What Did You Watch? 2024-12-20 (Friday)

I watched:

Several YouTube videos.

What did you watch?

--
Let's go Brandon!

anim8rfsk

2024-12-21 11:22:45 UTC

Post by Ubiquitous
Several YouTube videos.
What did you watch?

Hey, thanks for asking!

BATMAN, the movie 1966
Watched it with an eye towards what I would reshoot if I had the time and
money between when they wrapped, and when it was released.

There was less than I thought. A lot of shots where you could tell the
stunt people, and they could’ve used at least inserts of the real villains.
It annoys me that the yacht at the beginning is headed for them and yet
when the batcopter spots it they’re coming at it from the stern. I think
you could fix that with some judicious flipping film left and right and a
shot ofthe batcopter hanging a U-turn.

And either replace the shots of Los Angeles with shots of New York or
forget the shots of New York and just make it all Los Angeles.

But then maybe the cheesiness is what makes it work.

Post by Ubiquitous
--
Let's go Brandon!

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

Arthur Lipscomb

2024-12-21 17:32:41 UTC

Post by Ubiquitous
Several YouTube videos.
What did you watch?

Hey, thanks for asking!
BATMAN, the movie 1966
Watched it with an eye towards what I would reshoot if I had the time and
money between when they wrapped, and when it was released.

But why? It's fine as is!
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."

Post by anim8rfsk
There was less than I thought. A lot of shots where you could tell the
stunt people, and they could’ve used at least inserts of the real villains.
It annoys me that the yacht at the beginning is headed for them and yet
when the batcopter spots it they’re coming at it from the stern. I think
you could fix that with some judicious flipping film left and right and a
shot ofthe batcopter hanging a U-turn.

I doubt I would even notice.

Post by anim8rfsk
And either replace the shots of Los Angeles with shots of New York or
forget the shots of New York and just make it all Los Angeles.
But then maybe the cheesiness is what makes it work.

This is a multi day catch up. When I wasn't rewatching the Superman
trailer, I watched:

Creature Commandos (HBOMax) "Chasing Squirrels" - Episode 4 gives
Weasel's backstory while also continuing the Suicide Squad, I mean
Creature Commando's present day story with their wrapping up the capture
of Circe. Unfortunately for the Commando's things aren't as wrapped up
as they thought. Another good episode.

Lower Decks (Paramount+) - "The New Next Generation" - The series
finale. Picking up on where the penultimate episode ended, it's up to
the crew of The USS Cerritos to save the universe. This was an OK
finale that wrapped things up, but left the door open for more. The
voice cast has been very vocal about wanting to do more seasons. I hope
their campaign to save their show works.

Silo (AppleTV+) - "Barricades" - Season 2, episode 6. Back at the main
Silo as each side geers up for war, Bernard makes the first move by
cutting off the food supply to the lower levels. But the lower levels
have a new trick up their sleeves that Bernard has never seen before.
Another good episode. I like how Bernard has his pressure book that has
a plan for everything and as events unfold he is smugly calling them
out, of that's ahead of schedule, until something happens that's not in
his book.

Boy in the Walls (LMN) 2023 made for TV movie about a newly married
woman who moves into a new home with her husband and step kids and gets
an uneasy feeling that someone else is in the house with them. The
husband dismisses her concerns, and the kids blame her for the weird
occurrences, but this is a lifetime movie so it turns out she was right!
Based on the name, I was expecting an actual boy living in the walls,
and the plot isn't exactly that, but close enough I guess.

Star Wars: Skeleton Crew (Disney+) - "Can't Say I Remember No At Attin"
- Episode 4 has the plucky crew arriving on a planet they think is home,
and I and probably half the audience thought was the home after time
dilation space travel. Another meh episode.

