12

(48) Star Trek: Discovery is Truly God Awful (Spoilers)

Posted by  $  nickursis 3 months, 2 weeks ago to Entertainment
117 comments | Share | Flag

A little afield, but interesting, in that this guy clearly shows just how involved the left gets in trying to make any vehicle a propaganda piece, and why the new ST series is actually extremely racist, bigoted and a clear violation of all they keep crying over.
SOURCE URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBb0hyuIfYQ


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by  $  Temlakos 3 months, 2 weeks ago
    Does everyone here remember what I said last year, that the Star Trek fiftieth anniversary was a tarnished jubilee? This is the prize example.

    I'm not waiting any longer. I am creating my own story arc, just to show a society built on "replicators" as it comes crashing down when people forget how to keep them up, etc.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ProfChuck 3 months, 2 weeks ago
      Interesting. I am working on a story about how the Borg got their start in a civilization that developed nanobots as medical devices to cure virtually all diseases and injuries. No! Wait, that's happening right now in our own medical labs. Uh Oh!!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  Temlakos 3 months, 2 weeks ago
        I agree with you. The Borg can only have gotten their start as a measure to cope with perceived imperfections in organic bodies. Couple that with a strong dose of elitism, and you get the hive-mind that wants to possess everyone.

        Whittaker Chambers was wrong. Ayn Rand did not "plump for a technocratic elite." She came down hard against all elites--against all who thought they could made decisions for others and enforce those decisions without the consent of those others. In the Borg you see the logical endpoint of a technocratic elite--or rather, of the mind-set of a technocratic elite, coupled with a technology, offered as a cure, with the power to enslave.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Riftsrunner 3 months, 2 weeks ago
          Too bad the SJW agenda has infected the Hollywood culture, as the Borg would have be a perfect allegory for Social Justice ideals of today. The Borg are a hive mind that demands compliance with the collective. Any race they come upon they convert and force to join them. There is no other point of view, so anyone who fights against the agenda of the Borg becomes an enemy and must be eradicated, including drones that step beyond the collective.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  Temlakos 3 months, 2 weeks ago
            I fully agree. The Borg always impressed me as the ultimate totalitarian collective.

            But the SJW agenda became part and parcel of Star Trek with the Next Generation show. Picard, on two separate occasions, tells denizens of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries that the scarcity economy is obsolete and no one has to work for a living. When Captain Kirk told Korob and Sylvia (S02E08, "Catspaw") that "we run these [precious gemstones] off by the ton!", you could overlook that. But not "In our time, men spend their time improving their minds, not their wealth." Then, too, the Ferengi are a very travesty and caricature of capitalists and capitalism. And now, as the original videographer says, the Klingons are now become a proxy for Afrikaners and American Southern whites!

            But--oh, have I plans. I plan to retell the story of the American Revolution, set 400 years into the future, from several points-of-view. Including an autistic savant who finds himself imprisoned--on a psych ward--for displaying American Revolutionary tendencies. When someone accidentally wakes him up...!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
              ST never dealt with money well at all, as 50% of their plots were directly fueled by greed. Harry Mudd for example, miners and such (I mean, who would want to mine, unless the became "fabulously wealthy" which was one line from TOS on why they needed them). The whole "we dumped money" idea never worked, at all, as they never gave any good reason for why someone would love to do the dirty jobs.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  Temlakos 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                I wondered about that one myself. You have to have some kind of trade, after all. I sense the showrunners, in the Nineties, forgot they had even made two episodes with Roger C. Carmel as Harry Mudd. Who would run a con, and against whom, and for what gain?
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                  Oh yes, the money thing was an ongoing mess for Trek writers, so the bluffed their way through. In one episode, they find an old ship with 4 people aboard, supposedly frozen at time of death in case they could be revived and fixed, which is what they did. They are in the midst of a conflict with the Romulans and several times the rich guy wanted to know about his wealth until Picard and Data let all his air out by telling them they no longer used money, that everyone pursued their best potential or some such. Good lines, except no one explained who does the dirty jobs, who works in Utopia Planetia shipyards putting ships together, and reconciled the miners who lived rough to "make a fortune in a few years" from TOS.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                    In fact, one of the Harry Mud ones dealt with him and some rejuvenation drug he could make women beautiful with, and he was "selling them" to remote miners.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by  $  Temlakos 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                      One could possibly explain that the Federation completed their moneyless economy in response to the Harry Mudd cons. Except that the Enterprise show said the moneyless economy was already in place.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                        I do not recall that from Enterprise (the series) but could be, although, as I said, Harry rand scams to make money, including selling the tribbles, etc. BTW in the Tribble episode, what did the bartender charge the Federations folks and the Klingon's? If they have no money, why would he have a bar?
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by  $  Temlakos 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                          The Vulcan exchange officer, T'Pol, crash-landed in an earlier century and recalled having to--horrors!--get a job of work to acquire "specie" to pay for room and board.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                            Well, yes, so you see the problem, different writers did different things..
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by  $  Temlakos 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                              By the time Manny Coto took over as chief showrunner for Enterprise, he could not repair all the continuity damage other showrunners had let writers do to the canon. But he gave it the Good Old College Try just the same, and came up with brilliant solutions that would have impressed Anton Checkhov. Only now CBS have chucked all that in favor of a totally unworkable and philosophically unsound vision.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
            They are indeed the poster kids for the current liberal mindset, if you do not agree and become assimilated, you are the enemy. That was one reason why I thought the guy made some valid observations, in that that is exactly what they are doing to the Klingon's. I do not see the angst ridden captain and first officer story.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Owlsrayne 3 months, 1 week ago
        I can't wait for Nanotechnology inject me now! Nanotechnology started before the Borg in Star Trek. Scifi writer Ben Bova used that idea his novel "Moon War" where the technology was used to build diamond Space Clippers from Lunar regalith. Then accidentally the main character get an accidental overload of medical nannites during a medical procedure making him into a superhuman.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 3 months, 2 weeks ago
    I haven’t watched any of the episodes and never would have seen this “critique” had it not been brought to the Gulch. The rant seems to pinpoint a lot of leftward political propaganda that’s been created in Hollywood and Madison Avenue and then passed off to the public as supposedly innocuous “entertainment and advertising”. There’s quite a bit to comment on in the video, but I’ll just stick to one point that stood out as soon as I saw it and that is the quote from J. J. Abrams: “We wrote these characters but when we went to cast it, one of the things I had felt, having been to the Emmys a couple of times - you look around that room and you see the whitest f—king room in the history of time. Its just unbelievably white. And I just thought, we’re casting this show… etc.” and then goes off on a personal crusade to teach all those white people a lesson in liberal diversity by deliberately making sure the casting of STD [Star Trek: Diseased? LOL] strictly adheres to the PC pecking order.

