Scary Fisher kinna let herself go, eh? Got lazy spending all them Lucasbucks over to the Kobe beef diner....

Well, he ain't Sam Fisher, that's for sure.

Yeah I'm certainly there with you. I told my girlfriend when we were discussing it that if, IF, they actually managed to get Hamill, Fisher and Ford all staring again, I would give it a shot. Even then I think I'll probably view it like one of your favorite films that becomes a TV show (I personally hate that, it's just shilling). Even if it's "good" good, it won't erase the scars that Ep.1-3 laid on me.
That said, before Ep.1-3 came out, I told myself there was nothing they could do in those films that would ruin the original series for me, and I was wrong about that.

But yeah, you're not alone. The only copies of the original films I own are the LaserDisc rips of the original, non-special edition series (because it's the last, highest quality version you could get before things went downhill permanently). I'm a nazi for respecting source material and lore.

Think they're ready for a new pianny?
How 'bout this Fisher Price Grand?
http://www.disquiet.com/images/2007.10-toy.jpg

>> ^vaire2ube:

Aye but the guy did say the Progressive lawyer in the courtroom did more than give a little assistance:

"At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent.
I am comfortable characterizing this as a legal defense. "
>> ^entr0py:
The good news is the Fisher family won the case regardless. There were also a few factual errors in TYTs reporting, as porksandwich mentioned the other driver had insurance which had already paid out to it's maximum, and progressive didn't represent him legally. But what they actually did do was bad enough to deserve the condemnation; a progressive lawyer contacted the defendant's lawyer and gave him assistance, so they could ultimately avoid liability.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-progressive-campaign-
20120816,0,5322264.story



I admit I didn't read the blog on account of the short attention span. But yeah it's fucked up. I would have thought defense attorneys would have to do most of that work to earn their standing, apparently not.

>> ^vaire2ube:

Aye but the guy did say the Progressive lawyer in the courtroom did more than give a little assistance:
>> ^entr0py:
The good news is the Fisher family won the case regardless. There were also a few factual errors in TYTs reporting, as porksandwich mentioned the other driver had insurance which had already paid out to it's maximum, and progressive didn't represent him legally. But what they actually did do was bad enough to deserve the condemnation; a progressive lawyer contacted the defendant's lawyer and gave him assistance, so they could ultimately avoid liability.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-progressive-campaign-
20120816,0,5322264.story



The front page of Fisher's blog has a screen cap, and a link to the official case record.

Aside from being listed as: "Interested party, type: Mediator." The record also contains this gem:

"It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant.2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case."

Aye but the guy did say the Progressive lawyer in the courtroom did more than give a little assistance:



"At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent.

I am comfortable characterizing this as a legal defense. "

>> ^entr0py:

The good news is the Fisher family won the case regardless. There were also a few factual errors in TYTs reporting, as porksandwich mentioned the other driver had insurance which had already paid out to it's maximum, and progressive didn't represent him legally. But what they actually did do was bad enough to deserve the condemnation; a progressive lawyer contacted the defendant's lawyer and gave him assistance, so they could ultimately avoid liability.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-progressive-campaign-
20120816,0,5322264.story

The good news is the Fisher family won the case regardless. There were also a few factual errors in TYTs reporting, as porksandwich mentioned the other driver had insurance which had already paid out to it's maximum, and progressive didn't represent him legally. But what they actually did do was bad enough to deserve the condemnation; a progressive lawyer contacted the defendant's lawyer and gave him assistance, so they could ultimately avoid liability.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-progressive-campaign-20120816,0,5322264.story

Matt Fisher's original tumblr rant: http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29338478278/my-sister-paid-progressive-insurance-to-defend-her

Aww I was hoping they did a spin off of Superman where he became a crab fisher and Mike Rowe voiced over his adventures. And then he later went on to be an ice road trucker and cheated using his super powers.

I said that jokingly, but you know......we mere humans could understand that crap. Sure he could still save people and be all heroic, but journalism is the opposite of interesting. Got some dude who can bench press cars and he's writing articles instead of doing the work of 10 guys labor in a day in one hour and running around rescuing people the rest of the day.

