.: bio


About Jimmy's Blog
Jimmy's Past Picks

 
 .: our blogs
Autumn Grooms
Chris Hardie
Cops & Courts
Criminal Complaints
Jimmy Gillman
From Tribune Files
Jerome Christenson
It has to be said
Joel Badzinski
Samantha Marcus: City Hall
Letters from the editor
Loggers
Mark Sommerhauser
Nolan Rosenkrans
On the run

 
 .: links

lacrossetribune.com
winonadailynews.com
rivervalleynewspapers.com
 Jimmy Gillman

Published - Tuesday, July 29, 2008

POST COMMENT | READ COMMENTS (93 comment(s))

What’s your favorite disaster film? And The Dark Knight’s been dark before

.
I recently watched German director Wolfgang Petersen’s re-make of “The Poseidon Adventure.” Released in 2006 simply as “Poseidon” and greeted with relatively mild reviews, I must admit I rather liked the film. It didn’t have the charm, if such a word can be applied to disaster films, of the original, but I’ve always been a Kurt Russell fan, and the specials effects, which are a large part of the story, were just what one would expect-- superior to the original and masterfully shot and edited.

“Poseidon” launched me into a streak of watching other disaster films, long a staple of Hollywood and a consistent favorite among audiences worldwide. I revisited another Petersen film, “The Perfect Storm,” director Mick Jackson’s 1997 throwback, “Volcano,” with the always watchable Tommy Lee Jones, and even went so far as to re-scale “The Towering Inferno.”

Often a guilty pleasure -- after all, people are killed en mass in these films, which to some extent conflicts with the concept of entertainment -- there’s still nothing like the occasional disaster (witnessed from afar, of course). Though I wouldn’t call any of the aforementioned films among my favorites, I wonder what disaster films readers have enjoyed or revisited lately.

Click here for more.

THE DARK KNIGHT HAS BEEN DARK BEFORE

To hear some film critics tell it, not until director Christopher Nolan took over the Batman franchise was the Caped Crusader portrayed on screen in appropriately dark tones. While the two latest Batman films are, indeed, outstanding entries in the series, I recently re-watched “Batman Returns,” director Tim Burton’s second stab at the Dark Knight. And believe me, that film is EXTREMELY dark, with Batman sending more than one thug to a gruesome death (while cracking a sly, malicious smile to boot!).

Condemned at the time of its release as being TOO dark, in the aftermath of the latest Batman films, I highly recommend taking another look at “Batman Returns,” an underrated film, and one I consider among the best of its kind.
.
 Tell us what you think...

 Comments »

Michael Welch Shut Up Welch Or Leave The Playground If You Cant Play Rough... wrote on Aug 15, 2008 12:25 PM:

" I actually should just throw up my hands and quit lecturing -- I feel like the dumbest tv dad ('Duh!') or worse: the most earnest. Welch is well a bit purtanical and somewhat 'delicate' in his personal habits; also he dislikes bicker bicker bicker and so's yer ol' snort and let's make Johnny look like a dorf! I hate being bullied myself and hate being 'baited' but sure sure that's MY 'problem.' Krause says he just 'withdraws'; I suppose I ought to take Brian Smith's once and future(?) advice more to heart (and mind) and just write my stuff and let it be and/or a la Frank Sinatra if I can't 'take it' you will pardon me while I disappear?... "

To Harsch wrote on Aug 15, 2008 8:53 AM:

" Complaining about the level of discourse? Such as your 1:56pm post? Oh, unless that is another post "you did not write." "

Harsch wrote on Aug 15, 2008 4:29 AM:

" Apologize shmologize, as Elias Gutierrez would say. 'Perhaps...apologize to both of us'...? Who are you two hubbubers to officiate? I would say it is far more offensive to take someone out of context (Kenneth, see example regarding Welch, committed by you, below) when you should or do know better, than it is to simply be a buffon or childhood bully. And Michael, you know I am instructed by many of your posts, you are the finest poster on this blog, but please stop with the whining about the level of discourse. It leads to unseemly love-ins as yours with Planet, to high praise for ordinary discourse. Enough, Enough already...oh god, oh christ...the Virgin is typing this! the Virgin is typing this...ahhhhhh "

Re BrianGSmith wrote on Aug 14, 2008 4:56 PM:

" BGS is a one trick pony. His goal on every blog is to somehow work in a Biblical reference so he can dazzle everyone with the "one fiber garment" thing. Most have moved long past that and just ignore him. Cagefighter still takes the bait. Nope, ideas and valid points are sorely lacking from his posts these days. "

Harsch...in defense of my fellow European wrote on Aug 14, 2008 1:56 PM:

" Smith appears to be what is sometimes called with pejorative intent a loose cannon. I love a loose cannon. Smith obviously posts rapidly and aggressively, but I don't think he ever posts without using ideas and addressing valid points. I also recall that he never rose to the wrestling bait (maybe I missed a post or two). He also definitely knows his bible. When I am attacked by a Smith-like assault, I enjoy it, enjoy arguing it because it IS an argument. The problem is that those who attack me rarely address more than a tithe or so of my remarks, and at that rarely in context. "

Michael Welch Okay We Agree On This... wrote on Aug 14, 2008 11:37 AM:

