Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

This was fun - I seemed to get The Facts of Life a lot.

Lol

In reply to this comment by illeto:
Ok, here is the Bio of the shirtless man:
FURIOUS

Usually not wearing a shirt, Furious stays true to his roots; the ghetto's of Harlem. Being the only black man in the show he is prone to be subject of racism, which leaves him little choice but to carry a piece.

Other than packing a .45 he is a peace-loving man who makes an honest living by selling ponies and standing up for his people. Despite this fact of life he has been falsely accused several times of slander, fraud, thefth, battery, carjacking, homejacking, illegal possession of firearms, pimping, assault, manslaughter, bribery, obstruction, perjury, burglary, provocation, arson and robbery.

The latest accusations also involve unfair competition in games such as Call of Duty 4 and CS:S, where he allegedly owned other players to the point of virtual rape and humiliation.

Ok, here is the Bio of the shirtless man:
FURIOUS

Usually not wearing a shirt, Furious stays true to his roots; the ghetto's of Harlem. Being the only black man in the show he is prone to be subject of racism, which leaves him little choice but to carry a piece.

Other than packing a .45 he is a peace-loving man who makes an honest living by selling ponies and standing up for his people. Despite this fact of life he has been falsely accused several times of slander, fraud, thefth, battery, carjacking, homejacking, illegal possession of firearms, pimping, assault, manslaughter, bribery, obstruction, perjury, burglary, provocation, arson and robbery.

The latest accusations also involve unfair competition in games such as Call of Duty 4 and CS:S, where he allegedly owned other players to the point of virtual rape and humiliation.

This is directed toward the author, whoever that is.

I believe in a sovereign God who sometimes gives us what we deserve.
<buzz> Wrong.

I believe Muslims are our enemies.
<buzz> Wrong.

I believe in life. A baby is not just a fetus, but a living being no matter where it resides.
<buzz> Wrong. You're not a living being until you're in my address book.

I believe there is a good reason for the death penalty.
<ding> Correct.

I believe in fiscal responsibility, for the government and for us.
<ding> Correct.

I believe the government is way too big and rife with greed and corruption.
<ding> Correct.

I believe in the truth. People believe lies because it's much easier than finding the truth.
<ding> Correct. See your point number one.

I believe in personal responsibility. That includes spanking your children.
<ding> Correct.

I believe American women should raise their own children and American men should be men enough to pay for children they've produced.
<ding> Correct.

I believe a man and woman make marriage. Period.
<buzz> Wrong. Gays are people too.

I believe in America first and foremost and we ought to take care of our own people, our own land, and illegal aliens should go home.
<buzz> Wrong. Too provincial.

I believe in guns and knowing how to use them properly.
<ding> Correct. Except they shouldn't be so easy to get.

I believe war is a fact of life and we should always win.
<buzz> Wrong. War is not a "fact of life." Blair, Mindy, and Tootie are facts of life.

I believe in lower taxes. I know how to spend money better than Congress any day of the week.
<ding> Correct. The first part anyway. What's your credit card balance? Then we'll talk.

I believe in voter ID.
<ding> Correct.

I believe there is a moderate and a socialist in this election.
<buzz> Wrong. On both items.

I agree with a two-party system,
<buzz> Wrong. The two-party system is killing our political process. The founding fathers knew this.

...but Obama isn't a messiah
<ding> Correct.

...or a democrat.
<buzz> Wrong.

He's a Muslim socialist.
<buzz> Wrong. Take a listen to McCain's 2000 town hall meetings and you'll discover the truth that you value: that McCain also wished to spread the wealth.

Smoking marijuana is just another fact of life.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'facts of life, 80s, sitcom' to 'facts of life, 80s, sitcom, marijuana' - edited by MrFisk

>> ^quantumushroom:
Why is McCain's "temper" an issue? I like a guy who expresses his anger.


lets not forget he also called his wife a cunt and a trollop publicly as well.

as for liking a guy that expresses anger.. I cannot see any possible rational in such a statement. America needs CONSTRUCTIVE IMPROVEMENTS. Not anger or expressing it. Logic & reason > emotion. Fact of life.