Sonic the Hedgehog 3 (theatrical) Latest entry in the franchise about a
really fast talking hedgehog. This time around Team Sonic (or Team
Knuckles if you ask Knuckles) is up against Shadow the Hedgehog (Keanu
Reeves). Shadow has teamed up with Robotnik's grandfather (both
Robotnik's played by Jim Carrey) and it's up to Sonic to stop their evil
plan to destroy the Earth. Krysten Ritter joins the franchise as part
of the military organization that sends Team Sonic on their latest
mission, but then for no reason that makes sense, Team Sonic decides
they can't trust the organization any more. Now that I think about it,
the mistrust was so they could do a ridiculously convoluted break in
scene instead of just having Team Sonic walk in through the front door.

In spite of revisiting the first two movies, I was often lost following
this one. It felt like there was a TV series that takes place in
between the movies and a lot of the background details from this movie
came from that show. Or it's just I never played the video game, so I
didn't recognize any of the game Easter eggs. But the audience I
watched it with seemed to love the movie, clapping and cheering and
getting all the references that went over my head. The movie certainly
looked nice, with lots of things blowing up. And it more or less held
my interest even if I didn't get *any* of the game references. I think
fans of the game will probably like the movie, and non game fans can
enjoy stuff going boom along with Carrey hamming it up for the cameras.
"It's almost as if we're in a movie with one actor playing two different
characters."

anim8rfsk

2024-12-21 20:23:12 UTC

Post by Arthur Lipscomb

Post by Ubiquitous
Several YouTube videos.
What did you watch?

Hey, thanks for asking!
BATMAN, the movie 1966
Watched it with an eye towards what I would reshoot if I had the time and
money between when they wrapped, and when it was released.

But why? It's fine as is!
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."

An absolutely wonderful line. I don’t think you need to change the script
at all.

While the movie doesn’t make it clear, it’s supposed to take place before
the series which explains why the dynamic duo don’t recognize Catwoman
without her mask.

Post by Arthur Lipscomb

I doubt I would even notice.

It’s bothered me for years.

Post by Arthur Lipscomb

This is a multi day catch up. When I wasn't rewatching the Superman
trailer,

Krypto!

Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Creature Commandos (HBOMax) "Chasing Squirrels" - Episode 4 gives
Weasel's backstory while also continuing the Suicide Squad, I mean
Creature Commando's present day story with their wrapping up the capture
of Circe. Unfortunately for the Commando's things aren't as wrapped up
as they thought. Another good episode.
Lower Decks (Paramount+) - "The New Next Generation" - The series
finale. Picking up on where the penultimate episode ended, it's up to
the crew of The USS Cerritos to save the universe. This was an OK
finale that wrapped things up, but left the door open for more. The
voice cast has been very vocal about wanting to do more seasons. I hope
their campaign to save their show works.
Silo (AppleTV+) - "Barricades" - Season 2, episode 6. Back at the main
Silo as each side geers up for war, Bernard makes the first move by
cutting off the food supply to the lower levels. But the lower levels
have a new trick up their sleeves that Bernard has never seen before.
Another good episode. I like how Bernard has his pressure book that has
a plan for everything and as events unfold he is smugly calling them
out, of that's ahead of schedule, until something happens that's not in
his book.
Boy in the Walls (LMN) 2023 made for TV movie about a newly married
woman who moves into a new home with her husband and step kids and gets
an uneasy feeling that someone else is in the house with them. The
husband dismisses her concerns, and the kids blame her for the weird
occurrences, but this is a lifetime movie so it turns out she was right!
Based on the name, I was expecting an actual boy living in the walls,
and the plot isn't exactly that, but close enough I guess.
Star Wars: Skeleton Crew (Disney+) - "Can't Say I Remember No At Attin"
- Episode 4 has the plucky crew arriving on a planet they think is home,
and I and probably half the audience thought was the home after time
dilation space travel. Another meh episode.
Sonic the Hedgehog 3 (theatrical) Latest entry in the franchise about a
really fast talking hedgehog. This time around Team Sonic (or Team
Knuckles if you ask Knuckles) is up against Shadow the Hedgehog (Keanu
Reeves). Shadow has teamed up with Robotnik's grandfather (both
Robotnik's played by Jim Carrey) and it's up to Sonic to stop their evil
plan to destroy the Earth. Krysten Ritter joins the franchise as part
of the military organization that sends Team Sonic on their latest
mission, but then for no reason that makes sense, Team Sonic decides
they can't trust the organization any more. Now that I think about it,
the mistrust was so they could do a ridiculously convoluted break in
scene instead of just having Team Sonic walk in through the front door.
In spite of revisiting the first two movies, I was often lost following
this one. It felt like there was a TV series that takes place in
between the movies and a lot of the background details from this movie
came from that show. Or it's just I never played the video game, so I
didn't recognize any of the game Easter eggs. But the audience I
watched it with seemed to love the movie, clapping and cheering and
getting all the references that went over my head. The movie certainly
looked nice, with lots of things blowing up. And it more or less held
my interest even if I didn't get *any* of the game references. I think
fans of the game will probably like the movie, and non game fans can
enjoy stuff going boom along with Carrey hamming it up for the cameras.
"It's almost as if we're in a movie with one actor playing two different
characters."

