“To me, this is a tacky thing to say after the fact (or even before the show aired). Ms. Hathaway may not have even been available or wanted the role. Although not the star of the show, if they are going to complain, they should mention the casting of Rolf (who performed well, BUT) who looked 30 years old singing "I'm just 17 going on 18." It was ludicrous. I laughed out loud during that scene.”
“Interesting comment. I'm not arguing with you, I'm thinking about your question. I'm not sure she would be gone from another network. She worked on E! for years and hosted The Tonight Show for decades as a substitute (NBC, I think), and she has always been "raw" and offensive in her comedy and language. It seems when you have a decades-long career as a comedian (not actor, political advocate, or even chef .. Paula Deen), there's a bit more of a pass. I don't disagree with that. Think Chris Rock, Louis CK, Sarah Silverman, etc., not to mention the older generation of comics like Pryor, Carlin, and Rivers. Comics get in trouble with the public every now and then for "going too far" with words, but rarely are their careers ended by it. Whereas it's condemned and punished for other careers in the public eye (perhaps rightly so), for some of the more crass comedians, it's expected, and often times there is a bigger message in the "joke."”
Nov 23, 2013 at 11:56:06
“I failed to mention in my previous reply to you that we, too, did a lot of the work ourselves building our new small home. My husband took a year off work and did all of the electrical, plumbing, drywall, cabinet installation, etc. ... what he could, he did himself. Of course, I realize not everyone can do that (I couldn't!) but it was an incredible savings. Good for you smmrselysummers, Cheers!”
Nov 23, 2013 at 11:48:13
“My husband and I did the same thing seven years ago. Sold our big house in the city and built our cozy house with cash from the profit. We're now living on eight acres of woods and have no mortgage. We were also able to incorporate cool "extras" into the house plan that add character, e.g., archway doors, stained glass windows, and a screened porch that we often sleep on. Although our house is nowhere near as tiny and conservative as the one featured in the article, I admire this guy and am looking forward to watching the full film Sunday night.”
“Thank you for a very reasonable reply (in tone, if not in content from my perspective). So many times, commenting on this site means getting beat down by others to the point of giving up trying to have a conversation. I read and respect your position, but even more so, I appreciate your calm and clear explanation. I wish you the best.”
“Dengold, Thank you for your reply. I have not confused the Tea Party with anarchists. I know the difference as a social science professor and expert in social movements. Your comment is well stated in some ways. But it is quite clear that Tea Partiers (much like Libertarians but in a much different way and at a much different level) want to dismantle the federal government. Of course they are. This is well documented, maybe not with those harsh words I used in my post, but it is quite clear. Most, if not all elected Tea Party officials are far right of even Libertarians. And their ideal is being played out this week, at least for a moment. I'll bet we may even hear some folks suggest this notion: "See these gov't programs have been suspended for [insert number of days/weeks] and we haven't even missed them ... it's clear we don't need them after all and they are just unnecessary entitlements that should not exist." Dengold, how can you deny (if you're not denying it, then I apologize) that they are basking in this shutdown? It's exactly what they campaigned on.”
Dengold on Oct 10, 2013 at 11:47:22
“Again, I would feel very awkward trying to gauge the minds of other Tea Party supporters, so I can only speak for myself. I have extremely mixed feelings about the shutdown. There is an old saying about being very careful in "choosing a hill to die on." As the saying suggests, the strategy is one of desperation and one of the last options you would ever deliberately elect. Yet, I have reached that point with the ACA; I am that strongly convinced of the incredible damage that law will wreak not only on our healthcare but also on our political framework, expanding government control over our lives to the point that our basic freedoms can become threatened. I'm sure you disagree, but, at least, try to understand how someone like me might be completely sincere in that belief. So the Tea Party has chosen this hill, and, as I look around, it's not at all the hill I would have chosen myself, but where else can I go? This fight is clearly a David/Goliath battle, but I don't think my side will be as blessed as David was. You think I want to "blow up" government, but what I want to do is to let people know that my belief is so strong that I'm even willing to accept all the horrible consequences of this action, consequences that are likely more damaging to my side than to others. Freedom often requires sacrifice.”
“Why would anyone vote for a politician who is running for a position in the federal government but despises and wants to eliminate the federal government (except for its war machine, of course)? Would you hire an atheist as your theist church pastor? Or a high school drop out as university president? Would you hire a hair dresser who strongly believes everyone should be bald? The Tea Party reps make no bones about it, during their campaigns and certainly now. If you don't like the gov't, this is your week ... bask in your idiocy, at the expense of so many others (maybe even yourself but you don't know it yet).”
Dengold on Oct 10, 2013 at 03:18:07
“I can't speak for others, but I can clarify my own view as one who supports (but is not yet a member of) the Tea Party. I do not "despise" the federal government, nor do I wish to eliminate it. Certainly, neither positions are advocated by those in the Tea Party. I believe the structure upon which our nation was founded is best for all its people since it not only limits the power of government but also enshrines the concept that our individual rights are God given, rather than granted by government. History is replete with destructive examples of the way power corrupts. Virtually all of the "crimes against humanity" have been committed by governments that had almost absolute authority. Guarding against the growth of government power might well be the single most important method of protecting civil rights. I also believe that large bureaucracies are wasteful and inefficient, but that argument takes a distant second place to the ideal of safeguarding civil liberties. Thus, I seek out candidates who share my concerns about government power and who put the highest priority on the protection of individual freedom. You may have confused the Tea Party with anarchists, but I can assure you, there is virtually no similarity whatever.”
cornell0673 on Oct 10, 2013 at 02:57:33
“they know it, they are just to dumb to realize they are only hurting themselves. certain things i dont understand about the party not to mention several more.
prolife but promote 2nd amendment rights and the death penalty.
all for charity but hate food stamps
only rempublicans can be christians, if you are not republican, you are muslim
freedom of religion then say, but your muslims.
and so many more.”
roc-o-rama on Oct 10, 2013 at 02:52:51
“Gotta Fan You for that insightful comment!
But to answer your question, it's the Tea Party way. Ol' sister Palin was just the tip of the iceberg in this bowl of nutts.”
“When it became apparent the show was going downhill and about to end after only three minutes (even if Chappelle overreacted), why weren't the hecklers removed from the audience so the rest of the crowd could enjoy the show they paid for?”
“Two points: 1) "Mercy" is afforded to those who have done something wrong, so there is an underlying judgement necessarily, when one uses the term mercy. 2) Gay priests are not the same as priests who are pedophiles. The article and the pope's statements do not address the difference, but this should be made clear, nonetheless, because oftentimes, folks incorrectly use these categorizations synonymously. A celibate gay priest is no different from a celibate heterosexual priest. Pedophilia is the problem among (some) priests, not their sexual orientation. If celibacy is the rule, sexual orientation matters not if they follow the rule of celibacy. Pedophilia ... that's another story, and mercy should not apply to them.”