bobobrazil1984

That line was meant to reference their hunting together, I'm sure of it.

the massive tone shifts in dead civilians is what turns me off to people in these kind of discussions. i couldnt give a crap about hezbollah and thier bullshit, but people go from being apopleptic about a dead civilian on one side to just shrugging and saying 'meh that's war, innocents die' when another side's family gets blown away. this of course goes both ways. well you know what, I'm sure some fuckwit suicide bomber is sitting in his cave or room thinking 'meh this is war, innocents die, we gotta free our people and we aint got tanks so this our weapon" before running off to some cafe to blow himself up and take a few kids with him. It makes me think that people really couldnt give a crap about civilians dead, its like politics, where people muster outrage to make their side look good.

I buy the Clark/Superman thing during normal Superman stories as just one of those things about Superman............... but not when the entire story is abuot a 5 year disappearance, in that case they need a little something. I seem to recall hearing about a scene where Ma Kent tells Clark that she mailed out postcards in his name to Lois and the Planet like he asked. Its a poor explanation but at least its something. but it was nowhere to be seen in the actual film.

Funny, though not a big deal, i swear myself when talking about the situation, though i'm talking about both hezbollah and israel, doin' the stupid shit over and over again!

to clarify my own thoughts, i have absolutely no problem with israel attacking hezbollah along the border where they camp out. I even have little problem with attacking targets that are clearly hezbollah targets in Beirut... but only something like 12 of 100 targets hit were clearly hezbollah targets!!! This is different than the Hamas strikes, where there is a clear and tangible hamas terrorist leader they are taking out and unfortunatly others are hit. i dont care if someone is arab, jewish, iranian, whatever, if they deliberatly target innocent civilians, they're scum, period. it doesnt matter why they're doing it, what the cause it, what their goal is, i dont care what the jews did to your village, i dont care what the nazis did to your grandfather, what the provocation is. i simply dont care. It is the clearest, non-bullshit, non-biased way to draw a line between good guys and bad guys. As you might gather, no i dont have much respect for either of the sides, and i dont really believe in the idea of using your opponents morality as a gauge of whats right and wrong. "Not as bad as the enemy" is not good, period.

McCain I think *might* be able to turn some hardcore republicans back to his side in an election, specially since it seems like he's veering that way and a bit away from the maverick role, but not Guliani, he's way way way too socially liberal for them.

by the way, the Canadians Curry is referring to are lebanese-canadians, 5 of them in one family, whose house was bombed by IAF planes. that'll show those hezbollah bastards!!!

^ well then thank god Israel's concentrating their bombing on the border and not Beirut!!!

isn't it somewhat known though that the Lebanese government doesn't have that kind of control over hezbollah? I mean remember, this is the LEBANESE government, they're not Iran or Syria or whatever, where they're secretly trying pumping shit into these groups.

Uh, only now that Canadias die, you think that? You realize something like 100 Lebanese, most of them having nothing to do with Hezbollah, have died right? That innocent Israelis have died in missile attacks on Haifa or some such city (I dont have a number but i think its under 20). btw I'm still trying to figure out how raining bombs on civilians in lebanon is supposed to take out hezbollah, but then again maybe i'm just not smart enough. after all, the geniuses in the middle east have been at this for so long.

Chick Flick. How many girls want to go see POTC or Superman or Click. Plus Anne Hathaway has decent success. TONS Two tons actually

^ not only that, but the bulk of those killed aren't even Hizbolla (the group that kidnapped the soldier)!!! so now both sides are lobbing missiles into cities, and killing civilians. lovely.

Here's my unpopular opinion: I don't make too much distinction between some guy who blows himself up in a public cafe, killing civilians... and a guy who points a missile or grenade launcher at a building where he knows a "bad guy" is in, and he KNOWS there are civilians in it or around it that will be killed. People argue that intent is the difference, but the fact is the second guy doesn't care (enough) about dead civilians. Yes, if you do care, people will maybe try to use this against you by shielding themselves with civilians. Its like how supervillians know that superman or batman won't kill them or care too much about lois lane or whatever so they always kidnap them, etc etc. It's part of the burden of being the "good guy", deal with it somehow. or give up your moral outrage and rightness and stop ranting about how you're right and they're wrong, etc etc. Also, I don't agree with using the behavior of terrorists or other evil folk as a barometer of what is or isn't right. You constantly see people use enemy behavior as some sort of barometer. Defend something horrible by trying to point to worse stuff they do. middle east countries do it with US and Israel, we do it with terrorists, palestinian supporters do it with Israel, frankly its all bullshit. The person who responds to Abu Gharib by saying "why aren't these people condemning <insert horrific terrorist act>!?!?" is the person I want to punch in the face. yes its true, being the better person puts you at a disadvantage at times, IF YOU LET IT. If you're stupid and don't want to use your brains.

