New Angel

Here's one article about the Bradbury/Moore situation.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=38776

I heard it on one of the TV News shows yesterday as well, but I can't
remember which one.
Lucille

"escapee" wrote in message
...
First of all, did you see Fahrenheit 451? It has nothing to do with what
Moore's movie is about. Okay, if I stretch it, it could be a metaphor in
comparison to Moore's film, but where else is it even remotely similar?

BTW, I'm interested to read where you saw this information about Bradbury.

V


On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 15:54:27 GMT, Rhiannon
opined:

The movie's publicity directly compares it to Fahrenheit 451, there are
supposedly very strong parallels in the theme, and the spin makes it
sound like it was done with the author's blessing. Since there is a new
film deal of Fahrenheit 451 in the works, Bradbury was not pleased. He
is also a registered independent so does not like the fact that people
are assuming Fahrenheit 9/11 portrays his political views.

escapee wrote:
To use the title? The Bradbury film was Fahrenheit 451. Does Bradbury
have the
copyright on the word "Fahrenheit" now?



Need a good, cheap, knowledge expanding present for a friend?
http://www.animaux.net/stern/present.html

I haven't seen it as a movie. I've read the book several times. Here's
just one link to info...several other news sites have carried basically
the same article. I'm not sure which news site mentioned RB's political
non-leanings.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movi....ap/index.html

escapee wrote:
First of all, did you see Fahrenheit 451? It has nothing to do with what
Moore's movie is about. Okay, if I stretch it, it could be a metaphor in
comparison to Moore's film, but where else is it even remotely similar?

BTW, I'm interested to read where you saw this information about Bradbury.

--
Brenda
"Nothing...I got nothing for sale."

Karen C - California wrote:

Father Guido Sarducci.

He'd get my vote! He always had me ROFLOL.

Nyssa, not easily amused

I have one of her designs--still not done and possibly never to be done.
After reading some of the things on her site and all, I don't want to stitch
her designs, this is a personal preference. I was supposed to stitch on the
angel but my name got lost somehow and i didn't re-volunteer for it. I may
just do a pattern of the fireman's prayer for the local--since the military
is going through and picking some of the local emergency personnel to be
trained and sent overseas.
Angel

"Cozit/Liz" wrote in message
...
You *do* know that she doesn't do the marketing anymore, right? Chances
are that that was entirely a decision made by the company that took her
on... especially as you mention the kits, which she didn't do in very
large number before.

-Liz

escapee wrote:


She also said no more selling at chain stores. Not only does Hobby
Lobby have
most every chart made by her, they sell her kits, also. Lie number one.
That's
enough for me to discontinue trusting anything she says. I could
forgive that
if she came back with "I lied...bla, bla, bla..."




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.708 / Virus Database: 464 - Release Date: 6/18/2004

Jere Williams wrote:
Oh pish-tush -- that reminds me of the joke about how you know a politician
is lying -- his lips are moving.

I cannot believe you think that Clinton is a liar only because he got caught
in that whopper.

Well now, it's good that you don't believe that because I certainly
never said that.

Elizabeth
--
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~living well is the best revenge~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The most important thing one woman can do for another is to illuminate
and expand her sense of actual possibilities. --Adrienne Rich
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

Seanette Blaylock wrote:
"Dr. Brat" had some very interesting things to
say about OT: Presidential Lies was New Angel:


Fred wrote:

What are the other elected representatives doing?? Surely the other elected
representatives have the power to confront the "powers that be" within
Congress or the Senate and demonstrate (provide proof) that LIES have been
told, people were mislead and that the liars and misleaders should resign or
be impeached, a.k.a. tossed out.

Actually, impeached is not also known as tossed out. Clinton was
impeached and kept his office.


IIRC, impeachment is about equivalent to indictment.

Actually, impeachement is equivalent to prosecution.

Elizabeth
--
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~living well is the best revenge~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The most important thing one woman can do for another is to illuminate
and expand her sense of actual possibilities. --Adrienne Rich
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

Cheryl Isaak wrote:
On 6/24/04 8:18 AM, in article ,
"Caryn" wrote:


Lynne M. wrote:


Clinton
should have been fired for his own lack of judgment, but we have
no mechanism for firing a president no matter how bad his behavior is.