Oh yeah, and
"A man who would compromise his own enjoyment of smoking to placate nanny-state assholes has no business leading a Boy Scout troop, much less the nation."

A man that is willing to put aside personal satisfaction in order to be a better candidate is much more preferable than a man that changes things to better suit his own personal needs.

guess you like your candidates angry and selfish. I prefer logical and selfless but thats just me.

>> ^Quboid:
G2) I don't believe in evolution. OK, I agree in general, but does it explain what it aims to accurately and completely? I very much doubt it. In fact I'd be amazed if the original work wasn't mostly discredited by now, just like much of Newton's work, Einstein's work and so on. Darwin's work was certainly a big step in the evolution of knowledge

The reason Evolution isn't discredited yet is the same reason Gravity wasn't discredited by Einstein: both are facts of life, however you choose to explain them. Why Darwin's work isn't discredited yet is the same reason Euclides' work isn't either: they're basic algorithms for solving precise problems. Unless the problems themselves change (more precisely our understanding of the problems), the solutions don't either.

Both Euclides and Newton ignored a pretty important variable: the three dimensional nature of space (four for space-time). That is why their algorithms were updated later by, among others, Riemann and Einstein. Darwin gave an algorithm for the Evolution of Life. It has been updated since, but there hasn't been a "three-dimensional" revolution yet (it's still a young theory by any standard, and note that the Theory of relativity hasn't been discredited yet either on macroscopic levels) . Even with that kind of revolution though, we would still talk about Evolution, just as we still talk about Gravity.

Many religions are intolerant of non-believers, followers convert others through ultimatum: believe and worship their deity or go to "hell". Historically, the purpose of many religions such as Christianity and Islam is to instill fear into the population; people who are afraid are easy to manipulate and govern. If you think about it, the fundamental function of said religions is no different from another form of manipulative action we know as terrorism...

In my opinion, most atheists just accept the fact that life is short, and we should cherish what little time we have, instead of investing time and money on a belief system promising an afterlife that may or may not exist at all. Atheists shouldn't be spending all their time complaining about stuff like 'in god we trust' logos on our money, although the inclusion such text does seem to be slightly archaic for our time.

DFT: of course that's what I said. What you call "the meaning" of the film is what I call "the theme". I personally don't think "it's no country for old men" (AKA "Its a cruel cruel world") is much of a meaning so much as a theme because it reflects an attitude, a world view rather than a motivation or revelation. Yes, it's a cruel world, if you want to look at it that way. Not only do I NOT want to look at it that way, I kind of resent someone spending two+ hours trying ardently to convince me of such without any better reasoning than "see this evil guy? he gets to walk and thus the world is cruel" I found the movie a huge disappointment and a big bummer because the ending could have been written as "...and so the world turns"

I don't need to see a movie about evil bad boogeymen who are more real than life itself - I already know there's boogeymen. I already know it is "futile" to attempt to stem the tide of evil. I already know I am only one person and cannot wipe out evil by myself. I already know that change causes this world to become foreign and frightening. What I'd rather see is a reason to keep going on despite these "facts" of life. What I'd rather watch for two hours is someone finding peace despite such overwhelming odds. What I'd rather hear about is someone finding an answer that works for them (even/especially if it isn't MY answer) rather than "wow this sucks"

And what good is it to speculate that the scary mofo went on to be just as evil and scary but without a sense of "purpose" or "justice"? He's still scary and evil and still killing people at whim. His possible "realization" doesn't change the theme whatsoever.