He could be both the common man (manual labor) and a super hero.

I always liked when Superman was not all super-positive....when he was getting into fights in restaurants and stuff. I mean your life as a secret super hero would be pretty damn stressful, and being continually upbeat is annoying.

I'm coming hard for Friday.
Like a pedophile
At his computer desk
Watching Rebecca smile.
I go the extra mile.
The marathon's 27th mile.
Then I hit the ice cold beverage isle.
I got a cast-iron liver.
And I would rather drown my sorrows
Than cry a river.
I use my brain like you
Use a plain flight ticket.
Now I'm in a place
Where all the fences are white picket.
The only way it might get disturbing
Is if you're bothered by the sound
Of light cricket chirping.
I just let in soak in like Robatussen.
And about the fast-paced rap race
There's no discussion.
I'm just trying to get into the proper mood.
Remix of everyday life, chopped and screwed.
What can I do to get the weekdays behind me?
Watsky, remind me.
Thank you, kindly.

Kick Monday in the nutsack.
Wedgie Wednesday's buttcrack.
I'm coming hard for Friday.
And if you're not, get the fuck back. (x2)

Compared to my old testicles, hecka small.
Mine crack walls, like a wrecking ball.
While my checkered drawls fall y'all's yornaments.
Fear for a porno flick.
Time to deck the halls.
I'm glad it's all finished.
The week is all bidness.
But now I'm chilling, sprawled out
With a tall Guinness.
I'm gonna set the world record
For the funnest time ever
Had on the planet.
So everybody call Guinness.
I swear a lot.
This ain't Fisher-Price.
If I'm a bad influence
Then here's the great advice:
Kids! Don't be a dickweed!
Appreciate the shit out of the present moment
And be fucking nice!
I whistle weird for the tune of it.
If they all did, it'd ruin it.
We spent two months on this here
Bluegrass-folk rock-hip hop album
Because we really felt like doing it.
So everybody...

Kick Monday in the nutsack.
Wedgie Wednesday's buttcrack.
I'm coming hard for Friday.
And if you're not, get the fuck back. (x2)

I'm an Amurican.
I put my work in.
And when work's done
It's time for perking.
Hey, let's invite the vultures down to have a drink.
They must be getting tired doing all the circling.
Cause it's the world's end.
We're overheatelated!
And, from what I hear,
We're also overpeopleated!
So, there's no room.
So, we'll all explode soon.
Let's get abbreviated
And forget what we created.
So I've been thinking
We should have a big party
For all humans, and even women.
For the dumb Southeners, and the lazy Mexicans.
The A-rabs, and the coloreds, and their peckers and
The cheap Jews, which is me, too!
I'll even treat you!
But, just this once, cause nothing's free, dude.
And when the fiery end comes
We'll burn up quicker.
Cause we're full of liquor.
So everybody

Kick Monday in the nutsack.

In total $26.000 were given out at MLG Winter Arena in price money.

^ Almost every American sketch comedy show from the late-70s and early-80s, Popeye, Mork & Mindy, Good Morning Vietnam, Dead Poets Society, Baron Munchausen, The Fisher King, Toys, Hook, Aladdin (say what you will about the movie, but his genie is THE genie), Mrs. Doubtfire, The Birdcage (remake), Good Will Hunting, Patch Adams, What Dreams May Come (I liked it at least), One hour Photo, Insomnia (remake), and then there's all of his random, unforgetable guest appearance and talk show circuit adlibbing...

Or do you just mean in recent years?

Maybe it's James Fisher come back to sleep with his wife again.

@rottenseed

However, if you read the "context" (since you dummies love to pull the
context card out), the question he is answering is:
Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful
for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”

So pretty much the ONLY mention of a man and a woman is an exclusive
mention of not getting a divorce

Obviously it isn't the only mention, since Jesus is quoting the Old Testament. There are other verses which refer to marriage, but even if it were the only one, it doesn't change the fact that God has defined marriage to be between a man and woman and has condemned homosexual relations and fornication. One mention or 100, the truth of it is absolute.