    What popped into my head when I first read the quote was my experiences in China when I worked and lived there for a time. That is, I never would have the same idiotic thought process as Abrams as I attended various entertainment events and, to paraphrase Abrams, start thinking: “you look around the room and see the most Chinesest f—king room in the history of time. It’s just unbelievably Chinese.” Hey wait… without having to fire up too many brain cells I knew I was IN FREAKING CHINA, a predominantly Chinese country (duh) attending events that a lot of Chinese people like to attend. Just exactly what the hell faces would one think to see there? Obviously Abrams brain cells have been rotted through and through with his own PC propaganda and couldn’t muster enough remaining cells to realize he was in the USA, a predominantly white nation, attending an event that a lot of white people like to attend. Nothing nefarious or racist about it. [Side note: I had a great time, as short as it was, working and living in China. Wonderful folks! I’m retired now, but wouldn’t mind returning as a tourist.]

    I think his quote tells us more about Abrams than anything else. He is a self-hating self-deprecating white liberal and has been thoroughly brain washed into becoming a PC advocate. He just can't help himself, suffering with PC cataracts to view the world through.

    Just hypothetically thinking I wonder what Abrams would do if he were to go to China to help put together a sci-fi series for consumption in China. After attending an event in a Shanghai theater, would he walk out in a self righteous huff and deliberately exclude Chinese from the cast just to teach them a lesson in American liberal “diversity”? I suspect he’d be fired for such idiocy and find himself on a plane back to his Hollywood left wing ideological cesspool.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by freedomforall 3 months, 2 weeks ago
      The fan reviews on IMDB are about 20 to 1 negative, (and many include thoughtful criticism.)

      I agree with your observation, mcc.
      Having watched the 3 episodes, in my opinion it is poorly written, poorly acted, has extremely bad camera work, and the writers and cast are vehement in their irrational bias against the morals, iintegrity, and ideals that moved civilization from the Dark Ages to individual liberty and free markets eschewing all the advances in health, nutrition, technology, and the pursuit of happiness.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Riftsrunner 3 months, 2 weeks ago
      The thing that is sad is you have reality and perception. If you look at television a few years back, you would find a representative sample of the country as a whole, every race and gender was represented in about the same numbers. Lately, there has been a perceived lack of minority programs, so these SJW's have decided to rectify this imbalance. There has been a push to hit all the social justice targets (gays, blacks, feminists, etc.). Just look at the ABC line-up in the US on Tuesday and Wednesday night's. You have a white family from the Midwest that is just above being white trash, an Asian family who are your stereotypical overachievers (I know this is based on a memoir of Eddie Huang), a black family that is an anti-minstral show where the blacks are normal and the non-blacks are caricatures, and a new show with a 20 something rapper becomes mayor through a publicity stunt to sell his songs on Tuesday. Wednesday has a Jewish family (no real problem here), a show about a family with a disabled child with cerebral palsy, then a family that hits many social justice targets (older stuck in the past father marries younger Latin Hispanic hottie with a son, a daughter who is more masculine than her husband, and a son is gay with a dopey Midwest partner and adopted overacheiving Asian daughter), and it ends with another white family who cannot seem to fit into their town because they are so poor by comparison (so a 'have versus havenots' story). If you add to this the cancellation of the second highest rated show (Last Man Standing) about a middle-American afluent conservative family that was probably very representative of normal white people in this country, you kind of feel there an effort on this networks part to try to make a perceptived slight into reality. I am not saying these shows are bad, many are funny and enjoyable. It just strikes me as them trying to go out of their way to do the cliched 'I cannot be racist because I have black friends' without actually saying it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by mccannon01 3 months, 2 weeks ago
        I must admit it's been years since I've watched any network sit-coms, or anything else they have to offer as regular "entertainment". Usually I've had a day of creativity and work of some kind or another and just want nice entertainment or education without all the insults to my values and indoctrination to rot. I do channel hop and land on such programming to check it out if I've never seen it before, but can size it up in a few minutes of viewing and move on never to return again.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
      Thank you, Mccannon01, my thoughts were righ along with there, and that was one reason I brought this in, and the Discovery fans in some other places are absolutely rude and horrible about anything negative, and refuse to even entertain the idea someone is playing with them to solve Americas issues and evils, one episode at a time. Even as that, is is a really miserable way to try to do that, as it removes all artistic and story originality, in favor of skewing everything to support their pet social ills. But, I cannot accept it as Star Trek, and CBS is making sure no one else is going to ever make any of the "real Star Trek" (fan films).
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Steven-Wells 3 months, 2 weeks ago
    I watched the first episode, only. I’d be nuts to spend money to watch Star Drek, full of hyper-political nonsense and absurd, feeble bridge crew. I kept waiting for the odd and mutinous (but very pretty) “Michael” to tell us about nasty male Klingons named “Cindy” and “Mabel”.

    But enough of the standard complaints. Here are the ones I haven’t heard yet elsewhere.
    1. Many shots were framed at Dutch angles, so what were those for? Showing that the main characters shouldn’t be trusted? Or that the ship was to feel disorienting.? Or that the whole show should feel unsettling or unpleasant?
    If you’re not familiar with the term Dutch angle, it’s where the camera frame is at an unusual angle to horizontal/vertical. It makes the viewer feel disoriented or suggests something disturbing about the characters shown off kilter. Watch the classic movie, “The Third Man,” where all the decent, honest people are always shown upright. All the creepy people and lying criminals are literally “not on the level”.
    2. While I’m okay with all the Klingons speaking in their subtitled language, it has to be spoken at realistic speaking speed. The director should require that the actors know their transliterated lines well enough to speak them realistically. Not slooowwwwed waaaaaayyyy dooowwwnnn, just because Klingon is full of gutturals and glottal stops. There’s no reason to allow weak actors who can’t say their lines.
    I couldn’t imagine a performance of The Pirates of Penzance, where an actor trudged along through the normally rapid-fire Major-General’s Song, with such lines as, “Then I can write a washing bill in Babylonic cuneiform, And tell you ev’ry detail of Caractacus’s uniform.”
    The director (or show runners) are as incompetent as the too-slow actors. But we already knew that.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Riftsrunner 3 months, 2 weeks ago
      Didn't they use the Dutch angle on the Batman series from the 1960's whenever they when into a villains lair? To literally show that the villains were so crooked that even their hideouts were tilted and each villain had their own angle depending how crooked they were from upstanding.

      They also used it in TOS during the episode 'Wink of an Eye' to differentiate between normal time and accelerated time.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
      That seemed to have been what they copied from the remake BSG, which did a lot of that. Note that there is little originality in ANYTHING Hollywood produces anymore. It it either a purely political statement, or a remake to supposedly guarantee a hit (which only seems about 30% effective), yet they refuse to work on known great material. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress would even give them something to preach with, if they just tried, probably without screwing it up too bad.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by SteveFoerster 3 months, 2 weeks ago
    If only Discovery didn't say "Star Trek" on it, and therefore its disregard for canon were irrelevant, I'd be okay with the show so far and looking forward to seeing what they do with it.

    In the meantime, I'm still watching, but for a lifelong fan like me it requires a hell of a lot of cognitive dissonance to overlook things like that Spock tells Chekhov in the original series that there's never been a mutiny aboard a Starfleet vessel, only to learn now that ten years before this his own foster sister was famous for being a mutineer that started the Klingon War.

