moment. WHen Ashlee Simpson went to lip synch her second song, she lip syched Pieces of Me first time round, the tape played POM again and she stood there like an idiot!!!! ANd then ran off stage. HAhahahahah!

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 3:19 p.m. CST

    liberal propaganda

    by stvnhthr

    Remember kids, because someone plays a vampire on TV they know more about politics than you and should be allowed to tell you who to vote for, it makes perfect sense.

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 8:40 p.m. CST

    News from the event

    by hebrokeaway

    *Joss is not writing or directing "X-Men 3." The studio didn't ask him. *"Tru Calling" is cancelled, there are no talks of a Faith spin-off or movie. *Joss is working on a screenplay for something totally new, not part of the Buffyverse, Firefly, or an established universe. *Serenity (Firefly: The Movie) starts six months after the last episode. *He joked that in the AtS finale "Not Fade Away," Gunn dies, Illyria lives, Spike shansus, and Xander loses his other eye.

  • Oct. 24, 2004, 9:58 p.m. CST

    Piccolo, Wilson was NEVER proven to be a liar and a fraud

    by HarrisonsDad

    There is some speculation (from the right and members of agencies working for the right) that Bush was "misinformed" and didn't lie, however, everything else Wilson said was true. Witness the following from the right wing web site FactCheck.org: . . . Soon after, on July 6, 2003, former ambassador Wilson went public in a New York Times opinion piece with his rebuttal of Bush's 16 words, saying that if the President was referring to Niger "his conclusion was not borne out by the facts as I understood them," and that "I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat." Wilson has since used much stronger language, calling Bush's 16 words a "lie" in an Internet chat sponsored by the Kerry campaign. On July 7, the day after Wilson's original Times article, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer took back the 16 words, calling them "incorrect:" Fleischer: Now, we've long acknowledged -- and this is old news, we've said this repeatedly -- that the information on yellow cake did, indeed, turn out to be incorrect. And soon after, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice acknowledged that the 16 words were, in retrospect, a mistake. She said during a July 11, 2003 White House press briefing: Rice: What we've said subsequently is, knowing what we now know, that some of the Niger documents were apparently forged, we wouldn't have put this in the President's speech -- but that's knowing what we know now. That same day, CIA Director George Tenet took personal responsibility for the appearance of the 16 words in Bush's speech: Tenet: These 16 words should never have been included in the text written for the President. Tenet said the CIA had viewed the original British intelligence reports as "inconclusive," and had "expressed reservations" to the British. The Senate report doesn't make clear why discovery of the forged documents changed the CIA's thinking. Logically, that discovery should have made little difference since the documents weren't the basis for the CIA's original belief that Saddam was seeking uranium. However, the Senate report did note that even within the CIA the comments and assessments were "inconsistent and at times contradictory" on the Niger story. Even after Tenet tried to take the blame, Bush's critics persisted in saying he lied with his 16 words -- for example, in an opinion column July 16, 2003 by Michael Kinsley in the Washington Post : Kinsley: Who was the arch-fiend who told a lie in President Bush's State of the Union speech? . . .Linguists note that the question "Who lied in George Bush's State of the Union speech" bears a certain resemblance to the famous conundrum "Who is buried in Grant's Tomb?" However, the Senate report confirmed that the CIA had reviewed Bush's State of the Union address, and -- whatever doubts it may have harbored -- cleared it for him. Senate Report: When coordinating the State of the Union, no Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) analysts or officials told the National Security Council (NSC) to remove the "16 words" or that there were concerns about the credibility of the Iraq-Niger uranium reporting. The final word on the 16 words may have to await history's judgment. The Butler report's conclusion that British intelligence was "credible" clearly doesn't square with what US intelligence now believes. But these new reports show Bush had plenty of reason to believe what he said, even if British intelligence is eventually shown to be mistaken . . . . So in reality, even members of Bush's cabinet have admitted that the "16 words" were incorrect . . . . That said, still, what right did Dick Cheney (or whoever it was) have to leak that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. In my opinion, the person who leaked the information and Robert Novak for reporting it are traitors to the country. You have to admit, that if Al Gore or a member of the Clinton administration had leaked information about the identity of an undercover CIA operative, the Republicans would've wanted blood. How answer everyone to the question of whether it was right to out Wilson's wife, or was it revenge and treason?

  • Oct. 25, 2004, 10:49 a.m. CST

    I can hear the chanting now...

    by ejcarter9

    ... at the end of this "party" the people will be chanting RECOUNT RECOUNT RECOUNT RECOUNT

  • Oct. 25, 2004, 12:56 p.m. CST

    HarrisonsDad...

    by LoneChicken

    Apparently, you didn't catch my point. Stupid celebs don't sway me politically one way or another. What bugs me is because of their fame, they can spout off any old gibberish and somebody is bound to make that newsworthy. Which, even if it's a tiny bit of people that this influences to follow like celeb-worshipping lemmings, is too much in my book. If you or I say something politically, no news or entertainment news outlet would give a damn. Yeah, everyone's got the right to say whatever they want, duh. Just like I have a right to tell them to shut it. It's just their voices gets projected because the world soooo badly wants to know what the celebs are doing/saying.

  • Oct. 25, 2004, 1:25 p.m. CST

    YOU CONSERVATIVES ARE SUCH PUSSIES

    by bushsux

    I asked a reasonable and fair question several times on this site: If you support this war so much and it obviously needs more troops, WHY DON'T YOU ENLIST? I got no answers at all from you conservatives, none. All I got was a couple posts telling me the military usually votes republican. I'm in the military helping fight this war, I'm not voting republican. Many of my friends in the military are voting for Kerry. You conservatives are a bunch of spineless pussies.

  • Oct. 25, 2004, 9:16 p.m. CST

    bushsux, I for one appreciate that you volunteered

    by HarrisonsDad

    I feel bad for people like you who are now used as pawns in Bush's desire to become a business partner with the Carlyle Group after he leaves office. This war is putting a lot of money into the hands of some major world players in business. I finished my tour of duty with the US Navy in 1976. I was never involved in any military action, and felt glad about it, considering I was against the Vietnam war. I too volunteered (it was either volunteer for the Navy or be drafted into the Army) so I think I have a right to say to the other conservatives on this board to also volunteer. Eith volunteer to help Bush fight his private war or volunteer to vote the man out of office before he pushes us into another unwanted and dangerous conflict.

  • Oct. 26, 2004, 2:45 a.m. CST

    Dubbya rejected by his own family: http://www.bushrelativesforke

    by Tall_Boy

    http://www.bushrelativesforkerry.com