Oh, but we do. That's what impeachment is for.

Elizabeth
--


And elections, and believe me MY vote this fall is not going to be for the
liar
currently in office.

Caryn

Unfortunately, I can not vote for either of them. I can not stand Kerry and
his JFK impersonation. I'll be voting for Mickey Mouse again.

I'm with you on that one, Cheryl.

Elizabeht


--
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~living well is the best revenge~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The most important thing one woman can do for another is to illuminate
and expand her sense of actual possibilities. --Adrienne Rich
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

Caryn wrote:

Why do you keep insisting on bashing a man who isn't in power? The past is the
past, Clinton's lies are in the past.

How is saying that Clinton lied, bashing him?

If you want to keep beating the dead horse that is the Clinton presidency,
that's fine, but I have the right to talk about the current big fat liar in
office now if I want to too!

You do, but they're not connected, really they're not.

Of course, the post I'm replying to might just be more flame-war bait, and I
guess by replying I've played into that haven't I?

Huh? I really don't know what you're on about here, Caryn. I posted an
honest appraisal of Clinton (for whom I voted twice and for whom I
would vote again were it possible) and you accuse me of posting flame
bait? I think perhaps your meters need recalibration.

Elizabeth
--
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~living well is the best revenge~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The most important thing one woman can do for another is to illuminate
and expand her sense of actual possibilities. --Adrienne Rich
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

escapee wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 03:09:03 GMT, "Dr. Brat" opined:

Why does this always end up being about Bush? Why can't we just discuss
Clinton without bringing Bush into it? I swear it's like fighting with
my husband. "I really hate it when you do X" "Yes but, you do Y and
that's worse." Drives me nuts.

Elizabeth

Yeah, that's right. When I get on Mark's case about something, he has every
right to express to me what annoys him about me. In other words, when I'm
perfect, I can then expect perfection. That will never happen, so when he
points things out to me it's an opportunity for me to look at myself and examine
it. It's what being married is about. A journey to self.

Oh, you misread me. He has every right to criticize me. I just wish
he'd do it at the time that I have done something to annoy him. Instead
he saves it until I criticize him and uses it to deflect the criticism.
Not much of a journey to self there, I would say.

So, I could talk trash about Bush all day, but that's really not what I
wanted to discuss. I wanted to talk about Clinton and I don't get why
it is that we can't talk about Clinton without someone (several million
someones) piping up that Bush is worse. That's irrelevant to the
discussion of Clinton, to my mind.

Anyway, Rush and his cronies are still blaming everything, including this fake
war on Clinton. They said he was wagging the dog when he went into Afghanistan
to get Osama. I guess they were wrong, huh?

You've said this twice now and I have no idea what you're on about.
When did Clinton go into Afghanistan to get Osama?

Elizabeth
--
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~living well is the best revenge~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The most important thing one woman can do for another is to illuminate
and expand her sense of actual possibilities. --Adrienne Rich
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

escapee wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 03:12:42 GMT, "Dr. Brat" opined:

Doesn't matter what he lied about. He lied. And if he'd lie under oath
about that, you have no guarantee that he wouldn't lie about anything else.

I look at his record as president. We had the best economy in the history of
our nation, and it wasn't based on this false economy set up by tax cuts. I can
go on and on about it. You can hate him if you want, but I don't and I'd
re-elect him in a second if he ran again, and when Senator Clinton runs for
office, I will vote for her. She will probably be the first female president of
the US. I can't wait.

You're pretty funny. I never said I hated him. I said he lied under
oath. Why does saying that make everybody assume that I hate him? I
voted for him twice and would vote for him again if I could, but he
still lied under oath. Facts is facts.

I don't know if I'd vote for Hillary or not. I suspect not.

Elizabeth
--
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~living well is the best revenge~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The most important thing one woman can do for another is to illuminate
and expand her sense of actual possibilities. --Adrienne Rich
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*