    I guess I can keep hope that the writers are aware of this and have some sort of exceedingly clever explanation by the end. But given the repeated descriptions of chaos during the show's development, that's a pretty thin hope indeed.

    All that said, I'm enjoying The Orville a lot more, and apparently that's the reaction of an awful lot of longtime fans.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Riftsrunner 3 months, 2 weeks ago
      Discovery is supposed to be in the JJverse of Star Trek, so what Leonard Nimoy's Spock said was true. They felt that the original canon was too constraining because it tied their hands for where they wanted to go with the franchise. So they caused an event in the original universe that created one where they could ignore certain inconvenient canon by rewriting the origin stories and characters to free them to create whatever they needed to push their agenda.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by SteveFoerster 3 months, 2 weeks ago
        You'd think based on what we've seen, but that's not so: http://comicbook.com/startrek/2017/08...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Riftsrunner 3 months, 2 weeks ago
          Why???? This is taken everything we know about prime timeline and throws it into a shredder. I guess, I heard it was Kelvin at one point and missed everything else. My problem is the uniforms and ship designs are too close to Star Trek:Beyond. We are talking over a century difference in ship design being similar, yet 10 years later we get a bridge like TOS Enterprise? I would assume the bridge of the Shenzou would be closer to to TOS Kirk's Enterprise design than ST:B Kirk's design on the Franklin. I guess CBS just shat on trying to be canonical for trying to seduce the movie fans. Something like 'You liked the look of the movies, well our new show looks just like it'
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
          Steve, if you can see that trailer, and still say "canon" you must be talking about an 18, or 24 pounder, since it is not the "according to" meaning. Riftsrunner is right, there is so much askew, it is clearly JJverse in space. The ship designs, bridge, technical details, engines, all scream "JJ". They just had to make sure they did NOT reflect the shapes of JJ verse, due to legal separation agreements, but it has nothing to do with pre-TOS Trek. They cannot do it in the actual "Kelvin timeline" for the simple reason it would interfere with the separation of church and state. CBS cannot use their designs or ships, so they had to come up with their own unique look. Yuck.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
        Uh, one problem though, is the supposed story was the TOS universe id changed by Spock arriving, which is 20 years or so after Disco. They could have gotten away with some kind of "Before Trek" Trek, but they swore it was canon. USS Discovery is definitely NOT canon.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
          The writers claim Discovery does not take place in the Kelvin Universe.

          I wish it would turn out that Discovery takes place at a point where the Mirror Universe becomes evil. In this case, we could see the universe not pure evil but laying the groundwork for the world where Mirror Spock gives up and says one person cannot summon the future.

          That can't happen, though, because they've already shown the mirror universe was cartoonishly evil in the time of Captain Archer.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
            The writers can claim all they want, but that ship did not exist in the TOS universe, and it is one reason a lot of fans said "nope", as the geek part of Trek is the whole idea behind the history and design of the warp nacelles, and the ship structure. All that went out the airlock on STD.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
              Isn't that true for Enterprise too? People say Enterprise was based on the Akira-class, which appeared in TNG and DS9.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                It my have been inspired by it, but the Akira was from a game made by FASA, who had to add ship types for the game to work. This was then made into models, and then CGI models and became fan fodder for mods etc, and a lot of FASA was folded into canon. The link below details it and there was a lot of use of the Akira model for NX01, but a lot of other things were changes to make it "different" like most ships, they needed to make each one somewhat unique. Here is a detailed discussion of the 2 ships, to explain why it is not so:

                http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/art...
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                  Cool. I appreciate ENT now more than when it was on.

                  Maybe in 30 years DIS will be like some TOS and TNG episodes that I thought were amazing and I now think are stupid. But right now I like DIS the way I liked TOS and TNG 30 years ago. I did not like VOY or ENT, so this is the first time in a long time I've had new Star Trek I liked. Maybe they'll run it with Neutral Zone preaching or too many anomaly-of-the-week episodes, but right now I'm enjoying it.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                    Well, that is good, I am not trying to push one way or the other, as each individual needs to determine what they watch and why, I was just thinking that the video presented an alternative view to some of the decisions made in making STD, and how and why they made specific choices. The Trek canon issue will go on probably for a long, long time. Unless they have some good deals for DVD's, I will skip STD, mainly because I do not stream due to slow internet speeds, and there is no alternative available. CBS was not all that brilliant in not considering people do not all have high speed internet available, nor do a lot of plans allow for large data, nor do they hook up their phones to the TV.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 3 months, 2 weeks ago
    It's getting so that the movie screens are filling up with scfi and CGI films that are underbaked whitebread. TV stories start so that I can tell you how it ends in the first 5 minutes. Last year films like "Ex Machina" and "The Arrival" gave me hope that we might be entering a new era of intelligent well made films. The New "Blade Runner" film has been praised to the skies and I was looking forward to seeing it, which I did today. I am less than pleased. But as members of the forum see the film I'll withold my opinion until a few have chimed in.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Owlsrayne 3 months, 1 week ago
    I watched the first three episodes on CBS All Access via Amazon Fire TV. I was disappointed in the plot line, and the female lead sounding to much like the Seven Of Nine from the Voyager series. The Klingons morphed into something unrecognizable. Then in the third episode they stole a plot device from the Canadian Scifi series Dark Matter (which was cancelled) of a Blink Drive, organic instead of tech. Playing the race card with the Klingons being one homogeneous race except for one character. The whole thing smacks of political/cultural correctness along with CBS world view. I'm disappointed but at least there is The Orville.
    ABC is getting into the game dis-entertaining with Once Upon a Time (my wife loves it) with multiculturalism muddling fantasy first episode. I'm hoping that The Expanse comes back on Scifi channel so there is a good space opera to watch.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by GaryL 3 months, 2 weeks ago
    I have come to expect nothing less out of HollyWorld and simply change the channels or refuse to watch, buy or support any of their garbage. A friend just told me how great a movie "Made In America" with Tom Cruise was. All I could say is Who is this A hole Tom Cruise and No Thanks.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  allosaur 3 months, 2 weeks ago
    The Federation is the Borg and Star Trek Discovery will likely get an Emmy for the left loving it.
    Also loving a lady First Officer's first name~Michael. Allo-sissy-saur woo woo signing off.
    Hey, Target. where's the ladies room? I'm feeling female today and I like scaring little girls.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by freedomforall 3 months, 2 weeks ago
      Don't worry, I'm sure that when the writers make her heroic they will change her name to Michillary. Can't have a hero with a male name- too confusing for the audience since they have been programmed that men are evil traitors and mutineers.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  allosaur 3 months, 2 weeks ago
        You've inspired my dangerous dino mind to imagine Michillary the Hero Hag who cackles as she photon torpedoes Kleon star cruisers with red cross hospital ship markings.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  3 months, 1 week ago in reply to this comment.
    Uh, CG, didin't you say you went to Democratic fund raisers, and contributed?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 1 week ago
      "you went to Democratic fund raisers"
      [More fun with words I don't understand]Well, that's true. At Democratic events, I have to avoid suffragettes in their 19th century garb inviting me onto their sin-bearing bandwagon, which is way less fun than it sounds. At Republican fund raisers, thought, I have to deal with binarism, ableism, ace eraseure, and cis-supremecy. I'm offended by the notion of erasing aces![/word silliness]
      I don't know what that stuff means either. I'm being silly, maybe even a silly sod. I make light of this stuff because I don't believe it's real. I think there are people who do things that are odd, mean-spirited, stupid, etc, but giving them all special names and focusing on them isn't helpful.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  3 months, 1 week ago
        Maybe, but maybe you shouldn't be going to any fundraisers, and thus reducing your exposure to both subspecies....
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 1 week ago
          " reducing your exposure to both subspecies"
          Absolutely, if it were true. I make light of it because I never see it and do not believe it's real.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  3 months, 1 week ago
            Really? What an unusual world you live in.....
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 1 week ago
              Yes. I don't know if I'm a Pollyanna, but what an amazing time to live this seems to be! https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  3 months, 1 week ago
                CG, I respect your right to your opinion, although I disagree with a lot of your perceptions. Violence, civility and basic behavior has been on a steady drop since the 70's, and it got it's impetus in the late 60's, when the established order lost validity in the face of Vietnam, and all the lies that started to be uncovered (aka Pentagon Papers). Media, journalism, took a "dig out the facts" position, which was good for a while, it just uncovered a lot of the "crap" going on. Then the politicos, to cover up the "crap" began owning it by blaming it all on the "other guy". That worked so well, and coupled with the liberal takeover of education, produced people who have no problem lying, cheating stealing, and then justifying it. Clintons, McConnell, Pelosi, Obama, Lych, Comey, all of them, violated their oaths, and do not care a whit about their responsibilities, as long as they get money, power, and stay on. It has spread like wildfire, and is becoming endemic. How else do you explain Chicago having one of the highest murder rates in the country despite the strictest gun laws? Laws, courtesy, common decency to each other are gone. Heinlein was correct.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 1 week ago
                  "How else [other than an overall increase in violence] do you explain Chicago having one of the highest murder rates in the country despite the strictest gun laws? "
                  Maybe places that have high crime have politicians who feel the need to "do something" even if it does not work, so they pass gun laws. Maybe the gun laws actually increase crime by taking guns away from law-abiding citizens. There are many explanation other than a general increase in crime.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  3 months, 1 week ago
                    So, that is an argument that conservatives and gun owners have made and your liberal friends ignore. They just want total control. Then you can go get screwed, raped, killed, whatever, because YOU DO NOT MATTER. The same applies to Republicrats, who preach guns and freedom to have guns, once they have used you for whatever they want YOU DO NOT MATTER. You obviously did not see the video of the ex Democrat Rep who said he hated elections because he had to pander to voters to get re-elected so he could then continue to pursue his own agenda.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 1 week ago
                      "So, that is an argument that conservatives and gun owners have made and your liberal friends ignore. "
                      You believe in this "liberal friends stuff", and I do not; I hardly know what it means. I also do not believe there is a huge number of evil people who do not care about people suffering in public office. I think that's all theater. The results of a large/intrusive gov't are very real. If it were just some bad guys who don't care of people, it might be easier to solve. That is not the case. I don't have an answer. I'm open to CoS. I'd be open to gov't-limiting amendments. Or maybe some charismatic person could pull together a bi-partisan gov't-cutting coalition or something.

