strains of edible fungi will grow happily on substrates like discarded coffee grounds, newspaper* and cardboard. Think how much more efficient recycling of cellulose-based waste would be if you didn't have to ship it hundreds of miles to a recycling facility The point of recycling paper is to get the fibers back, not to destroy them.
Could someone explain why no many people hate Hillary Clinton, is it just personality or is there something else? Before the blowjob extravaganza, there were playing cards for the Illuminaty game called "pupet master" or something like that, depicting Hilary pulling Bill's strings. They think she's some kind of master manipulator working to create forced abortions and puppy rapes or something.
It's certainly hypocritical for that creative person then to come back later, after they've been successful, and demand more money. The company has absorbed the losses for all the failures, and should keep the benefits of the successes. No more raises, lifelong minimum wage for everyone!
I've never heard of either the author or the novel -- and I'd like to think I'm fairly up on this type of thing. You'd LIKE to think that, but you really, really shouldn't;-)
It was the never-ending alcoholism story that drove me to quit Iron man forever. The idea of my "hero" crawling around puking and suffering DT's just didn't float my boat. Man, it's frikkin' James Bond in a powersuit, they gotta have something to spice things up. Is there a fine for drunk powersuiting? Sounds unsafe.
Michael Moore was trying to make the point that it is a "culture of fear" that causes gun crimes, not the availability of the guns themselves. Of course, even though Michael Moore openly admits that gun control would have very little effect on gun violence, he supports gun control because Just after Columbine, there was a copycat in canada. Except that, being in canada, gun access was... inconvenient: he tried it with a knife. He managed to injure six people, including himself.
The point of gun control is that it stops most hothead idiots. You still have to deal with cold blooded planners, but at least you're not allowing any narcissic functional idiot access to a point and click murder interface. Imagine having to face a bureucracy to commit murder. That is why you need restrictions on gun acquisition, just for the extra safety hurdle.
As for "Banning all guns", that is the extremist position, mmmkay, don't paint all "gun control" into that corner.
Only a gun-control nut or someone with a beef against the NRA would make the connection between the two. Well I guess Moore was wrong, it WAS videogames and Marilyn Manson that were responsible, not bowling. Dang.
Notice that there's a nice little copyright notice in the opening pages? Notice how it doesn't say anything about it being copyrighted to Stan Lee, but to Marvel instead? That's what I figured. Marvel has and continues to hold the rights to these properties, since day one. Oh DO shut the fuck up.
Okay. So how did they lose the rights to Superman in the first place?
Neal: Well they just signed a piece of paper.
Sam: That's all it took? Well why would DC Comics screw them out of that?
Neal: Well DC didn't screw them. There was no entity such as DC Comics at the time. There was an accountant who was one of three partners who ran a printing company who was printing comic books as a way to keep their presses moving and that was all they were really interested in doing. Of course it became a pain in the ass and they had to pay attention to it and they did pay attention to it and Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, who had been working for them, brought into them this comic idea that they had been trying to sell to the syndicated strips for several years and they thought that they were never going to sell it, so why not sell it to the publisher that was publishing their detective stories and their cowboy stories? And so the publisher gave them a piece of paper to sign and said, "We'll buy it, but everything we publish, we own so you have to sign this piece of paper. I don't think it was even a fully typed out piece of paper. I think it was about three quarters of a page and they signed away their rights just like that.
Sam: Now were you able to help better their quality of life? Did they get enough money?
Neal: They got enough money to live like human beings. Well it doesn't sound like a lot these days but they got $25,000 a year. But it escalated and it was up from nothing. But it was more than that. They got their names back on the strip and they also got setted. What you call "setted" is when somebody goes, "Oh, the creators of Superman are here tonight during this benefit performance of the Superman movie. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster. Jerry and Joe will you take a bow?" And they were treated well, and treated well at conventions because they finally came out of their hole. They had their way paid. They earned what was at that time a living wage so they could fly places and do things. Joe got married for the first time in his life. Jerry got to live a reasonable life. He put his daughter through school. And their income went up. They had medical insurance and they had lots of benefits you have at a bigger corporation. For the first time in their lives they lived a reasonable life.
Sam: So they did okay.
Neal: They did okay at the end of their lives. At the end! At the end after they had been fucked. I don't like to use the word 'fuck' so much but when it comes to this story the word just comes to my mouth.
Maybe you think Moore's edition of the speech maintains what he really thought Heston meant. If so, fine. But please don't simply discard my position as anger at Moore editing the movie. What he said
The people who say Moore lied with that are the ones spreading a lie.
When was the last time you heard a president apologize for being wrong about something? Anything? Show humility?:\ The day the OJ Simpson verdict came out. Of course, no one but me heard him apologise for the government's past actions, since the news was on more "important" matters that day, but he did show some humility.
Michael Moore's works are full of falsehoods. Consider for example his butchery of Charleton Heston's speech in Denver after the Columbine shootings. He edited the speech I never know if I should hate or pity the people who say "OMG he EDITED his MOVIE!" I teeter-tooter on the edge of fury and compassion on that one... It's a really tough call.
I just wish he hadn't been in the movie. The evidence he presented was so eloquent that all he had to do was not screw it up, but his very screen presence is so obnoxious that people want to disbelieve him Ad hominem. It says a lot about a person when they consider facts less important than the appearance of the person delivering them.
distorting the truth in a documentary is probably the worst thing you could ever do for the industry. Like telling the world that lemmings jump of cliffs in mass sucides? That sort of thing?
hard-working true blue documentarians who want to present both sides of an issue but are shown that doing that isn't sexy enough, that they won't get the respect they so richly deserved by allowing both sides to speak and letting the audience decide That is a lie in and of itself: There are not two sides to every story, and all sides to a story are not equal.
The problem? Safari for Windows just isn't Windows enough.' Apple sells hardware with their software. They want to give a feel of mac to the windows world, not to copy the windows experience.
Global Warming IS a theory, and a pretty good one, but it's SIGNIFICANTLY weakened by the morons who follow it blindly, and refuse to let others analyze it critically! The theory is doing fine, and there's plenty of people analyzing it critically.
The next time someone says "there's no time for debate" please think about
The people trying to filibuster science. THEY are a real threat.
Now I'm even more confused. If you can get any channel you want a la carte, then why do you need to impose indecency regs on channels. It's part of the War On Culture.
It makes perfect sense if you consider that the people behind it are acting in bad faith.
This whole attitude of "if you don't agree with this model of global warming you are being paid off" needs to stop so real science can start.
There was a lot of real science going on before big oil started paying people to produce junk science.
Alarmism is not a good stance, but business as usual is far worse. Big corporations have a lot of inertia, and they've fought every rightful instance of ecological science in the past. Just like the MPAA and RIAA fought casettes, saying they would ruin their businesses, bigoil is fighting environmentalism, saying it'll kill their business.
to be opposed on political grounds. It is a political conundrum, but one with an interesting possible solution from this Canadian. The essence of his proposal is that an agreed upon yardstick that can measure anthropogenic warming be used as a tool to levy Carbon taxes on C02 emissions. The easiest way to win an election is oppose the party that proposes a new tax.
Slashdot Mirror
They think she's some kind of master manipulator working to create forced abortions and puppy rapes or something.
Also, uppity woman doesn't know her place.
The idea of my "hero" crawling around puking and suffering DT's just didn't float my boat. Man, it's frikkin' James Bond in a powersuit, they gotta have something to spice things up.
Is there a fine for drunk powersuiting? Sounds unsafe.
The point of gun control is that it stops most hothead idiots. You still have to deal with cold blooded planners, but at least you're not allowing any narcissic functional idiot access to a point and click murder interface.
Imagine having to face a bureucracy to commit murder. That is why you need restrictions on gun acquisition, just for the extra safety hurdle.
As for "Banning all guns", that is the extremist position, mmmkay, don't paint all "gun control" into that corner.
Dang.
Okay. So how did they lose the rights to Superman in the first place?
Neal: Well they just signed a piece of paper.
Sam: That's all it took? Well why would DC Comics screw them out of that?
Neal: Well DC didn't screw them. There was no entity such as DC Comics at the time. There was an accountant who was one of three partners who ran a printing company who was printing comic books as a way to keep their presses moving and that was all they were really interested in doing. Of course it became a pain in the ass and they had to pay attention to it and they did pay attention to it and Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, who had been working for them, brought into them this comic idea that they had been trying to sell to the syndicated strips for several years and they thought that they were never going to sell it, so why not sell it to the publisher that was publishing their detective stories and their cowboy stories? And so the publisher gave them a piece of paper to sign and said, "We'll buy it, but everything we publish, we own so you have to sign this piece of paper. I don't think it was even a fully typed out piece of paper. I think it was about three quarters of a page and they signed away their rights just like that.
Sam: Now were you able to help better their quality of life? Did they get enough money?
Neal: They got enough money to live like human beings. Well it doesn't sound like a lot these days but they got $25,000 a year. But it escalated and it was up from nothing. But it was more than that. They got their names back on the strip and they also got setted. What you call "setted" is when somebody goes, "Oh, the creators of Superman are here tonight during this benefit performance of the Superman movie. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster. Jerry and Joe will you take a bow?" And they were treated well, and treated well at conventions because they finally came out of their hole. They had their way paid. They earned what was at that time a living wage so they could fly places and do things. Joe got married for the first time in his life. Jerry got to live a reasonable life. He put his daughter through school. And their income went up. They had medical insurance and they had lots of benefits you have at a bigger corporation. For the first time in their lives they lived a reasonable life.
Sam: So they did okay.
Neal: They did okay at the end of their lives. At the end! At the end after they had been fucked. I don't like to use the word 'fuck' so much but when it comes to this story the word just comes to my mouth.
The people who say Moore lied with that are the ones spreading a lie.
Of course, no one but me heard him apologise for the government's past actions, since the news was on more "important" matters that day, but he did show some humility.
I thought there was some new news from Marvel.
Like me and my comix geek buddies we were saying a few weeks ago: that Ironman suit looks pretty good!
I teeter-tooter on the edge of fury and compassion on that one... It's a really tough call.
It says a lot about a person when they consider facts less important than the appearance of the person delivering them.
They want to give a feel of mac to the windows world, not to copy the windows experience.
The next time someone says "there's no time for debate" please think about
The people trying to filibuster science. THEY are a real threat.
It makes perfect sense if you consider that the people behind it are acting in bad faith.
There was a lot of real science going on before big oil started paying people to produce junk science.
Alarmism is not a good stance, but business as usual is far worse. Big corporations have a lot of inertia, and they've fought every rightful instance of ecological science in the past. Just like the MPAA and RIAA fought casettes, saying they would ruin their businesses, bigoil is fighting environmentalism, saying it'll kill their business.