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

Adam H. Kerman

2024-12-22 16:10:27 UTC

Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Boy in the Walls (LMN) 2023 made for TV movie about a newly married
woman who moves into a new home with her husband and step kids and gets
an uneasy feeling that someone else is in the house with them. The
husband dismisses her concerns, and the kids blame her for the weird
occurrences, but this is a lifetime movie so it turns out she was right!
Based on the name, I was expecting an actual boy living in the walls,
and the plot isn't exactly that, but close enough I guess.

No Bad Ronald after all?

Ubiquitous

2024-12-23 09:30:41 UTC

Was this a remake of BAD RONNIED or just the generic horror trope?

--
Let's go Brandon!

Ian J. Ball

2024-12-21 18:40:52 UTC

Post by Ubiquitous
What did you watch?

Hey, thanks for asking!
BATMAN, the movie 1966
Watched it with an eye towards what I would reshoot if I had the time and
money between when they wrapped, and when it was released.

As per semi-usual, Ubi's original post isn't showing up on ES, so I'm
following up on yours.

Friday I gave my last final exam of the year, and finished grading my
second-job lab class.

I still managed to get through soaps. Then I looked around for a movie
to watch off streaming, and didn't really find anything I wanted to
watch, so I ended up with something I was disappointed with off Pee+:

soaps: Fri's ep's. (So, all I have going into the weekend is some Y&R
ep's - this was by design, as I need to start tackling some more
streaming series...)
GH - Christmas-y episode - Nina is appalled that Willow invited Drew
(and Scout, who wasn't seen on camera) to her Christmas celebration, so
she SOS invites Ava who drags a reluctant Ric Lansing along. Curtis
tells his family about his plot to take over as CEO of Aurora Inc. And
Carly ends up inviting Jack Brennan over to Christmas at Sonny's!!
(Ha!)... But I am really sick how this show is using "grief" to deflate
nearly every instance of conflict on this show! In this epie, Joss, in
grief over Dex, seems to "forgive" Sonny (absolutely and completely
*undeserved*!!), which is really pathetic. Meanwhile, Diane talks
grieving Alexis into calling a "truce" with Ric over Christmas, for
Molly's sake (though Molly wasn't in this episode), even though Alexis
despises Ric. This is all on top of Molly knuckling under to horrible
Kristina due to "grief" as well...
DOOL - "Doug III" goes to Leo Stark to sell the necklace, and Leo
tries to talk him into returning the necklace, but I guess Doug III has
debts to pay off!! Holly discusses Tate, and Sophia, with Maggie. I
wasn't entirely sure, but it sounded like Tate talked Sophia into an
abortion (across state lines?) - and the show was pathetically preachy
on the subject of parental consent, which all normal people are
completely in favor of. Brady's and Ava's ballet "date" goes awry (I do
actually wonder if Kristen did steal the tickets!), but it sounds like
they're planning a second date anyway... then Ava gets a mysterious
text! (from Kristen?!!).

Wild Eyed and Wicked (Pee+) - I watched this 2023 indie fantasy(?)
horror(?) flick because it stars Molly Kunz (from "The Irrational" TV
show), and while I was quite pleased with her (as she is lovely!), I was
much less happy with the film itself.
I'm really not sure what they were trying for here - monsters as the
personification of fear and unhappiness? - but it really didn't work for
me. It doesn't help that Kunz's character is kind of an unlikeable
B-word (yeah, she has her reasons...). But the whole "monster" plot,
just didn't work for me.
I did wonder where this was filmed - I assumed update New York, but
IMDb says it was Chester County, Pennsylvania. So I guess I was somewhat
close!

What did you watch?

Arthur Lipscomb

2024-12-21 20:36:51 UTC

snip

Post by Ian J. Ball
Wild Eyed and Wicked (Pee+) - I watched this 2023 indie fantasy(?)
horror(?) flick because it stars Molly Kunz (from "The Irrational" TV
show), and while I was quite pleased with her (as she is lovely!), I was
much less happy with the film itself.
I'm really not sure what they were trying for here - monsters as the
personification of fear and unhappiness? - but it really didn't work for
me. It doesn't help that Kunz's character is kind of an unlikeable B-
word (yeah, she has her reasons...). But the whole "monster" plot, just
didn't work for me.
I did wonder where this was filmed - I assumed update New York, but
IMDb says it was Chester County, Pennsylvania. So I guess I was somewhat
close!

I don't think I've heard of this before. Well, now it's added to the
watch list.

suzeeq

2024-12-21 20:40:31 UTC

Post by Ubiquitous
What did you watch?

Hey, thanks for asking!
BATMAN, the movie 1966
Watched it with an eye towards what I would reshoot if I had the time and
money between when they wrapped, and when it was released.

Yes, but many states where it's legal, still require parental conset
under a certaion age.

Post by Ian J. Ball
Brady's and Ava's ballet "date" goes awry (I do
actually wonder if Kristen did steal the tickets!), but it sounds like
they're planning a second date anyway... then Ava gets a mysterious
text! (from Kristen?!!).

Ian J. Ball

2024-12-21 21:26:41 UTC

Post by Ian J. Ball
Friday I gave my last final exam of the year, and finished grading my
second-job lab class.
I still managed to get through soaps. Then I looked around for a movie
to watch off streaming, and didn't really find anything I wanted to
soaps: Fri's ep's. (So, all I have going into the weekend is some Y&R
ep's - this was by design, as I need to start tackling some more
streaming series...)
DOOL - "Doug III" goes to Leo Stark to sell the necklace, and Leo
tries to talk him into returning the necklace, but I guess Doug III
has debts to pay off!! Holly discusses Tate, and Sophia, with Maggie.
I wasn't entirely sure, but it sounded like Tate talked Sophia into an
abortion (across state lines?) - and the show was pathetically preachy
on the subject of parental consent, which all normal people are
completely in favor of.

Yes, but many states where it's legal, still require parental conset
under a certaion age.

Read that again - I'm saying regular people support parental consent laws.

This is another area where the Left is laughably inane - they don't
think kids should buy cigarettes or alcohol, and (generally) seem to
support parental consent for tattoos and cosmetic surgery, but think
kids should have abortions and sex change operations without their
parents' consent. It's asinine.

Post by Ian J. Ball
Brady's and Ava's ballet "date" goes awry (I do actually wonder if
Kristen did steal the tickets!), but it sounds like they're planning a
second date anyway... then Ava gets a mysterious text! (from Kristen?!!).

Adam H. Kerman

2024-12-22 16:35:38 UTC

Post by Ian J. Ball
DOOL - "Doug III" goes to Leo Stark to sell the necklace, and Leo
tries to talk him into returning the necklace, but I guess Doug III
has debts to pay off!! Holly discusses Tate, and Sophia, with Maggie.
I wasn't entirely sure, but it sounded like Tate talked Sophia into an
abortion (across state lines?) - and the show was pathetically preachy
on the subject of parental consent, which all normal people are
completely in favor of.

Yes, but many states where it's legal, still require parental conset
under a certaion age.