                      This sounds absurd, but I actually think my son's football is part of the solution. Those kids come together from different walks of life, get physically moving, work as a team, experience wins and losses. I'm a nerd and don't fully understand the game, but I really admire those kids, coaches, and refs. My 9 y/o explained to me how one kid missed a catch by trying to make it look cooler. He also explained how they played a team whose coach constantly argued with the ref, while his coach accepted the calls He said the nature of the game at this level is you don't yell at the ref and should generally accept the calls unless there's something egregious, and you have to accept the refs are human and make mistakes. Wow. These are hard concepts, and he's stoic about things he really cares about, like whether his play was valid. It's not just my kid. American football and soccer bring out good character traits. I do not know if football will save America (I'm half joking), but I think I can have as much influence taking my kid to it as I have lobbying my politicians.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  3 months, 1 week ago
                        No argument of the value of sports,unless it devolves into "participation trophies" only. Kids need to learn that you may win, lose or draw, but no one rewards people who "just show up". Again, that is a Liberal concept disconnected from reality, where a group has decided they can make the whole world feel good if we only.....
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 1 week ago
                          They don't keep score, but the kids do. The kids all know their numbers of wins, losses, and ties for the season.

                          The rest of us who are not involved in politics do not see all this liberal/conservative stuff. They do other modern-kid stuff too, like always bringing snacks and water (water makes sense for sporting events, but they do it for everything), and always "eyes, eyes, don't run around that large tree. I need to be able to see you every moment!" I would never have understood parents yelling "eyes" at that age. I have no idea how that fits into what talking heads who get paid to bicker say, but it's definitely the trend. I just don't participate.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • -1
                  Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 1 week ago
                  " the established order lost validity in the face of Vietnam"
                  I think you're saying in the 70s people realize the gov't was lying and called for reforms. Now it's just petty. I totally see that. I've never lived through that time, when I imagine people were having a debate about giving the gov't the secrecy it needed to do its job but being sure there was accountability. Now it's just politicians wanting to lock the other up.

                  I see no influence whatsoever of a takeover of education. I see problems with education, but I don't see it being so well coordinated that crooked politicians hatch and execute a plan to raise a generation of people who won't hold them accountable. That's laughable. I do see people not holding gov't accountable, but I don't single out education over other cultural factors and I certainly do not think it was a centrally-planned plot.

                  What you say is kind of depressing because I do imagine my parents' generation overthrew that established order. My generation scoffed at the idea of an established order, but I see what you're saying of it leading to naked "blame it all on the other guy" discourse.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  3 months, 1 week ago
                    Not only did I live with it, I gre up watch Cronkite and the evening Vietnam news stories. I saw the Watergate hearings, I saw the Pentagon papers released and the fallout. That was where the politicians learned they couldn't rely on a wall of silence and compliance in government, so they switched to the "lie till you die" defense, mixed in with the "start another rumor" plan, which has been co-opted into the media who are now their mouthpieces. Did you notice that the Harvey Weinstein debacle is all women bitching about being raped, molested, etc, who say they told everyone and no one listened? These are the same "liberal" Hollywood elite who tell you "I'm leaving the country if you elect Trump" and don't. They are the same ones screaming for the rights of illegal immigrants, sanctuary cities and states, and ignore the fact it is all based on breaking the law, and their negative impact. Why is Harvey Weinstein such a beast and the guy who murdered the girl in SF not? He was released! Because they have to protect the poor innocent illegals. They are the most insane, illogical, emotional, 'help the little racoon and get rabies" idiots you can imagine. The schools have been pursuing a deliberate program of idiots educating idiots, because of their system, you send kids to college, they are exposed to liberal professors who program them to ignore the laws they don't like "and be a force for change" then they send them to schools where they pass that same logic onto other generations and you have generation after generation of "educators" who have NEVER HAD A REAL JOB. Results do not count, the quality of your product is not measured. Yes, the school system is a disaster because they have closed loop education, with the idiots teaching the idiots. The result is moronic professors who declare that whatever they think is the TRUTH and reality, and it becomes so. Wish upon a star and you get it. One of the best ways to control a culture is to control the education, get em while they are young. Go study history and look up "Hitler Youth", or better yet, go study Japanese history 1850-1945, and look at how they co-opted Bushido to be a "cultural value". The results were 4 years of bloody war. Yes, you can control education, and you can control what people think, it is a long haul program, but it works great.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 1 week ago
                      "These are the same "liberal" Hollywood elite"
                      I say judge each claim on its own merits rather than grouping people. If there is the same person making contradictory claims, then you can ask that person. But I don't accept that there's some elite gang who all think the same things.