err, crying at the first 10 seconds? c'mon that's a little much.

I can buy someone saying Rocky's fights don't have psychology if they're thinking about it in WRESTLING terms, but only in wrestling terms. You'd have to be a retard to think there's no general storytelling and viewer psychology in the way the fights are laid out though. Like someone said there's a reason almost every punch is choreographed, hell there's a reason why its so exaggerated (he takes fifty punches and doesn't fall, etc)

Am I the only one who seems to remember that the Lebanese prime minister is supposedly, according to the right anyways, one of the few better more moderate (relatively speaking) leaders in the middle east? Isnt anyone else worried about him getting destabilized and lebanon getting an extremist leader? ie the same worry people have about musharraf and pakistan.

good for her. Not that it'll matter, but still. Is there anyone who's not a right winger who still doubts taht they were indeed going after and trying to discredit their opponents? I mean, god, fuck this bullshit. and hey if the next prez is dem and they do the same bullshit, fuck them too. hit em for the maximum legal punishment.

It would be awesome if this turned out to be a great film, and we could just erase Rocky V from existence.

Really lookin forward to this, but the plot makes no sense. How does beating an over the hill old Rocky prove that you could beat him in his prime? It doesn't.

You probably could literally lift the whole thing with the natives right out and have a really taut and fantastic movie just under 2 hours. Still it was a great movie, I'm looking forward to seeing it again.

Thank god they didn't use their original ideas for an ad campaign. I know someone at Sony who mentioned the original lineup of ads was 1) A black slave being whipped by a white nicely dressed master, WHITE IS COMING 2) 3 black gangsta "thugs" with gold chains pointing guns at a scared white family, BLACK IS COMING 3) and the soon-to-be-announced Yellow PSP, which has a bunch of Fu Manchu esque asians scheming

by the way, the episode that LOST submitted for Emmy consideration was "Man of Science, Man of Faith." On its own, it was a pretty good episode. Probably not the best episode to show if your'e trying to get emmy noms.

Is it worth playing for someone who likes FF10? I have heard not-so-great things about X2, and i dont know if a game starring rikku and yuna, without a big epic plot, is what i want to get into. i still have bad memories about that awful awful "music concert" commercial they ran for X-2 all the time. I'm vaguely curious about the gameplay though, having character classes and being able to switch them around sounds kind of interesting.

I'm a coupla years late, but I finished FF10 today, and I loved it. The story was really solid, and ditching active time, showing all the turns, and letting you switch characters was a really nice move, so much so that it actually made me do a 180 from hating turn based battles to digging them. I'd say its right up there with VII as far as the 3D-era FFs go. My one and only gripe is the lack of a world map. You can still roam around to the various cities at the end via airship but I liked just roaming around the world and randomly going to whatever city i end up at. I believe this was another game that the "modern final fantasies suck long live SNES FFs" crowd shit on?? This just reminds me why I always tune out those folks when it comes to RPGs. LOVED it. Especially the ending. One other thing though, FFX-2 should totally have been a prequel about a young Auron. It just occured to me in Auron's last scene, that he is actually a bit of a badass and probably has tons of history. A prequel about Auron/Jecht/Braska coulda been pretty awesome.

The West Wing It went from one of the best TV shows ever to a crappy almost unrecognizeable show when Aaron Sorkin left. To be fair, it had started slipping in quailty with Sorkin there, but the difference in Season 5 to 1-4 is particularly jarring. It didnt even LOOK the same, even the style of shooting and camerawork was far more "generic". Seasons 1-2 are probably some of the best TV seasons ever, capped off by my favorite scene, Bartlett versus God!