Read that again - I'm saying regular people support parental consent laws.
This is another area where the Left is laughably inane - they don't
think kids should buy cigarettes or alcohol, and (generally) seem to
support parental consent for tattoos and cosmetic surgery, but think
kids should have abortions and sex change operations without their
parents' consent. It's asinine.

You're a lunatic. Laws on prohibition of achohol sales were originally
written by conservatives for supposed religious reasons. However,
teenagers are genetically predisposed to STOOPID and don't require
assistance from intoxicating substances.

Tobacco use -- addictive but not behavior altering -- shouldn't be
prohibited, but again, to the extent that there were early laws
prohibitting tobacco sales and use, they came from conservatives.

Where the hell did you ever get the idea that the church lady isn't
there to impose behavioral restrictions upon everybody else?

Ian J. Ball

2024-12-22 18:00:51 UTC

Yes, but many states where it's legal, still require parental conset
under a certaion age.

Read that again - I'm saying regular people support parental consent laws.
This is another area where the Left is laughably inane - they don't
think kids should buy cigarettes or alcohol, and (generally) seem to
support parental consent for tattoos and cosmetic surgery, but think
kids should have abortions and sex change operations without their
parents' consent. It's asinine.

You're a lunatic. Laws on prohibition of achohol sales were originally
written by conservatives for supposed religious reasons. However,
teenagers are genetically predisposed to STOOPID and don't require
assistance from intoxicating substances.
Tobacco use -- addictive but not behavior altering -- shouldn't be
prohibited, but again, to the extent that there were early laws
prohibitting tobacco sales and use, they came from conservatives.

So, you're in favor of selling cigies to minors? Got it.

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Where the hell did you ever get the idea that the church lady isn't
there to impose behavioral restrictions upon everybody else?

As usual, I have no idea what point you are trying to make here... [roll]

Adam H. Kerman

2024-12-22 18:34:24 UTC

Yes, but many states where it's legal, still require parental conset
under a certaion age.

Read that again - I'm saying regular people support parental consent laws.
This is another area where the Left is laughably inane - they don't
think kids should buy cigarettes or alcohol, and (generally) seem to
support parental consent for tattoos and cosmetic surgery, but think
kids should have abortions and sex change operations without their
parents' consent. It's asinine.

You're a lunatic. Laws on prohibition of achohol sales were originally
written by conservatives for supposed religious reasons. However,
teenagers are genetically predisposed to STOOPID and don't require
assistance from intoxicating substances.
Tobacco use -- addictive but not behavior altering -- shouldn't be
prohibited, but again, to the extent that there were early laws
prohibitting tobacco sales and use, they came from conservatives.

So, you're in favor of selling cigies to minors? Got it.

You don't get anything at all. Tobacco -- in the form of e-cigarettes
and vaping -- had no age threshold till very recently even in places
already restricting the sale of cigarettes to minors. In my state, they
recently raised the age of majority for tobacco purchase to age 21.

But no, while cigarettes aren't good for health in general, as they
don't affect personality like alcohol or most other drugs, I wouldn't
have an age threshold to buy them.

You are such a church lady, Ian.

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Where the hell did you ever get the idea that the church lady isn't
there to impose behavioral restrictions upon everybody else?

As usual, I have no idea what point you are trying to make here... [roll]

The point I am making, which you are willfully oblivious to, is that the
origin of laws imposing restrictions on personal human behavior that
causes no harm to others is the imposition of conservative religious
principles upon individual behavior in civil and sometimes criminal law.

Liberals couldn't have imposed an illiberal nanny state in law (shedding
classical liberalism) had they not adopted conservative religious values
to do so whilst deluding themselves into thinking that there was a valid
reason to impose such controls on behavior.

You cannot come up with an exception to this.

shawn

2024-12-22 19:08:48 UTC

On Sun, 22 Dec 2024 18:34:24 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"

Yes, but many states where it's legal, still require parental conset
under a certaion age.

Read that again - I'm saying regular people support parental consent laws.
This is another area where the Left is laughably inane - they don't
think kids should buy cigarettes or alcohol, and (generally) seem to
support parental consent for tattoos and cosmetic surgery, but think
kids should have abortions and sex change operations without their
parents' consent. It's asinine.