                      "Why is Harvey Weinstein such a beast and the guy who murdered the girl in SF not? "
                      I think it's all rubbish, just trash. People can rubberneck at life's tragedies in a sanctimonious way, as if it were part of the policy-making process. I don't want people making one another feel uncomfortable, and I certainly want to help illegal immigrants any way I can. Lurid news stories are not the way to do it.

                      "The schools have been pursuing a deliberate program of idiots educating "
                      I don't believe the public grade schools do very much at all deliberately, at least a nation-wide thing. It's all about having a good teacher.

                      I see absolutely none of the "Hitler Youth " type stuff whatsoever. It's actually 180 degrees opposite. There are all these standards focused on accommodating students with special needs, and the great teachers navigate them and do a good job. Some of the special needs accommodations make no sense, like having a full-time person assigned to be a shirpa for someone with developmental issues that make his cognitive abilities way below his abilities. There's no science I know of that says having them around people their age but not able to follow any of the class material is helpful to them. But when it's for special needs, they turn off good judgment.

                      Overall the quality is better than what I'd expect from a free handout from the gov't, and that's not saying all that much. If they get the right teacher, it's better than the expensive schools we interviewed. I have seen absolutely zero top-down politicization.

                      "you send kids to college, they are exposed to liberal professors who program them to ignore the laws they don't like "and be a force for change"
                      I'm trying to instill those liberal values at a very young age, not to "program" them, but for them to figure out the world and have agency. Be willing to break the law in protest and accept the consequences if necessary. Be a force for change. Happen to things rather than letting things happen to you. I am trying to give them these liberal values now. College is way too late.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 1 week ago
                      "Did you notice that the Harvey Weinstein debacle is all women bitching about being raped, molested, etc, who say they told everyone and no one listened? "
                      Most of them say they were not even physically coerced in any way. I certainly do not condone making people feel uncomfortable, but doing it is not as bad as a serious violent crime.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
    "Janeway was a solid edition to the center seat?" Okay. She was not my favorite captain. He talks about the "gender politics", but that seemed far less important than what she acually did-- many questionable decisions with what felt like hand-wringing in place of consequences.

    I see no politics whatsoever in DIS this far in the first three episodes, not even the slightest hint. Nerds like me are speculating what's going on.The show won't immediately reveal its secrets! Is it the beginnings of a mirror universe? Section 31? Trying to make ot about contemporary politics is a far greater stretch. It's just not there. They may take it that direction, but there's no evidence. We really don't know exactly what's going on.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by freedomforall 3 months, 2 weeks ago
      More biased irrational drivel from CG, the O and Hitlery supporter. A bat can see reality with more clarity.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
        I don't get too excited on it, everyone has their own opinion and view, in this case I got hammered on a Fan Film FB page by all the Discovery cheerleaders.I just considered that, with Hollywood's incessant liberal media manipulation and hypocrisy, that driving a series to be a political diatribe is plausible and he supported his theory with evidence of such from the writers and producers. No one anywhere's has countered the suppositions, just started screaming back with constructive words like "stupid", "dick", "neo-fascist", which certainly seems to say he may be onto something. Propaganda takes many forms. The issue of the Federation being the "good guy" and encroaching on the Klingon's, who profess to just want to be left alone, seemed really valid, just as the liberals want to ram gender issues, race issues, and global warming down everyone's throat, "for our good".
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
          "who profess to just want to be left alone, seemed really valid, just as the liberals want to ram gender issues,"
          One interpretation is they're setting up a bunch of political statements. Another is a good villain has motivations besides just being a bad guy. The audience totally disagrees with Khan, for example, but we know why he's doing this. He really was smarter and stronger than Kirk. But Kirk won. And then Kirk acted like he was doing him a favor by marooning him on a planet instead of sending him to jail. Kirk never checks in on him, and Khan's wife dies horribly. Khan is irrational b/c he never would have wanted to be checked in on, but that's the whole point! Khan is wrong. But we know why he does what he does. It makes perfect sense that this person who was stronger, smarter, and used to winning lost and then lost his wife, and he is on an insane mission to beat Kirk.

          The issue of losing your local culture to progress is an old one and a reasonable motivation to give the Klingons. It's not necessarily commentary on those issues happening right now any more than it's about Roman roads and trade causing Roman ideas and language to replace local ones 2000 years ago.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by freedomforall 3 months, 2 weeks ago
            As bad as the writing and acting is through 3 episodes, viewers should expect the writers to drag out Khan again shortly (with little regard to the existing history of the character.)
            Fortunately, many of the fans of Star Trek can see the obvious political propaganda that you conveniently ignore, as you ignore O and Hitlery's unethical and unconstitutional actions.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
            Maybe, maybe not. You can choose to view it either way, just as kneeling is "Not about disrespecting the military", yet it is, as the military are what kept that flag flying. It is a show, and you can choose to view it as a show, or view it as deeper meaning. I am not about to believe that this show is just their idea about Trek and fun, in that I have not supported or watched it, as I do not support CBS's treatment of fans, Axanar, or paying 5.99 a month to watch one show, and have to go through all the gyrations needed to do so. Besides, I am so disgusted with the "Nu-Treking" they have done, they can keep it. The Discovery alone is proof of their desire to change everything.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by freedomforall 3 months, 2 weeks ago
              For some people, there is no discovery in this rubbish. Hopefully the backlash will open the eyes of many more against the statist sponsored media manipulation that has been epidemic for the past 30 years.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
              "You can choose to view it either way"
              Right, because we don't know yet. They haven't given us enough to know what they're saying. They are definitely NOT going for "Trek and fun". It's obviously darker, although the vein that DS9 was darker than TNG. This appears to be even darker. But it's too early to say.

              I find modern political debate extremely childish, so I hope they jump into it in an obvious way. I do think that would ruin the show.

