Hillary Invokes Sci-Fi

Discussion in 'Reviews' started by Flanders, Jun 28, 2017.

  1. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    7,628
    Thanks Received:
    743
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,036
    I have to thank Hillary Clinton for giving me the opportunity to review every work of fiction ever written in one thread.


    When Hillary says it you know it is not true with one exception: Libraries and democracy do go hand in hand. Neither one is good news for freedom-loving Americans:

    During a speech at the American Library Association’s convention on Tuesday, former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton compared the treatment of libraries in Trump administration’s budget to Ray Bradbury’s novel “Fahrenheit 451.”

    Hillary said, “I believe that libraries and democracy go hand in hand.​

    Hillary: Treatment of Libraries in Trump Budget ‘Like Something Out of Fahrenheit 451’
    by Ian Hanchett
    27 Jun 2017

    Hillary: Treatment of Libraries in Trump Budget 'Like Something Out of Fahrenheit 451' - Breitbart

    Nobody in their right would trust Hillary or libraries. Fiction is the foundation for the tax collector’s governing morality; so it comes as no surprise that the American Library Association called on her.

    One question: Did they pay Hillary the same speaking fee paid by Wall Street firms? Answer: NO. Defending fiction on library shelves is so important she spoke pro bono.

    See this thread from 2012 for a detailed analysis of fiction in libraries. Note that the format was butchered when USMB updated the board a few years ago:


    Since 1876, the American Library Association has had a stated mission of providing leadership for improving libraries in the U.S., but watchdogs point to radical shifts in policies that make the once trusted institution not only hard to trust, but a genuine threat to America, according to a critic.

    XXXXX

    Admittedly, a grain of truth can be found in a piece of fiction. The problem is all of the B.S. one has to wade through to find that grain. The fiction section in every library contains 99.9999999 percent B.S. That’s a lot of manure to handle looking for a grain of truth. You’re better off looking in your own life’s experience.

    XXXXX

    Just so there is no misunderstanding. I am not suggesting banning anything. I am suggesting that not one tax dollar be used to endorse fiction in any way. I would go so far as to take a close look at the tax breaks publishers and movie producers receive. Tax dollars should not pay to publish works of fiction, nor should tax dollars be used to store them for “posterity.”​

    Reading & Writing
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2017
  2. Darkwind
    Offline

    Darkwind Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    Messages:
    25,000
    Thanks Received:
    4,658
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +14,596
    What?

    Fiction, no matter what form it takes, is the ultimate liberty of free speech. It is wholly asinine to argue against a library, which is nothing more than a collection of free speech in a tangible way that people can see and hold within their hands.

    I think that libraries are obsolete given that the Internet has become our library, but that is not an argument against books, knowledge, or libraries. Sorry, but this thread is so wrong-headed I can't even begin to comprehend how anyone could be against knowledge and the worth of libraries.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    7,628
    Thanks Received:
    743
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,036
    To Darkwind: Where did I say abolish freedom of speech? Put some work in on your reading comprehension skills and you will see that tax dollars have nothing to do with free speech.

    Nor did I argue against “books.” I argue against fiction and funding it with tax dollars.

    Try to grasp this: Buy all of the fiction you can afford, but do not ask me to contribute to your reading habits.

    Here is a bit more on the topic for those who are interested:


    Benjamin Disraeli (1804 – 1881) was onto more than he knew when he had Mr. Phoebus, in Lothair, say:​

    Books are fatal: they are the curse of the human race. Nine-tenths of existing books are nonsense, and the clever books are the refutation of that nonsense. The greatest misfortune that ever befell man was the invention of printing.​

    I have to agree with Disraeli in that the printing press did not do much to eliminate mankind’s appetite for brutality in the five and a half centuries since Johannes Gutenberg (1400? - 1468?) invented movable type.

    Admittedly, the percentage of people who knew how to read remained low until “enlightened” governments in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries began teaching the children of the illiterate masses how to read and write. It wasn’t long before entire families could read and write. A cynic might say that all of that book-learning produced 20th century government-slaughterhouses never dreamed of in the centuries of illiteracy.​

    A Proper Use For Libraries

    XXXXX

    Finally, liberals are not known as limousine liberals because they all get around town in limousines. They got the title because they dabble at defending the unwashed, the unloved, and the unappreciated.

    Liberals regard the 1920s and ‘30s as the era of Camelot; home to the wittiest, the most brilliant, the most creative people ever assembled at the same time in the Algonquin Hotel.

    Liberals are convinced that the departed communicants who frequented the Algonquin Round Table said more of importance than did the host of the Last Supper and his quests.

    Liberals seldom leave Baghdad on the Hudson. Whenever liberals do go abroad for business or pleasure they pine for Manhattan as Count Dracula longs to sleep in his native soil.

    Liberals tolerate equals visiting Manhattan while holding them in contempt the instant they leave.

    Liberals will never rest until every human being on the planet accepts the printing press as the second most important invention of all time; rapidly closing in on the wheel.

    How do I know all of this since I never spent time with liberals? Easy answer: All of my adult life, I have been inundated by the importance liberals assigned to themselves, their opinions, and their worldview. I arrived at my conclusions from what liberals said over many decades in newspapers, in magazines, in movies, and on radio and television. Everything from the “theater” to the Metropolitan Opera, to the fawning over the author of the latest book that nobody except liberals ever reads, or the latest stage play that fewer than one percent of Americans would go see if they got free tickets.

    One way or another, the rest of us hear about those authors, their books, and their plays just to make sure that we do not miss something important. I will bet you that two-hundred million Americans know the name of every liberal author that ever lived.

    I will also bet you that not more than a minute number of Americans ever read books written by liberal authors. Yet talking about liberal authors, living and dead, is standard repartee for liberals. I can understand the reason for the talk when a sales pitch is selling books, etc. My guess is that they always talk about the same things when they are talking to one another just to show how well-informed they are.
    Ultimately, liberalism is a soap opera because a liberal can awake from a fifty year coma without having missed a thing.

    And then there is the publishing industry itself. The entire liberal community in America orbits around liberals in publishing. Liberals in the hinterland hold a janitor at the New York Times in higher esteem than Mother Teresa. Publishing is the turkey —— everything else is the trimmings.

    p.s. Do not rush to label me a book burner because I am not knocking books per se. I simply do not want to pay a penny for somebody else’s choices. In short: I prefer making my own mistakes. ​

    Oscar Is In For A Taste
     
  4. Darkwind
    Offline

    Darkwind Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    Messages:
    25,000
    Thanks Received:
    4,658
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +14,596
    Spending on libraries IS spending on the first Amendment. It is self-evident. Learn to think.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    7,628
    Thanks Received:
    743
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,036
    To Darkwind: Your abysmal stupidity is the only thing that is self-evident. Libraries are the publishing industry’s best free advertising gimmick ever devised.

    Asshole liberals like you should spend more time worrying about property Rights:


    Of all the loathsome deeds Hollywood parasites get away with Oscar is a tick behind Hollywood degenerates above the law “because they are artists”:

    An Oscar bylaw, bolstered by a U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision in 1991 that was affirmed again in 2015, forbids post-1951 honorees or anyone who inherits a statuette to peddle it in any way without first offering it back to the Academy for $10.​

    Leonardo DiCaprio, the Malaysians and Marlon Brando's Missing Oscar
    by Gary Baum September 21, 2016, 6:30am PDT

    Leonardo DiCaprio, the Malaysians and Marlon Brando's Missing Oscar

    Anybody who owns items from books to buildings should have the right to sell them. Hollywood parasites toil away at the Academy of Arts and Sciences in one of the most heavily subsidized tax dollar industries ever created. The logic that gives them eternal ownership of Oscar statuettes escapes me. I suppose perpetual ownership originated with the guy who first said something like “Motion pictures is the only product you sell and still own them.”

    NOTE: Preventing a theater owner from demolishing a Broadway theater is a cottage industry all of its own.

    Nobody who buys a ticket to see a movie thinks they own the film after they leave the theater. It is the same as watching a TV show or reading a book for free in a public library. Conversely, you own the CD of a TV movie you buy, and you own your copy of a book you purchase. Presumably, you can sell them whenever you please for whatever you can get without giving the original owner a piece of the pie.​

    Oscar Is In For A Taste

    Incidentally, the old Hollywood Communists claiming that their freedom of speech gave them the Right to use property they did not own is alive and well. Sally Field tried it 2007:

    Most people who pay attention to freedom of speech overlook property Rights when they discuss censorship. In short: Nobody has a Right to commandeer someone else’s microphone to get a message out, nor does anyone have a constitutional Right to be heard. Socialists always had trouble getting people to listen. That is why Hollywood and television have to sneak their messages into almost everything they produce.

    Sam Goldwyn’s famous line, "If you want to send a message call Western Union." was not about censorship. The Hollywood blacklist flap in the McCarthy Era was about ownership Rights although liberals convinced succeeding generations that the “Witch Hunts” were about censorship. Communist writers and directors demanded their Right to use someone else’s property to send their message. In effect, studio heads like Goldwyn said “Screw you.” Liberals have never stopped pissing and moaning about it.

    Parenthetically, I am not a big fan of Rupert Murdoch, or any media baron for that matter, but if he loses his property Rights what chance do I have of keeping mine?​

    [​IMG]
    http://bp3.blogger.com/_BcAhLr85Pvs/Ru6OXjo9QpI/AAAAAAAANRU/3EhPm8w3wV8/s400/sally3.jpg

    Monday, December 31, 2007
    FOX Censors Sally Field's Anti-War Rant

    Televisionista: FOX Censors Sally Field's Anti-War Rant

    Sally Field tried to take Rupert Murdoch’s property and use it to send her message. That is not freedom of speech. Sally Field had other choices. She could have bought a soapbox, purchased her own media outlet, or even get permission from Murdoch beforehand. When the story was in the news I remember thinking “I would love to see a pro-Iraq War American go to Sally’s home and preach to a crowd from her front porch without her permission.”

    Liberals confuse the issue even further by saying that conservatives claim they want less government but applaud censorship. No true conservative wants to censor people like Michael Moore so long as he makes his films without using tax dollars, or use somebody else’s property without their permission.

    On the other hand the Socialist message is forced on children in the public schools. Al Gore crossed the line when his environmental crapola was forced on school children. Had he been denied access to a young CAPTIVE audience the Left would still be screaming censorship. Gore proved that liberals are allowed to cross the line separating government coercion and the Right to NOT LISTEN whenever it suits them.

    NOTE: When the Hollywood studio system disappeared, Communists and liberals of every stripe took over the industry. As the technology for delivering a message evolved Hollywood saviors began to assert the individual’s Right to preach a message with somebody else’s property rather than make a movie with their own money encompassing their message.​

    Hillary Clinton Proves Fake News Is Newspeak
     
  6. orbi
    Offline

    orbi Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2017
    Messages:
    79
    Thanks Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +14
    Time proves conservatives wrong all throughout History. SSM, the illogical, ignorant “birther” insanity, Valerie Plame, the trickle-down economy-destroyer, "iraQi links" to 9/11, "Al Gore said he invented the internet", the not-so-swift boat lying traitors for money, climate change, inter-racial Marriage, The Civil Rights Movement, Segregation, the "Commie" witch hunts, Female Suffrage, slavery, The Revolution, the original "witch" hunts...and so on, and so on...(that is just in AMERiCAN History, you know! we could go further back if you haven't gotten the point yet)

    (and notice that i am referring to ideologies. NOT political parties…which change depending on time and place)

    (plus, of course, supporting a con "man" who scams the elderly, attacks Veterans and their Families, sexually assaults women, wants to date his daughter, loiters and lingers around girls as young as fifteen getting undressed...)
     
  7. iamwhatiseem
    Offline

    iamwhatiseem Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    21,974
    Thanks Received:
    4,548
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    On a hill
    Ratings:
    +13,628
    So...why is this in the Reviews section?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page