And I expect my movies to adopt a change. Period. I disliked this film for the same reason I disliked "To Live" - there is nothing, no honor, no epiphany, no revelation, no deux ex machina, no inner turmoil, NOTHING that changed - just "hey life goes on"
Well shit, I KNOW "life goes on", that is to say "NO DUH" and that means if the life in questino is EVIL then "evil goes on" again I say "NO DUH" but I really have no care to see a movie tell me this. There is absolutely nothing life-affirming or personal change-inducing about such a message. It falls flat to me because its useless.

How can you not put the *politics tag on?

You don't, however, borrow money on a credit card. You screw yourself and enrich people like Kravis if you do that.

Tax-deductible debt is a fact of life - there are better ways of nailing the ultra-rich for their income than to harp on borrowed funds.

Story in the NY Times about it: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/business/06equity.html?ref=business

It obscures the REAL problem, being the 15% rather than 35% tax rate which is a huge joke. I can't believe that loophole is still open.

From the NYT article:
"Mr. Greenwald’s movie, the first in a four-part series, is unrelated to the S.E.I.U. and came about, he said, because of what he read about the lavish lifestyles of private equity executives and the debate over the industry’s tax treatment (private equity managers pay capital gains rates of 15 percent on much of their income, instead of the ordinary income tax rate of 35 percent)."

Perhaps the other 3 parts focus on the real issue.

Gorgonheap, if the system is well designed — and I'm sure it will be — then I can't imagine it being a burden on users. Just as it is now, you can participate as much or as little as you want to, and if you choose to keep your life simple, just don't pay any attention to your currency total.

I think it will be great to earn the right to do things like saves and promotes, rather than just waiting for an arbitrary time to count down. And instead of having to get 5 applauds for one star (which sure doesn't happen much), you could get one 'siftar' per applaud.

Lucky, it's a fact of life that change is always resisted. Let's see what happens after a number of other sifters have chimed in to this thread. But kudos to you guys for involving the community in the decision-making process.

One thought: are people in fear of losing status when the currency system is put in place?

Which tax protester has won their case in court?

The courts enforce their own interpretation of the Constitution. The Founders 200 year old interpretation of Constitution is outdated. The Founders themselves put in the vehicles of change into the US government, so the document you read nowadays, is not the really same document that determines what's legal.

People getting laid off is not a fact of civilization, it's a fact of life. When a service is no longer in demand, the person will have to find something else to do.

I don't believe that any well qualified electrical engineer would be forced to work as a checker in Walmart. Do a search for "engineer" on Monster.com, and you'll see thousands of jobs -- http://jobsearch.monster.com/Search.aspx?q=engineer&sid=%2D1&cnme=&rad=20&cy=us&brd=1&re=&JSNONREG=1

@acl123 - Gene Weingarten wrote it. My understanding is that Gene is a male name. Other than that "Emily Shroder, Rachel Manteuffel, John W. Poole and Magazine Editor Tom Shroder contributed to this report".

Sounds like YouTube is your bag given your willingness to start trolling. Gene's not averse to dolling out the insults and curt replies so I'm sure he/she can cope with being called an arse.

Going back to the clip there are a million and one reasons why people might not stop and they don't mean the end of Western civilisation. And getting to work on time might help one cobble together the money to see the likes of Joshua Bell.

The problem is certain people are willing to see the worst in this when the reality is just far more mundane. Indeed Weingarten mentions it as well - context. We don't expect to see things out of context - and certainly not world-class violin playing in some dingy metro. As another commenter on the article suggested, there are ALOT of other factors in this situation that are competing for people's attention. This isn't about beauty and art being unappreciated - for me it's an experiment that tells us about psychology, group behaviour and the fact that life is tough for buskers.

Finally as much as I love classical music and opera, I do accept that not everyone else does. Let's not forget that before we start admonishing others.

[edit] It's worth noting that the article's publication was held over til two days before Bell was up for an award - as requested by his publicist.

just an FYI, Alan Thicke wrote this theme song, as well as the ones for "Different Strokes" and "Facts of Life"