              "the military are what kept that flag flying."
              I understand this is a tangent, but I don't get it at all, probably because I have somewhat "radical" views on it.. I think we should have only a limited standing army and a well-regulated militia of armed citizens should be primarily responsible for keeping the flag flying. I think having a permanent weapons industry big enough to influence the gov't and forces deployed around the world are contrary to the ideals of the flag. I think the flag stands for, among other things, the right to protest and say unpopular things. So I guess in my view the flag itself in a very very loose sense "disrespects our military" as we know it and is a banner for people protesting the government. People protesting, including protesting a large standing army and its actions, are putting the ideals of the flag into action.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                Under the current political structure as it evolved after WW2, we cannot have a "small limited standing army" in that EVERYONE want to control EVERYONE else. Go watch WW2 Confidential on History or Smithsonian, they did a good job showing a lot of the deep diide and manipulation of all the players. Everyone was lying, everyone was manipulating, and Stalin was just killing everyone. Same today, when you have so many countries that want your ass in a sling for whatever reason, you need enough strength to stop them, as well as the proxies. Proxy war has been the rule since 1945. The snowflake poulation today lives in a dreamworld of "you make me feel bad inside" while telling you how "you are a (fill in your special name here)" and not meaning one little shred of it. Just like The Beast and Bernie all lied out their butts with their ever increasing "I will give you free (fill in your want)" As long as we have the wimpy diaper kids here, and really bad intentioned people outside, we need our large military.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                  "we need our large military."
                  Most people think the world is different now. This is related to, but not at all the same as, people saying parts of the Bill of Rights as literally written does not apply to the modern world.

                  I think you said people wanting to control one another is why we need a large standing army. I think Madison said this was a reason we need not have a large standing army.

                  I have only a vague understanding of the meaning of you're saying about snowflakes, diaper kids(???), and so on. It seems like you're saying the world's problems are related to character flaws. I tend to think people have the same flaws, and there were snowflakes, jerks, fantasy-prone people, officious people, and all of that since behaviorally modern humans appeared. .
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                    CG, maybe you do not ever meet them, but yes, there is a huge number of self important, entitled, self centered people who have been programmed to use a litany of "excuses" to get, say, or do, whatever they want. The most common tool is the accusatory "You're a ( fill in you label here)"

                    The most extreme end f this is their cannibalistic feeding frenzy all blame games devolve into:

                    https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2...

                    http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/05/uc-...

                    If you can still not identify the flakes in your world, you may need some therapy, as you may be compromised. Or you have never had to work with, near, around or for one of the creatures.

                    For the military, go study your history, look to 1938-41, US Involvement in International affairs, the America First group, and what happened December 7, 1941. Then extrapolate how bad we did for the first year or so, and how incompetent the tiny military we did have performed, and transfer the data to today, and see how secure you would be with a billion armed Chinese coming to visit.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                      "First group, and what happened December 7, 194"
                      Isn't that amazing though. A problem of war cropped up and they turned their economy into fighting it. The theory was the gov't would back out of the economy once the problem was over, but of course it's never over. The gov't says they're holding their finger in the dike and people would die if it weren't for them. So, they say, one country has to appoint itself police officer and protect the world.

                      "see how secure you would be with a billion armed Chinese coming to visit"
                      If we had an armed population, some of whom trained together regularly, it would be very costly to attack. And the spoils of war aren't there. The people of the world are enjoying a wonderful lifestyle their grandparents couldn't conceive of by trading with one another. The value is in the things they make for one another. It's not like gold that you could go loot. The value is in trade. Going to war with an armed population that's willing to engage in friendly trade is a losing deal.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                        "IF" we had an armed population. Remember, said flakes are always trying to disarm the population. Yet their efforts in Chicago yielded worse results because, as many people have pointed out, they make it hard for people to legally get guns, but that does not effect illegals ones, so crime goes up, murder rate goes up, etc. I disagree on the spoils idea, in that the market is a spoil itself, the materials, knowledge and tools are spoils, and every country with a "communist" or "socialist" government, seems to just be wallpaper over a dictatorship with either a party or person in power and a few elites getting rich, Venezuela comes to mind, but China is also a good example. The value in trade only exists when you have the stable currency in the world, and right now China is making moves to disrupt that with their latest Yuan moves and gold trading centers.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                      "If you can still not identify the flakes in your world, you may need some therapy"
                      I'm not saying jerks, criminals, and people with other character flaws do not exist. They exist. I just don't see them as a new phenomenon causing particular problems. There's a whole industry saying, "you're struggling in life, and it's mostly to blame on [insert people with character flaw] and their leaders like [insert politicians]." That seems bogus to me. There have always been human frailties. People's problems and successes, including mine, are mostly their own doing and chance.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                        It is that "whole industry" that is programming the flakes, though, and the silly sods believe it, as stopping and thinking and discussing is much too much work. Race is such a topic, banned, verboten in most workplaces, and is easily manipulated because groups congregate, and then feed off each other. Black communities create their own hell by staying in closed groups, with limited jobs, and the gang influence, that makes it very hard for a black kid to actually get educated to get out. A lot never get away from the "hood", I have met a large number who keep all the "culture" in the military, and STILL blame others for their issues, even when it is obvious they did not get promoted because they failed the test. The same communities blame the "racists". The white suffragettes who think every sin is theirs to bear, thus they must make everything right by some or any means, then jump on that bandwagon and will spout nonsense that makes no logical sense, yet they really believe it.The 2 links I posted testify to that. While it IS their own doing, it is YOUR fault, by their skewed logic.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                          I don't actually know who the players are: "flakes", "sods", "black communities", "suffragettes". I see so many people going about their business with no regard for any of these groups. As bizarre as all this (including those two articles) sounds to me, there may be something to it because of how attitudes toward watching children has changed radically. People over 40 are either confused by it or just accept the world has radically changed. People under 30 grew up under the new rules and don't even realize it. It seems like something happened in the 90s, when I was a teenager and young adult, in watching kids. There are so many examples but I've seen young parents make a hand gesture indicating "eyes" to admonish their 8 y/o for running behind a tree in the course of their play with other kids. The theory goes a parent has to keep eyes locked on kids every second, and cannot be trusted to run in a park even for a split second behind a tree. The parent or guardian must literally be staring at them ever instant, in a way that strikes me as obsessive but strikes most people under 30 as just normal. For lack of a better name, I call this behavior "momism".

                          Maybe this has nothing to do with all this stuff about flakes programming sods or whatever. Frankly that stuff sounds like a bad sci-fi horror film with nothing to do with reality, BUT I do know there is some sociological change going on that I do not understand. I see no indication it's related to race or anything, but something is going on.

                          In the world of adults, I see none of this at all. Sure politicians are trying to get people fired up and angry at their neighbors, but adults seem to ignore it and focus on their lives. With kids, though, we treat them like we're paranoid if they have a moment to create their own game or just hang out society will crumble.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                            There are flakes in every age group, but the majority are those just coming into their twenties, who have been told by their university idiots in classes like "Cultural Equality for the Masses101" all the fantasies that are carefully made up to blame all the groups that came before them, thus deligitimitizing anything they ever did, said or created. Thus the statue mess, the "safe space" cry, the protests when anyone who ever they do not agree with shows up to speak, because the whole framework of society has been indicted. Not for any good reason, just because, and it permeates into everything else. Since they are so fractured, they splinter easier than the stolid conservatives, who once bought, stay bought. The Hillary gang bailed on her for Bernie because he promised more, and maybe you missed it, but the last 2 months of the election wer a constant bidding war, even when Bernie was safely tucked away in his new 3rd house. Maybe you see none of it, in your business or whatever, because anyone associated with business that is not dependent on a government subsidy or grant, has to make a profit, and so cannot live in the flake universe. Your momisim is related to the same thing in the 60's, when there was a communist under every chair, desk and behind every tree, the needed to know where you were every moment, in the 90s we had Iraq and Desert Storm and that moved in terrorism. Now no parent will allow her kid to go to a concert without body armor. It is probably there in every generation, the "threat of the week". The flakes are out there, I have worked with a few, and even been through the mill of HR for being "mean" and telling them the awful truth that "Yes, your beautiful process doesn't work and causes bad things like: XXXXXX"." Then you get told to tell the nicely, and do not scare them with loud noises, mean words or hand gestures. You must be lucky, or have exposed yourself to them enough to not "be mean".
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                              I understand about 50% of this, and I suspect I'm not getting the main point.