You're a lunatic. Laws on prohibition of achohol sales were originally
written by conservatives for supposed religious reasons. However,
teenagers are genetically predisposed to STOOPID and don't require
assistance from intoxicating substances.
Tobacco use -- addictive but not behavior altering -- shouldn't be
prohibited, but again, to the extent that there were early laws
prohibitting tobacco sales and use, they came from conservatives.

So, you're in favor of selling cigies to minors? Got it.

You don't get anything at all. Tobacco -- in the form of e-cigarettes
and vaping -- had no age threshold till very recently even in places
already restricting the sale of cigarettes to minors. In my state, they
recently raised the age of majority for tobacco purchase to age 21.
But no, while cigarettes aren't good for health in general, as they
don't affect personality like alcohol or most other drugs, I wouldn't
have an age threshold to buy them.
You are such a church lady, Ian.

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Where the hell did you ever get the idea that the church lady isn't
there to impose behavioral restrictions upon everybody else?

As usual, I have no idea what point you are trying to make here... [roll]

It's why until just the last few years you couldn't buy alcohol
anywhere in the state on Sundays. Now you can buy it on Sunday but
only in the afternoon.

Ubiquitous

2024-12-23 09:30:43 UTC

Post by shawn
It's why until just the last few years you couldn't buy alcohol
anywhere in the state on Sundays. Now you can buy it on Sunday but
only in the afternoon.

What in the wide wide world of sports are you babbling about?

--
Let's go Brandon!

anim8rfsk

2024-12-23 18:02:34 UTC

Post by Ubiquitous

Post by shawn
It's why until just the last few years you couldn't buy alcohol
anywhere in the state on Sundays. Now you can buy it on Sunday but
only in the afternoon.

What in the wide wide world of sports are you babbling about?

Blue laws. You can’t buy alcohol on Sundays in an attempt to force you go
to church instead. They don’t get repealed but they keep getting rolled
back so you can buy alcohol earlier and earlier in the day on Sunday.

I’ve always been amazed at the bizarre assumptions behind these laws. Like
drinking or going to church is a binary thing and your only options. And
that people who habitually spend Sunday morning, getting drunk are
incapable of buying booze in advance on Saturday.

It does mean the bars close early Saturday night/Sunday morning and you
can’t go to the bar until Sunday afternoon but again seriously your only
option is to go to church?

Post by Ubiquitous
--
Let's go Brandon!

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

Nyssa

2024-12-24 14:56:33 UTC

Post by Ubiquitous

Post by shawn
It's why until just the last few years you couldn't buy alcohol
anywhere in the state on Sundays. Now you can buy it on Sunday but
only in the afternoon.

What in the wide wide world of sports are you babbling about?

Blue laws. You can?t buy alcohol on Sundays in an attempt to force you go
to church instead. They don?t get repealed but they keep getting rolled
back so you can buy alcohol earlier and earlier in the day on Sunday.
I?ve always been amazed at the bizarre assumptions behind these laws. Like
drinking or going to church is a binary thing and your only options. And
that people who habitually spend Sunday morning, getting drunk are
incapable of buying booze in advance on Saturday.
It does mean the bars close early Saturday night/Sunday morning and you
can?t go to the bar until Sunday afternoon but again seriously your only
option is to go to church?

Blue Laws can be even more convoluted than just banning the
purchase of beer or wine on Sunday.

There was an entire list of items that you were not allowed to purchase
on Sundays in my state when i was a teen.

There were *very* few types of stores or businesses that were even
allowed to be open on Sundays (grocery stores, drug stores, and
restaurants. frex). I remember our neighborhood drug store had
to drape sheets over the sections of aisles with forbidden goods
each Sunday, then removed them on Monday.

Forbidden items included *toys* fer crying ot loud! Like a kid would
go to hell if he/she got a jigsaw puzzle on a Sunday. :/

Candy was a-okay though.

Nyssa, whose mind still boggles at the entire concept of Blue Laws
to this day

anim8rfsk

2024-12-25 01:31:26 UTC

Post by Nyssa

Post by Ubiquitous

Post by shawn
It's why until just the last few years you couldn't buy alcohol
anywhere in the state on Sundays. Now you can buy it on Sunday but
only in the afternoon.

What in the wide wide world of sports are you babbling about?

Blue Laws can be even more convoluted than just banning the
purchase of beer or wine on Sunday.
There was an entire list of items that you were not allowed to purchase
on Sundays in my state when i was a teen.
There were *very* few types of stores or businesses that were even
allowed to be open on Sundays (grocery stores, drug stores, and
restaurants. frex). I remember our neighborhood drug store had
to drape sheets over the sections of aisles with forbidden goods
each Sunday, then removed them on Monday.
Forbidden items included *toys* fer crying ot loud! Like a kid would
go to hell if he/she got a jigsaw puzzle on a Sunday. :/
Candy was a-okay though.
Nyssa, whose mind still boggles at the entire concept of Blue Laws
to this day

Yikes!

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

Ubiquitous

2024-12-23 09:30:42 UTC

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Tobacco use -- addictive but not behavior altering -- shouldn't be
prohibited, but again, to the extent that there were early laws
prohibitting tobacco sales and use, they came from conservatives.

So, you're in favor of selling cigies to minors? Got it.

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Where the hell did you ever get the idea that the church lady isn't
there to impose behavioral restrictions upon everybody else?

As usual, I have no idea what point you are trying to make here... [roll]

Kerman's on the rag again. Heavy blood loss makes him extra incoherant.

--
Not a joke! Don't jump!

Adam H. Kerman

2024-12-22 16:25:14 UTC

Post by Ian J. Ball
DOOL - "Doug III" goes to Leo Stark to sell the necklace, and Leo
tries to talk him into returning the necklace, but I guess Doug III has
debts to pay off!! Holly discusses Tate, and Sophia, with Maggie. I
wasn't entirely sure, but it sounded like Tate talked Sophia into an
abortion (across state lines?) - and the show was pathetically preachy
on the subject of parental consent, which all normal people are
completely in favor of.

Yes, but many states where it's legal, still require parental conset
under a certaion age.

Yet the girl may have been over the age of consent, which means having
sex wasn't statutory rape with respect to her age. If the two yout's
expected to be grounded for life and have to raise their spawn
themselves, perhaps they'd have learned how to operate that condom correctly
before doing the deed.

But that's not a legal consequence, so don't you think we'd better let
her have that abortion as her own choice and not with parental consent?

Ian's wrong here.

Adam H. Kerman

2024-12-22 16:16:06 UTC

Post by Ian J. Ball
As per semi-usual, Ubi's original post isn't showing up on ES, so I'm
following up on yours.

I'm sure the shithead is completely innocent of whatever triggered the
issuance of the NoCeM. The real question is Why don't you just start
your own threads when you aren't commenting on anything he's plagarized?

Ian J. Ball

2024-12-22 16:24:25 UTC

Post by Ian J. Ball
As per semi-usual, Ubi's original post isn't showing up on ES, so I'm
following up on yours.

Because there's no reason to do that when I can just follow up on Anim's
or someone else's post.

I only do that when something happens like Ubi purposely getting the
date in the title wrong.

Adam H. Kerman

2024-12-22 16:29:14 UTC

Post by Ian J. Ball
As per semi-usual, Ubi's original post isn't showing up on ES, so I'm
following up on yours.

Because there's no reason to do that when I can just follow up on Anim's
or someone else's post.

I made no comment about whether you should followup to not-Ubi.

Post by Ian J. Ball
I only do that when something happens like Ubi purposely getting the
date in the title wrong.

Ubi purposely gets everything wrong. Just ignore him. If there is a
choice between following up to Ubi when you have no comment to make on
what he's plagarized and starting your own thread, then ignore the
shithead always and start your own thread.

Ubiquitous

2024-12-22 18:11:55 UTC