" I agree about Brian -- but whenever I attempt to uh 'gently' rein him in he insists I should in effect 'mind my own business' and that anyway he enjoys it. He does it so often that I believe him but because Smith baits 'Cagefighter' doesn't make 'Cf' look more 'mature' when HE greedily swallows the bait, hook and all. I note that today, for the moment, the children have exhausted themselves apparently or they can't think of anything to say about 'serious' subjects like the the Georgian war; that's pretty pathetic. But let some 'weakness' like Smith's penchant for stirring appear and they jump to it like dogs to vomit. 'Cagefighter' LOVES 'Smith' and WANTS him to play with him; this is what attracts 'Cf' MOST about this blog... "

Kenneth W Krause wrote on Aug 13, 2008 1:18 PM:

" Yes, Michael, I have read those blogs and seen what the discussion has turned into. When that happens , I usually just don't participate. It looks like Brian Smith stirs things up just as much as some of the others. Maybe they should all apologize to the both of us....? "

Kenneth W Krause wrote on Aug 13, 2008 1:13 PM:

" Thanks Rick. I didn't focus on the weakness vs "weakness" thing, as I took the quotes to simply mean Michael wasn't admitting his arguements were weak, but rather that his critics perceived them as weak. And, given the critics perceptions, I saw nothing wrong with arguements which are perceived as weak being attacked. Anyway, that was my take on his post, and I apologize if I misunderstood. "

Michael Welch Request Of Krause... wrote on Aug 13, 2008 12:52 PM:

" What we have here lately ('Stasiak' excepted) is 'the children's hour' re: the level of comments; sure I LONG for some adult conversation but with just a few notable exceptions it's been 'boarding house pie' and 'Cagefighter' crap re: his obsession with Smith -- and am I BORED he asks? Jee-zus! AM I BORED!!! You betcha buckie! If you, KWK, can't recognize what's in front of you, yes then of course any discussion between us has become meaningless. Try -- I mean TRY -- reading how the 'Georgia' blog or the 'Edwards' blog has degraded into playground chivvying and then you ought to apologize to me and you'll mean it... "

harsch to krause wrote on Aug 13, 2008 12:20 PM:

" My feeling is that if you are going to step in you ought to be thorough, and you clearly were not. I would say that some 90% of what Welch and me post is ignored or twisted--very little is directly and fairly argued. Your failure to acknowledge that Welch had weakness in quotes and misrepresentation of his stance (you see nothing wrong with ideas being attacked, as if HE does and says so). So I got a little grumpy, sorry. "

Harsch to Matlover wrote on Aug 13, 2008 12:07 PM:

" Krause certainly is capable of posting to my liking--that is, sometimes quite well thought out and reasonable. You clearly lack this capacity, so you are right to urge Krause to do so. "

Cagefighter wrote on Aug 13, 2008 10:17 AM:

" Harsch, I am sure Krause is humbled and awed by your superior intellect and un-boringness and un-cipher-like qualities. Surely he will try to formulate his posts more to your liking in the future. "

Kenneth W Krause wrote on Aug 13, 2008 9:07 AM:

" I didn't say "agree to disagree". I don't like that saying either. I stated we will just have to disagree. Which we do. It is what it is(how is THAT for cipher-like?). "

Harsch to KwK wrote on Aug 12, 2008 6:58 PM:

" I find your incessant 'agree to disagree' not only intellectually weak but boring, cipher-like. "

Kenneth W Krause wrote on Aug 12, 2008 1:20 PM:

" Just one other thing, Michael. I was never critical of your responses after the poster asked you guys to lay off a little. In fact, in my 8/8 9:41am post, I credited you for, in essence, reacting as a gentleman. So, even though we disagree-no hard feelings? Take care. "

Kenneth W Krause to Michael wrote on Aug 12, 2008 1:15 PM:

" Well, when I initially offered my opinion regarding the situation, you replied. So that tells me you cared "at least a little". But whether you care or not, or agree or not, it doesn't really matter. All I can do is call it as I sees it. "

Michael Welch It Doesnt Really Matter... wrote on Aug 12, 2008 12:09 PM:

" Personally I wonder why Daddy Krause MUST set himself up as arbiter of this -- are the kiddies playing with YOUR computer Dad? I mean re: Harsch what's the relevancy Kenneth? I KNOW from TWO YEARS of crapola from the stone throwers what to 'expect' -- yet I still attempt to focus an argument on something substantial and I was pleased when 'Planet Stasiak' took me up on it. The rest were only playing their games which is not to assert they don't 'believe' what they say but that they think that if they feel they 'won' somehow my opinion changes or is 'neutralized.' The angle they always take leads however to Point Zero; nothing in fact 'changes' at all. If you 'can't' see this it really doesn't matter -- and frankly I don't care what you 'think' about it... "

harsch wrote on Aug 12, 2008 10:58 AM:

" for the ferrell skit, see youtube. I hope it's there. secondly, remember that weakness was 'weakness', an important point in this discussion. "

Krause to Harsch wrote on Aug 12, 2008 8:29 AM:

" I guess we will just have to disagree. I did note I was referring to this particular blog, and acknowledged that other blogs have seen both sides at fault. I did explain myself intelligently in previous posts, but would still be interested in the Will Ferrel skit. Do you happen to have a link? "

Harsch to Krause wrote on Aug 11, 2008 4:26 PM:

" No we are not off base, Mr.Krause. Welch put weakness thusly: 'weakness'; and I assume you have the intellectual honesty to know anyway that he is not arguing against arguing ideas. And, leaving me aside, you know very well that Welch is attacked and mocked before he attacks, before he gets 'personal'. Again he is not writing about this particular blog alone (but you know that). And also, since you choose to ignore this particular part of OUR exchange, the line I use is from Poe's 'Cask of Amontillado'. And please, next time you have the grandiosity to say someone is 'off base' either see Will Ferrel's skit on his son being off base or explain yourself intelligently. "

Kenneth W Krause wrote on Aug 11, 2008 2:41 PM:

" Sorry, you guys are off base here. Rick, when I wrote of Michael being critical of attacks on ideas, I was referencing the first part of his 8/7 12pm post. If there is a weakness in any idea or arguement, I see nothing wrong with it being attacked. Having said that, there is no need to get personal or nasty when doing so. "

Michael Welch What A Shock Eh... wrote on Aug 11, 2008 11:49 AM:

" I'm not surprised at your response; one gets used to eat or be eaten I'd say... "

Harsch...Captain Reasonable wrote on Aug 11, 2008 11:31 AM:

" KwKrause strikes again. Sounding friendly, thoughtful and reasonable and then entirely misrepresenting Welch by suggesting that Welch is arguing that ideas shouldn't be attacked in this forum. These tactics aren't clever even in such a disguise. As for my 'venturing', I assumed more people had read Edgar A. Poe. I was wrong. Oh, and also, I believe Welch makes it clear he is referring to this and other recent blogs together. Well, the devil take my hindmost. "

Kenneth W Krause wrote on Aug 11, 2008 9:15 AM:

" Harsch, I only bring it up because of your accusations re "venturing upon insult". I know you claim said insult doesn't bother you, but my point was only that you "ventured upon insult" first. Michael, I just can't agree with you here. I called it as I saw it, as honestly as I could. Sorry, I see nothing wrong with ideas being attacked. When someone sees an apparent weakness in ideas expressed, attacking said ideas are part and parcel of discussion. I thought Rick crossed the line, and I think others on both sides of the discussion have crossed the line in the past. I am not saying one side is any more innocent than the other side...but, on this particular blog....I just can't agree with you. Sorry. "

Michael Welch Some Praise For One MAN... wrote on Aug 9, 2008 11:56 AM:

" One more observation: the usual 'level' of exchange here is at that of the 'nasty adolescent'; Harsch yes is pretty rough at times but anyone (like myself) who is nearly a daily regular on this blog knows how nasty his responders can be whether or not -- no PARTICULARLY IF they be self proclaimed 'Christians.' Now KWK arrives as a 'daddy' who automatically defends his kiddies' boorish behavior without really looking into it -- yet most of their 'complaints' seem akin to those of ghouls in a zombie war suddenly moaning about their upset stomachs. 'Stasiak' however has indeed found HIS 'adult voice' and is actually DISCUSSING without sneering and moreover, he maintains his intellectual integrity -- see in particular his debates with 'Cranium' and 'Faase.' (And he does so without any 'whipped boarding house pie' and other such nonsense...) "

Michael Welch Silliness Is The Way Of Life On This Blog... wrote on Aug 8, 2008 11:57 AM:

" KWK, you're just defending the usual nonsense -- as I wrote below the 'politeness' bit ONLY occurs when the blood scent momentarily dies off; then these accusations begin as yet another 'bloody game,' one of MANY games which convince no one of anything nor do they actually discuss a subject. Demanding I answer some questions EXACTLY as they wish me to is not 'discussion'; I attempted to raise many points about abortion rights that were ignored so that 'THE questions' could be repeated over and over. 'Stasiak,' 'Cranium' and I FINALLY got beyond this habitual silliness and have had REAL exchanges. (READ them -- carefully yes.) By the way I RAISED questions 'PS' has avoided direct answers to; HE has 'responded in his own way.' If turnabout is 'fair play' I ought then to harass him to no end as per the 'Christian' example on this blog... "

harsch wrote on Aug 8, 2008 11:51 AM:

" What dialogue is that? I don't see the problem with satirizing, mocking, laughing at, etcetera, as I said and you did not respond to. The main problem is that people on this blog call for death and destruction all the time, and no one 'politely asks them to stop', so why would I? What is the imperative? Where is the line drawn? And why keep bringing up the 'attack' on my wife when I made it clear at least twice that it didn't bother me? What'e the relevancy, Kenneth? Why does it disturb YOU? Do you like it so much? May satan release you suckling sinners from sadistic sensationalism. "

Kenneth W Krause wrote on Aug 8, 2008 9:41 AM:

" Rick, I will do some reading on the other blogs. But, it is certainly very possible to attack someones religion. It happens all the time. I note that your wife was mentioned only after posts such as yours on 8/5 440pm. This was after the poster nicely asked you and Michael to layoff a little. To Michaels credit, he did. Now, some satire and humor can be useful in making a point, but the poster obviously thought a line was being crossed. You chose to ignore his request(I mean, you COULDN'T let anyone infringe on your right to free speech, could you?), and the dialogue degenerated from there. "

Harsch...Dear Kenneth wrote on Aug 8, 2008 3:46 AM:

" You have been away for a while, so perhaps you should read more to determine whether attacks on Welch have indeed been arguments against him. As for me, I cannt attack your family from this distance, and if you have faith I cannot attack your religion. When my wife was brought into the discussion I merely laughed. Welch is arguing for intelligent and fair discourse as always. He is upset because of all the sophomoric tactics used to misrepresent his views or avoid them. Try reading his exchange with Planet a couple of blogs down for an example of his civility when honestly engaged. "

Kenneth W Krause wrote on Aug 7, 2008 3:51 PM:

" Michael, I have been away from the blogs and am sort of catching up...You seem to take issue with ideas being attacked, and equate that with personal attacks(such as those involving faith or family). Certainly, I see nothing wrong with religious ideas or doctrine being questioned, but to compare attacks on arguements to attacks on peoples family or their faith is totally misplaced. Surely you see a difference between some of Ricks posts on this blog versus attacks on arguements or ideas? "

Harsch wrote on Aug 7, 2008 3:44 PM:

" Harsch insists he did nothing wrong. Harsch will defend Harsch if Harsch see any actual attack on Harsch. Harsch thinks there is nothing uncivil about mockery, satire, and outright laughter at silly Christians. "

To Michael wrote on Aug 7, 2008 3:26 PM:

" An honest reading of this blog from start to finish shows that everyone was being fair and civil(albeit spirited) until Harsch started in. Even then, he was politely asked to stop. Now, unfortunately, this blog ends up like so many others...no real discussion, just games of one-upmanship. Too bad. "

Michael Welch Why Not You TRY To Be Uh Christian Gentlefolk Hmmm... wrote on Aug 7, 2008 12:00 PM:

" Look I can't see that the 'Christian' folk here are 'gentlemanly' or 'ladylike' as long as they scent blood. If they perceive any 'weakness' in an argument of Harsch or mine they're off like a pack of hyenas on a wounded wilderbeast; they only become 'polite' when confronted with their particular gouging; they suddenly realize that THEY haven't been 'nice.' Super Chicken got going by threatening to 'whip me like boarding house pie' -- hmm. I assume she's extremely familiar with uh boarding house recipes? Anyway you 'Christian' righties LOVE getting 'tough' but you moan and whine every time your eye gets poked back... "

Harsch...all cliches are fine and well...fine and well wrote on Aug 7, 2008 10:18 AM:

" Dear none too bright (all feel free to include yourselves): I welcomed the insult venturing, as you can easily read. Please send more. But remember, as a genius who used to visit my used book store in the eighties once pointed out, God is the ghost on the top shelf. So you're on your own. Lightning will not strike me, and there will truly always be more Jesus in your farts than in your hearts. "

To Harsch wrote on Aug 7, 2008 8:36 AM:

" Well, freedom of expression is all fine and well as long as you don't get miffed about someone "venturing upon insult" after you have already ventured upon same. If anything and everything is to be fair game, that's all fine and well. But, what are some other cliches? "If you can't stand the heat....", etc. "

Michael Welch I Just Dont Know How To Love Him --... wrote on Aug 6, 2008 7:47 PM:

" In the case of repetitive 'boarding house' products, they ARE beginning to seem more cliche than a 'unique' simile. But it's as per Augustus' 'as quick as boiled asparagus'; I mean it's the Superb Chicken's preferred and if we lived with 'Bama'SamaMama for MONTHS on end we can surely endure 'boarding house lies' or 'boarding house flies' etc. I've made my point per Jesus and I LIKE Jesus -- I'm always defending his harder sayings like 'love your enemies' and 'turn the other cheek' all the time but the 'Christians' here reject both for 'eye for eye' and since I've nothing against using the OT in our case -- in fact re: 'eyefer' it's probably more sensible and realistic than Jesus' airy ideals. (If he was 'gay' he still hadn't a very 'happy' life I'd say...) "

Dear Michael wrote on Aug 6, 2008 7:20 PM:

" I forgot: what 's the difference between a simile and a cliche? "

Harsch...the evidence that Jesus was gay wrote on Aug 6, 2008 7:18 PM:

" Not that it matters, but the book written in 1988 by Dr. Paul Saunders 'Was Jesus Gay?', makes a convincing case that he was, but I for one don't buy it, for it just isn't interesting. Same for the Jesus went to India theory. I prefer satire, which is replete on this blog, albeit accidental, or fortuitous. Asking someone to cool something of low temperature is a little like asking an ape to take a time out. Come on, sensitivity on THIS blog? Reasonable request for self-consorship. I beg you to stop asking me to cool it, for I find that deeply offensive to my sense of freedom of expression. "

To Michael wrote on Aug 6, 2008 3:40 PM:

" Still, I thought the request to cool it was a reasonable request. Yet Harsch still felt a need to keep at it even though the sacrilege was obviously uncomfortable for some. So, the poster responded in kind. I think insulting someones faith OR family is bogus and not cool. And once someone expresses discomfort and asks nicely to "cool it", a civil dialogue would warrant cooling it, not turning it up. "

harsch wrote on Aug 6, 2008 2:28 PM:

" Ye of little faith, be not concerned by the mockery you inspire. Love satire lest it not bite your bottom like a viper. "

Question wrote on Aug 6, 2008 12:57 PM:

" Why would anyone think by treating Harsch as a gentleman, he would react as one? It goes back to the old saying "What do you expect from a pig but a grunt?" "

Michael Welch BOARDING HOUSE PIES -- Similes Are YUMMY... wrote on Aug 6, 2008 11:58 AM:

" The 'satire' burgeoned because two commenters below decided to regard metaphors as 'literal' and went into the usual 'outraged' acts. The point about God with a 'heart of stone' was apt and not even funny, not even MEANT to be I think, and was a short pithy response to a pretty serious comment of mine below. Treating Harsch's metaphor, as I noted, as 'literal' however then invited us to continue the ridiculous. The 'joke' has I admit paled for me because satire is indistinguishable from actual 'serious' comments here and employing metaphor is pearls before well you know. But we know how EVERYBODY just adores BOTH repetition AND being silly and they whip both like, like -- like BOARDING HOUSE PIE! Wow -- how's that for a a a simile!... "

Planet to Harsch wrote on Aug 6, 2008 10:59 AM:

" In fairness, you ventured upon insult first. If it is the same poster, he very politely asked you to cool it a little. He was trying to be a gentleman and treat you as a gentleman. Some peoples faith and religion are very personal to them. As are peoples families. "

harsch wrote on Aug 6, 2008 10:35 AM:

" The thousand injuries of blogonato I bore as best I could, but when he ventured upon insult...he failed, so I'm still a happy man. "

Re Harsch wrote on Aug 6, 2008 9:47 AM:

" Leave your wife out of this. What she does for fun with bicycles isn't something we all need to know. "

Harsch...by the way wrote on Aug 6, 2008 8:38 AM:

" Dr. K says nix to the bicycle theory. "

Harsch wrote on Aug 6, 2008 1:13 AM:

" Or lost it riding a bicycle. "

harsch wrote on Aug 5, 2008 4:40 PM:

" I would hope they're sacreligious, otherwise why would religion have a sack? In fact, sacreligion is a religion in itself. The pagans may have started it but the great monk Rabelais took the...baton (can I say that without some religious feller thinking I mean a part of J. the Christ that a certain prostitute Knew? I sure hope so.) and it's as live as an Olympian torch (please don't take that wrong either--the gay community no longer uses the phrase: it's now called the Sabine scrape). Anyway, the last report from Dr. K was that Mary--yes, THAT Mary--may have born without the hymen, so there's really nothing to worry about. "

Re Harsch and Welch wrote on Aug 5, 2008 2:55 PM:

" Just a suggestion, but maybe cool it just a little. I know neither of you ever try to be puposelly offensive, but these comments are bordering on being sacrilegious.... "

Harsch...Dr.Ks visit with the big J wrote on Aug 5, 2008 1:17 PM:

" Dr.K told Jesus, 'Go home, relax, it's just stigmata.' "

Michael Welch Jesus In Therapy... wrote on Aug 5, 2008 11:53 AM:

" Jesus once sighed: 'It's like throwing metaphors at swine!' His Dad told him to 'die die my darling!' and he never got over it. He sees a therapist to this day -- a Herr Professor 'K'?... "

Super Chick wrote on Aug 5, 2008 8:42 AM:

" Re Dr K-- So, he is one of THOSE doctors, eh? Hippocratic oath means nothing to him. Seriously, he certainly wouldn't be my first choice for my families general practitioner. Besides lack of ethics, he is obviously WAY too old. Any other doctor in my area would whip him like boarding house pie. "

Harsch to Joan wrote on Aug 4, 2008 5:58 PM:

" Thank you for your comments and your excellent question. I spoke with Dr. K by phone just now (he had just emerged from the operating room). He said it wasn't last Tuesday, but one of his first operations was the abortion of Adam and Eve. "

Joan to Harsch wrote on Aug 4, 2008 8:38 AM:

" The obvious conclusion is that Dr K. is a liar. He really expects us to believe he operated on God? Did Adam and Eve also come in for their checkups last Tuesday? "

Michael Welch Tell Him That I Prometheus Despise Him And His Works... wrote on Aug 2, 2008 11:35 AM:

" The 'Christians' who write here are the worst of all; they pounce and tear, slander and snear, make everything about a religion with many attractive possibilities appear to be the absolute tightest arse, constipative blinkered constriction possible. Only a blind mule without an anus can become THEIR sort of 'Christian.' Every time I 'exchange' these obsessed harangues with them I know I'd rather be a stinky little Muslim rag picker in Bangladesh waiting for the next big wave than to spend an hour with 'them' in one of their charnel houses they call 'churches.' They rail at any humane compassion that cannot be cut into their procrustean bed of nails. I 'learn' from them only my continued contempt for them... "

Harsch...a quote from a great surgeon wrote on Aug 2, 2008 6:26 AM:

" Dr. K, top thoracic surgeon in Slovenia, 'Yes, I operated on God, and when I reached the cavity where his heart should have been I found a stone.' "

To poster wrote on Aug 1, 2008 10:32 PM:

" We are going to embrace change. It's going to happen right after Bush leaves office and Barrack Hussein Obama moves in. "

Barack Hussein Obama to Michael wrote on Aug 1, 2008 3:07 PM:

" Yes, how silly to want to control people by preventing them from killing their young. Oh, the humanity! If only these silly people would embrace the hope of change. "

Re Harsch wrote on Aug 1, 2008 1:20 PM:

" Silly boy. "

Michael Welch The Christian Dogs That Follow Me Have Fleas Indeed... wrote on Aug 1, 2008 11:55 AM:

" The essence of all this hyperventilated hoo-rah is that these 'Christian' righties desire a punitive model of society; people are kept 'in line' by fear of punishment and coercive control; 'mercy' is rarely available as per George W's refusal to intervene in the Texas execution of born-again-in-prison-came-to-Jesus 'lay' preacher Karla Fay Tucker -- even when such as Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell asked then Gov Bush to help her. Nothing I write advocating government actively aiding families by providing say national MENTAL health care and direct financial assistance gets ANY response from this crowd because only punishing resonates in their tiny calcified substitutes for 'hearts'... "

Harsch wrote on Aug 1, 2008 10:53 AM:

" Try harder. "

To Harsch wrote on Aug 1, 2008 9:21 AM:

" What are you trying to say, that the poster is pursuing a line of discussion? I don't get it. "

harsch...my dog my dog dont you lie to me wrote on Aug 1, 2008 8:17 AM:

" I think rather more important is where it itches. My dog scratches where it itches. Your flea never landed on you, but you keep chasing it, begging it to be your parasite. "

Depends WHERE you scratch... wrote on Jul 31, 2008 3:38 PM:

" If the dog is scratching the same spot over and over but the flea has moved on...that flea will never be scratched. See my response on the "W" blog. I believe you are being deliberately obtuse, as you don't seem to be a dense person, but just in case I responded over there... "

Michael Welch Move Along Cheyenne Where Will You Be Campin --... wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:55 PM:

" See my comment on the 'W' movie blog; if you just 'can't' figure it out then yeah I do agree: it would be (long past) time for you to 'move on.' Once Abraham Lincoln, during his campaign for the senate in 1858 was confronted by a farmer who told him that he (the farmer) had gone to several of the debates between AL and incumbent Stephen A. Douglas and that that farmer jes' could NOT figger out what Linkun was a-sayin'! AL responded laconically 'Well there are some fleas a dog cain't scratch!' That's been my experience here fershure!... "

Michael Welch What Pat Buchanan And McGovern Agree Upon... wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:27 PM:

" I've said before that I used to be a Reaganite 'neo-con' but the utopian vision of the 'Leave It to Beaver' society that RR so adeptly embodied never appeared -- instead government expanded AND in the 'wrong' direction -- it emphasized militarism and intervention which led not to democratic achievements in say Nicaragua or El Salvador but the same old corruptions; why we don't even recall the 'crucial' importance of these hapless countries now. (Daniel Ortega is again prez of Nicaragua but nobody cares because he's not Muslim I guess.) I came to believe that government nevertheless COULD do 'good' but not if it were primarily dedicated to war and continuous overseas 'adventures'; I found myself echoing the old McGovern slogan from 1972 -- 'Come home America!'... "

Planet to Welch wrote on Jul 31, 2008 12:33 PM:

" I only ask a question once, and if you choose not to answer, I move on. The point of my post was clear-I honestly don't care what you think. BUT, your other responders are correct in that you never did answer whether you think(paraphrasing) forcing someone to remain a father or a son or whatever against their will is immoral and fascist. "

Michael Welch The Impending Doom... wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:51 AM:

" Perhaps 'extremism' -- as noted yesterday -- needs constant 'venting'; paranoia strikes deep even though the American political landscape has been turning 'right' since oh 1976 I'd say. The great trouble is that righties have a utopian vision too and 'conservatism'-in-power has proved no more the 'seamless garment' than has liberalism. Neither Ronald Reagan nor George W could 'privatize' social security; the collapse of so many investment banks has even the Bushies pumping for more regulation; health care remains the ticking time bomb as the boomers retire in droves. Nothing happens as imagined, the late conservative intellectual William F. Buckley correctly observed; and after TWO DECADES of political dominance the righties STILL feel beleaguered and hanging by the thread of Damocles... "

Michael Welch Reducing To The Absurd... wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:41 AM:

" The harassment has gone on from blog to blog for days and NOW I find out they 'don't care' what I think after all! Well so much for 'emotional investment' -- how fickle thou art! Yet I only favor the slaughter of babies as long as they are plump and juicy -- I love little children! They're delicious! I mean what can we discern from this ongoing spit-counter-spit but that American political views are so arched that 'liberals' = 'Muslim terrorists.' Barack HUSSEIN Obama is preparing a 'neo' war on Afghanistan and somehow even HE is accused of planning to turn the American world over to Osama bin Laden and company. (Of course McCain would only put 'US' on a 'slow march' to Islamic domination...) "

Planet...poor Harsch wrote on Jul 31, 2008 10:22 AM:

" Nope, he never answered these questions. But, that's ok. "

harsch...poor planet wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:37 AM:

" You try so hard yet you understand so little. Welch answered every relevant question beginning months ago and up until yesterday. Now if you want to ask him if your farts stink, he might not choose to answer, but why should he? "

Planet Stasiak wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:29 AM:

" No, Harsch, Michael has not responded to the questions by Texas Jess. I, for one, have no idea after reading the exchange, whether Michael thinks it is immoral and fascist to compel a father to remain a father, a son a son, etc. Personally, I don't really care, but that is beside the point. "

harsch wrote on Jul 30, 2008 5:12 PM:

" The great Texas Jess has asked Welch many questions he has already answered. Why don't you lambs read and think for yourselves instead of becoming (in one case) 'emotionally involved'? "

To Michael wrote on Jul 30, 2008 2:08 PM:

" But, if a father "deserts" he is still a father. If a son or daughter "deserts", they are still a son or daughter. So, should we allow them to kill because, after all, it would be immoral and fascist to force them to remain a father or a son or a daughter against their will? By forcing them to remain so, we are forcing our morality on them. To embrace the hope of change, we need a "workable" morality. "

Michael Welch Socialism As Mommas Best Little Helper... wrote on Jul 30, 2008 1:40 PM:

" As far as all this obsessing over 'fathers and mothers' stuff is concerned, it's VERY clear and has been for such a LONG time that some folks don't really 'enjoy' families, usually because they can't support them in the life style for which Americans are trained to become accustomed. Most parents simply do the best they can, like good soldiers, but some 'desert' and some should NEVER have 'enlisted' in the first place. Marriage IS more than sex yer ol' gran'ma warned ya and brother was SHE right! Socialism would be a boon to families actually -- 'change you can USE' all right -- but socialism would end the empire and that my chicklings IS 'verboten'... "

Respectful request for Michael wrote on Jul 30, 2008 1:30 PM:

" I am curious as to your answers to the questions posed by Texas Jess at 4:14pm on 7/29. Would you please address them? I feel like I became emotionally invested in this dialogue, and am very interested in your response. "

Michael Welch The True Nature Of The American World... wrote on Jul 30, 2008 11:51 AM:

" Christian conservatives are peeing in their pants over gays marrying whom they want to marry, ABORTION ABORTION (did I say ABORTION?) and the inevitable result of EVERY world wide imperial 'thrust' which is that 'all roads lead to Rome' and so ALL our 'conquered' come here as they once did to that 'eternal city' and later to London say. Hence FROM our constant overseas wars (a reason 'old fashioned' conservatives like Pat Buchanan decry these wars) arrive the conquered who happen to be Vietnamese, Russians, Hmong, now Muslims as well as Mexicans. The cultural 'change' cannot be altered AS LONG AS THE IMPERIUM is our accepted raison d'etat. And the imperium cares not a whit about gays, abortion et. al.; it only 'baits' every election with them... "

Michael Welch -- It Ended When God Said Goodbye... wrote on Jul 30, 2008 11:41 AM:

" What's ironic really is that the rightists commenting here don't realize that even if Obama is elected they 'win'; i. e. Obama is PLEDGED to intensify the Afghan war; in Berlin he was actively RECRUITING the Germans for it. Re: Iran AND north Korea for that matter the Bushies have already decided to 'negotiate'; I don't believe that even the inept, grossly corrupt Olmert government in Israel is about to 'bomb bomb bomb' anymore. Obama is NOT proposing a national health care system but more subsidies for PRIVATE care; Obama is offering MORE tax cuts for the middle class at the 'expense' of the wealthy yes, but he is proposing NOTHING to 'control' oil prices or home mortgage problems that the Repubs haven't acceded to... "

Michael Welch Dont They Know Its The End Of The World --... wrote on Jul 30, 2008 11:32 AM:

" What's the most interesting, after one (attempts to at least) get beyond this continual, just unending abortion obsession, is the dichotomy of 'visions' (GHW Bush's 'vision thing') of the past, present and future. For righties the past is really 'the ideal' -- ALL American wars have been justified, noble, honorable blah blah; the present however is a herculean struggle by the sons of the light ('conservatives' or better 'CHRISTIAN' conservatives) against the forces of darkness ('liberals' aka 'socialists' and Muslim symps) to keep US 'values,' like Kentucky Fried Chicken say, going, while the future dims into nightmares of Obamian horrors such as universal health care and negotiations with the Iranians -- from which of course result the end of American supremacy and real hard-arsed morality... "

Cagefighter wrote on Jul 30, 2008 11:00 AM:

" You still haven't answered the questions posed by Texas Jess. If you do, I think you may find your moral compass is, well, off. "

Cass wrote on Jul 30, 2008 10:32 AM:

" I agree that a political blog site might be a solution, but I think Mr. Gilman's blog should be left alone. There are a lot of pirates that overtake this blog with their personal agendas and don't stay on the blog's topic. I say send them to another blog. "

Harsch...just a minor point wrote on Jul 30, 2008 1:35 AM:

" The government already decides what is fit for us to eat. The problem is the corrupt process. Now, back to the blog: Jimmy, I have to include monster movies in order to take part, so I will recommend Anaconda, one of the worst films of all time, but worth watching for a vomited monkey and an extremely good performance by Jon Voight, giving his all in a movie he knew would be awful. By the way, the Brazilian government allows anacondas to eat monkeys, yet we see from the film that the monkey is not the right food for the anaconda. "

To eight sixteen pm poster wrote on Jul 29, 2008 9:54 PM:

" It really isn't a disaster. If you follow these long enough you always learn something. Perhaps Jimmy could just start a political blog? It's getting closer to the election anyway... We need a place to vent! "

This Blog Is A Disaster wrote on Jul 29, 2008 8:16 PM:

" ....specifically because certain people insist on bringing their immaturity, fragile egos, and wacked-out obsessions with political figures to the conversation. These CREEPS have nothing better to do than to come to Jimmy's blogs and bait, taunt, and argue with each other. Their Mommies need to take away their computers..... "

Texas Jess re disasters and darkness wrote on Jul 29, 2008 4:14 PM:

" By the way Michael, you never DID answer: Is it immoral to force a mother to remain a mother against her will? Or a father to remain a father against his will? Or a son to remain a son against his will? Or a daughter to remain a daughter against her will? How about a sister or brother to remain a sibling against their will? Isn't it fascist to compel them to do so? Shouldn't they be able to make whatever choice they feel their circumstances warrant, even if it is not your choice? After all, we don't want to force our morality on everyone, do we? Sounds like this moral relativism of yours is a recipe for disaster. "

Re Michael..our FUTURE could be our disaster wrote on Jul 29, 2008 3:51 PM:

" Embracing the hope of change allows for such leaps of logic as to assert the Federal Government should shut down all fast food restaurants in the name of health concerns and compel people to eat only what the Government may deem acceptable........only to then assert that it is an infringement on liberty to not allow women to kill their unborn children and/or not be punished(Indra Book) for killing their children already born. Only in Michaels world as he embraces the hope of change could the former be acceptable, and the latter fascist. "

Michael Welch Imagining Your Gods... wrote on Jul 29, 2008 1:39 PM:

" Oh 'JFK' and 'Nixon' ARE 'disaster' films -- but about TRUE disasters, not fantasy ones. A 'fascist' hero by the way is someone who operates outside the law as a singular judge and jury, who ignores the constitution and due process -- actually that sounds a lot like the current administration re: Guantanamo and environs. 'Batman' and 'Superman' of course have fascistic aspects I'd say, yes; they came from a time in which the government seemed less capable of protecting people from economic and other real 'disasters' and then came WWII and the cold war and still more fears. We all imagine our own gods to 'right' the world; Batman is just another... "

Just some dude to Michael wrote on Jul 29, 2008 12:32 PM:

" JFK and Nixon are not classified as disaster films. And we already know your views on Batman(he is a fascist because he brings criminals to justice) "

Michael Welch Our History Since Is Our Disaster... wrote on Jul 29, 2008 11:23 AM:

" In a sense my uh 'favorite' disaster film must be Oliver Stone's 1991 'JFK,' plus its 'sequel' really, the 1995 'Nixon.' Both are extremely sophisticated political movies, rather more daring than even say Capra's 1939 'Mr Smith Goes to Washington,' a 'dark' picture indeed, or even John Frankenheimer's quite ominously fine 1964 'Seven Days in May,' a fictionalized rendition of a nearly successful right wing military coup in the US -- a pic by the way that the, by then, LATE but prescient President Kennedy urged Frankenheimer to make. 'JFK' and 'Nixon' provide popular culture explanations of 'why' the US is as it is now -- polarized politically, a far flung Romanish empire in trouble, with growing poverty and future calamities at home. They are our 'history' as 'disaster'... "

Bush wrote on Jul 29, 2008 10:18 AM:

" This is all George Bush's fault. If he hadn't fooled the Congress (and continues to fool them) into funding this illegal war, we'd all be handing out daisies to the terrorists and having them over for summer cookouts. They're just confused but really nice people deep down. "

Cass wrote on Jul 29, 2008 9:47 AM:

" "The Presidency of George W. Bush" is bound to become a top disaster film. "

Barack Hussein Obama wrote on Jul 29, 2008 9:06 AM:

" The Dark Knight and its predecessor Batman Returns are hardly conducive to embracing the hope of change...the hope of change...the hope of change I advocate. It would have been better if Batman had been the one thrown in jail and the criminals he brought to justice were given amnesty, free education, and free healthcare. "

Ronnie Gossett wrote on Jul 29, 2008 8:48 AM:

" I definitely have to go with "Airplane". An all time classic disaster movie. Leon (in a panicked voice)- "The fog is getting thicker!" Then, someone runs up to the panicked Leon and starts shaking his midsection, exclaiming "And Leons getting laaaarggggerrrr." "


The comments above are from readers. In no way do they represent the views of theRiver Valley Blogs.

 Post a comment (150 word limit) »
We will not post reader comments containing racial, religious or personal attacks, slander, profanity, e-mail addresses, mailing addresses, phone numbers or Web site addresses that are for personal or promotional gain.
(optional)
   
Thank you for your comments! Once your comments are approved, they will appear on the site.

 

 
Copyright © RVNG Publications | RVNG is a division of Lee Enterprises