                              Deligitimizing institutions - It seems like there's a broad trend of Boomers saying they reformed institutions and my generation is too cynical and does not appreciate their work. Millennials seem like they grew up slower and still retain some childish feeling that if they do what they're told they shouldn't have any hardship. (I think all middle-aged people think this way, so I'm cautious it may be just middle-age crankiness about the youth.)

                              "Hillary gang bailed on her for Bernie" - You're Sanders challenged Clinton's with promises of gov't handouts.
                              "maybe you missed it"
                              No, I didn't. I really wanted Clinton to win the electoral college, so I was reading those articles. I saw the whole the thing.

                              "stolid conservatives, who once bought, stay bought."
                              Bought? You mean in the sense of bribed? Or you mean less fickle? How's that related?

                              flake universe - I think this is your word for the thing where people say they don't want to be around upsetting ideas. No one likes upsetting ideas, but these people go overboard and say they shouldn't have to hear even respectfully-stated ideas they don't like. I think, but am not sure, it's related to hovering parents.

                              "when there was a communist under every chair, desk and behind every tree, the needed to know where you were every moment"
                              I was a kid in the 70s and 80s. I remember people being rightly afraid of nuclear war, but I don't remember it translating into your parents needing to know exactly where you were every minute. Kids were running around playing. I never sensed adults felt like hovering over their kids would protect them from the Soviet threat.

                              "90s we had Iraq and Desert Storm and that moved in terrorism."
                              So I was a teenager by the 90s, and I never sensed people were afraid their young kids would be affected by the invasion of Iraq.

                              I do remember reading about parents who worried about their young children being affected by terrorism. At the time I thought it wasn't true, but now I suspect it was. I was a young adult by then and not thinking about children.

                              "the "threat of the week "
                              This is real, but it is not at all what I'm talking about. The thing I observe is obsessively hovering over kids with no stated threat. It's not that they're worried about something that I don't agree is a threat. It's more like a psychological ritual or something where they must spend every second staring at their kids. I suspect it's the cause of the thing where some young adults think they should be protected from respectful disagreement. That problem is frankly too serious for name-calling. I think it's a real sociological trend. I think the pendulum is swinging the other way. People are calling it giving their kids "grit" and raising them "free-range". The words mean basically NOT doing the obsessive hovering that became popular at some point after I grew up.

                              "Then you get told to tell the nicely, and do not scare them with loud noises, mean words or hand gestures."
                              I do not know what this means. Who's doing the telling? I think you're describing a particular uptight person. I used to ruminate about why people have a problem with me, but I've mellowed and I just avoid the situation. It can be hard if it's a big client, but I know if I refer them to someone else and gracefully exit the project, in a year everyone will be happier and I'll hardly remember.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                              • Posted by  $  3 months, 1 week ago
                                CG, do you ever read the news? I mean news beyond lamestream media. In the 60's we had air raid drills under our desks and you knew the three triangles were a civil defence air raid station/shelter. Parents were a lot more invested in their kids, what they did, who they saw. Look at the non lamestream news and you see protests where all that is blathered is about recisim, veryone and everything is a racist, this was programmed by the Obamanation gang over the last 8 years, and built on the feminist agenda, and tossed in LGBT as a cherry. It is the politics of divisiveness and separation, as it is so easy to control a group by pandering to their one interest. It seems you want to filter what is going on and reframe it into something that fits, and that is very dangerous, as that is what has happened over the last 80-100 years. People have become more tribal and pushed into "groups" by the people who would seek to control them, and this includes both parties. The subject of this video was a breakdown of how that could be, if you are willing to look beyond a simple TV show and framework. I actually see parents going off on another path, where they leave the kids to the electronic nanny, and some work as 2 income families to try to get ahead, others work 2 parents because both parents want to do whatever it is they do, and the kids are a side job. Either scenario gives you kids with little to no social skills or exposure, except through whatever games they play, and I have seen a rise in animal abuse, and child and spouse abuse, because, after all, they aren't real. Those are the things we have to deal with now.
                                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                                • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 1 week ago
                                  [I'll just use the name-calling words for fun, not knowing what they mean.]
                                  I mostly follow lamestream. A lot of their ads are geared toward silly sods because the primary content is aimed at programming sods. The public-facing reporters and commentators are mostly snowflakes, but they have many regular non-snow flakes working behind the scenes. The flake universe if is bounded but expanding, which some see as an indictment of the very framework of society. They reported on the Hilary gang, but they were less keen to report on the Obamanation gang because it's built on the feminist agenda and, as icing on the cake, the LGBT agenda. I actually work with an LGBT person, and he keeps his agenda on tiny yellow postit notes and expecting me to pander to it. Why doesn't he use Google Calendar for his agenda? The media don't cover the suffragettes much, but the assistant principal at my kids' school is a suffragette, and she blathers on making no logical sense about racism and her bandwagon of bearing sins. My wife works with someone in one of the black communities, and I'm actually grateful talk of it is verboten because they're creating their own brand of hell and that's unpleasant. I'd rather go stay in the fancy cabin in the north woods that our flake friends bought with money they made wallpapering over tyranny. The flakes in the gangs of Beast and Bernie are so different from your average rank-and-file flakes. Once I tried to tell them the awful truth, but they didn't care for it.

                                  All these people with funny names are a crapstorm falling over each other to control the other groups.
                                  [/Using words I don't know]
                                  I have no idea who any of these people are. It's all gibberish to me. If I said anything real above, it's by accident because I don't know what any of it means. If I ever really met a suffragette inviting me on her sin-bearing bandwagon, I was probably just walked away confused. It's truly gibberish to me. All these groups and gangs definitely sound like royal jerks though.

                                  If you know any suffragettes, flakes, or anyone part of a "gang", I would just stay away from them.
                                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                                  • nickursis replied 3 months, 1 week ago
    • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
      So what the producers and writers said in the quotes he put up on the screen, in addition to the JJ quotes were?????? Remember, there is also the fact that they were required under the Solomon decision to change their look from the TOS era, as the TOS era is supposedly all Paramounts, which raises the question of how CBS was able to sue them, if Paramount has all the TOS rights....
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  CBJ 3 months, 2 weeks ago
        Do you have any links to the Solomon decision? I'm interested but can't find it on the search engines.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
          Sorry, that was my name for the various splits between Viacom, CBS, Paramount back in the late 90's. I have searched for the supposed 10 year ban on TV programs (CBS's supposed excuse for why no Trek was produced), and I have only heard, in many Trek forums, of this "deal" where Paramount retained all the rights to the "Original Trek" look, ships, characters, and CBS had to create non competeing shows. I will look to see if there is something.