All of this is for naught, however, since the first amendment to the
constitution, states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Pretty amazing, huh? How not only does the constitution (apparently
written and signed by "Christians") doesn't mention any "god"
whatsoever, but they make sure in an amendment, that the government
does not support any single religion. This means that, sin or not, the
government has no business enforcing any law on the basis of religion.

game. set. match.

Your declaration of victory is premature. What the founders meant by "religion" is any particular Christian denomination. They did not want any to be preferred or adopted as the national religion. Fisher Ames, who wrote the language of the first ammendment, said this:

“...we have a dangerous trend beginning to take place in our education....We've become accustomed of late to putting little books in the hands of children containing fables with moral lessons. We are spending less time in the classroom on the Bible, which should be the principle text in our schools. The Bible states these great moral lessons better than any other man made book.”

The man who wrote the first amendment obviously thought it was constitutional to teach the bible as our principle text in public schools, yet today they say that even having one in the classroom violates the 1st amendment. I wonder who actually knows more about the 1st amendment or what its purpose was. Obviously it wasnt meant to prevent government support of Christianity or the bible as our principle means of education. "Imagine that"

Two years after Jefferson wrote the letter that people use to justify a separation of church and state, he ordered as a presidential act the extention of using federal lands "“for the sole use of Christian Indians and the Moravian Brethren Missionaries for the civilizing of the Indians and promoting Christianity”. He ordered that act extended two more times before he left office. Yet today they say that we can't have a nativity scene on government property. Are you starting to see how painfully out of context your imagined secularist interpretation is? There wasn't any such thing as secularism then, because everyone was Christian and believed in God. Why do you think the US capitol building was converted to a church every sunday? Why was the first supreme court opened with a 4 hour prayer and communion service?

What you are also unaware of is that the state constitutions at the time not only mentioned God and Christianity, many of them forbid anybody but Christians taking office:

Constitution of the State of North Carolina (1776), stated:

There shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State in preference to any other.

Article XXXII That no person who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State. (until 1876)

In 1835 the word “Protestant” was changed to “Christian.” [p.482]

Constitution of the State of Maryland (August 14, 1776), stated:

Article XXXV That no other test or qualification ought to be required, on admission to any office of trust or profit, than such oath of support and fidelity to this State and such oath of office, as shall be directed by this Convention, or the Legislature of this State, and a declaration of a belief in the Christian religion.”

That, as it is the duty of every man to worship God is such a manner as he thinks most acceptable to him; all persons professing the Christian religion, are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty;
wherefore no person ought by any law to be molested… on account of his religious practice; unless, under the color [pretense] of religion, any man shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality… yet the Legislature may, in their discretion, lay a general and equal tax, for the support of the Christian religion. (until 1851) [pp.420-421]

Constitution of the State of South Carolina (1778), stated:

Article XXXVIII. That all persons and religious societies who acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is publicly to be worshipped, shall be freely tolerated… That all denominations of Christian[s]… in this State, demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal religious and civil privileges. [p.568]

The Constitution of the State of Massachusetts (1780) stated:

The Governor shall be chosen annually; and no person shall be eligible to this office, unless, at the time of his election… he shall declare himself to be of the Christian religion.

Chapter VI, Article I [All persons elected to State office or to the Legislature must] make and
subscribe the following declaration, viz. “I, _______, do declare, that I believe the Christian religion, and have firm persuasion of its truth.”

Part I, Article III And every denomination of Christians, demeaning themselves peaceably, and as good subjects of the commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection of the law: and no subordination of any sect or denomination to another shall ever be established by law.” [p.429]

Starting to get the picture? How about this treaty?

Continental Congress (1783), ratified a peace treaty with Great Britain at the close of the Revolutionary War. The treaty began:

In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity. It having pleased the Divine Providence
to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the Grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith… and of the United States of America, to forget all past misunderstandings and differences… [p.149]


Why did George Washington announce this when they finished the constitution?:

By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation.

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor-- and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/GW/gw004.html

The evidence is insurrmountable and overwhelming that this country was founded on Christian principles. To deny it is to ignore everything that is true about our history.