          Here is the history, it is very convoluted:
          http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/St...

          Here is one discussing JJ Abrams issues with it and some of the backstory:

          http://www.slashfilm.com/complicated-...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
        I listened to it. Wow. It's like an unintentional parody of someone trying to shoehorn an interesting sci-fi show into being about modern politics. When people watch the show 30 years from now, like watching TNG now, no one will even remember all this political nonsense.

        The show is about a flawed protagonist who in a war situation literally pulls the trigger to start war. She said at the beginning killing the enemy leader would make him a martyr and lead to a horrible war. Klingons killed her parents, and she shows clear signs of wanting war with the Klingons. Now everyone blames her for starting the war. But did she pull the trigger to protect her captain or because on some level she wanted a war? The show doesn't tell us. Maybe the character is asking herself this question. She acts like she has a death wish, but is that because she really did start the war on purpose or because she didn't want to and failed miserably. We don't know. The nitwit character in this video would misses the whole point and asks what does all this mean for supporters of President Trump and for issues of race and gender identity? Of course it has absolutely nothing to do with those things. That's just what he's obsessed with.

        Much of what he talks about are Lexus and the Olive Tree issues that have been with us since people started trading and traveling farther than they had before, and they've obviously accelerated with jet travel and the Internet. He thinks it's something new and applies to specific groups of people.

        "Federation has more in common with the Borg"
        He says this like it's bad, but I really like it when the Federation isn't presented as an always-right utopia. Eddington made this exact analog to the Borg on DS9. I hope they make issues related to this part of the story arc.

        "Who exactly are the bad guys in this story?"
        It remains to be seen. We don't know!! This isn't a show made for television decades ago, written
        before on-demand video when stories had to make it obvious who the bad guys are.

        He keeps saying "the left is obsessed with identity politics." "Everything is offensive to them."
        That's hilarious-- talk about the pot calling the kettle black. If I had tried my hardest to look for anything this guy might find not consistent with his version of political correctness, I could never have found as many reasons to be offended.

        The issues he claims the "Hollywood bubble" supports, e.g. feminism, social justice, etc, are things
        I take for granted as virtues. So maybe I and possibly most people are in the bubble with them.
        Maybe this video gives a view outside my bubble, and it isn't pretty. It's kind of like the
        caricature people make of Republicans as jerks, except he's apparently a real person.

        I absolutely do not think particular parties and candidates make people jerks. I think the character in the video is a jerk, and in this video in manifests by him contorting a show into being about politics.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  blarman 3 months, 2 weeks ago
          "The show is about a flawed protagonist who in a war situation literally pulls the trigger to start war."

          B5 had a similar opening plot.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Riftsrunner 3 months, 2 weeks ago
            That was because B5 was reality carried forward. Strazynski said that humans have had 1000's years to become less greedy and altruistic humans, another two or three centuries isn't going to change us. And Star Trek was too sanitized. It's a noble goal to aspire to, but it would always remain beyond our grasp.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  blarman 3 months, 2 weeks ago
              Can't disagree with that. Star Trek (Roddenberry) assumed that with technological advances would come more "civilized" behaviors in humanity. It ignores the individual, unfortunately.

              The other one which I think pretty accurately portrays how things could be is Firefly.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
                Firefly was good too, I think one thing that handicapped it was it was not well set up in the beginning and a lot of people could not connect spaceships with horses and steam trains.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by  $  blarman 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                  Agreed. There needed to be a bit more backstory. If you watched the entire (and only) season, you finally got out of it that there were the haves (the old world) and the have nots (the settlers), but it took a long time to get there.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
            "B5 had a similar opening plot."
            I only saw a few episodes. I plan to watch that entire series at some point.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
              B5 was wonderful, funny and serious. It was sort of early Orville, the first show to use CGI (Lightwave) as the primary illustrative tool, and they did great work, for then. Jerry Doyle was a really good character in it.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  blarman 3 months, 2 weeks ago
                Doyle was great. For a long time afterward he ran a libertarian talk show in Southern California. Even tried running for political office, but got beat down by all the progressives.

                I also got to meet Claudia Christian one time at a writers conference - she was really nice. Got a hand-signed glossy she brought the second day just for me. Also got to meet Mira Furlan (plays Delenn). She wasn't quite as pleasant.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by  $  3 months, 1 week ago
                  Yes, I remember when he ran and I contributed to it, as he had a good grasp on reality and individual responsibility.I never went to a con, but there are several good recordings on YT.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
        "So what the producers and writers said in the quotes he put up on the screen, in addition to the JJ quotes were?"
        I didn't get past the part where he said Janeway was a good captain. I didn't care for that character or VOY. I'll listen to the rest of it. :)
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  3 months, 2 weeks ago
          He does support his positions, and I think he does a decent job of justifying it. Just to put this in context, 60% of people (2954 votes) on Rottentomatoes liked Discovery, while 90% of the critics did yet Orville has 90% of the people( 3245 votes) liking it, and 20% of the critics. So, perception is obviously a wide variable, and this guy seemed to look at it from his angle. Rottentomatoes is by no means a worthy barometer, in that they use the critics ratings on all their "whats on" lists and ignore the users, indicating they are catering to some other master beyond people, and I can see where someone would look at Discovery in the light he did, because as he went on, I was able to agree that what he was saying was plausible, and the supporting material he had made it even more probable.I have personal issues with CBS, not only in the way they marketed it, but the way they handled Axanar, and his last bit on Axanar I thought was spot on.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  blarman 3 months, 2 weeks ago
            What makes me want go see a movie (or show) is if the critics hate it, because most of them are left-wing ideologues. Look no further than "An Inconvenient Truth" (and its sequel).
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 2 weeks ago
            I watched the first free episode of Orville and liked it. I have seen some fan productions, and they are amazing. There's one with sets that look just like TOS and stories and style that feels totally TOS. It's just amazing.

            "I think he does a decent job of justifying it"
            I can think of reasons I don't see it.
            1. The writers haven't revealed it all yet. Maybe Burnham is going to have a long redemption story arc and all the antagonists will white males and have a rude racists attitude like that admiral. I took his race-related remark as something to make us not like him so we didn't care when died, but maybe the whole show is going to be that way. It's too early to tell. If they get preachy about politics, I won't like it. If you want to see hardcore leftwing political preaching in Star Trek, see The Neutral Zone. It's hard to watch.
            2. If his complaint is the writers believe in feminism, protecting the environment, and social justice, I'll never see the problem, as long as it doesn't preach, because I believe in those things as basic values. It could be there and I'm missing it.
            3. I may be a Star Trek fanboy reading all kinds of complexity into a by-the-numbers TV show where the cop with a chip on her shoulder goes to jail for shooting a bad guy and has to prove to the world he was right.

            So there are lots of reason I could be wrong. But right now the show reminds of how I felt as a kid watching TOS, so I really like it.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo