| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#2
04-03-2003, 10:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
New HollyWood Blacklist
Sorry if I didn't really understand what is going on, but what exactly
did all of these people do? It was kinda unclear to me...... =will= |
|
#3
05-03-2003, 12:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
Jeez,
This is a totally incomplete list. I don't see daffy duck listed at all. Bill Marcy wrote: We don't need the Government of these Great states to blacklist these evil people, we can do it ourselves, when enough of us stop consuming their trash, they will fade away and get real jobs (or, more likely, go on public assistance, you don't see many republicans on this list do you?) Feel free to add to this blacklist the names of people who harm the United States, and our children by producing or acting in the "entertainment" products they foist on us. In the end, after a quick purge, we will all be better. Spread the list, the farther the better. Best regards and God bless the United States of America! Bill Marcy George Clooney Mike Farrell Robert Greenwald Gillian Anderson Edward Asner Rene Auberjonois David Bale Kim Basinger Ed Begley, Jr. Theo Bikel Barbara Bosson Jackson Browne Peter Beck (REM) Mike Mills (REM) Michael Stipe (REM) Diahann Carroll Kathleen Chalfant Don Cheadle Jill Clayburgh David Clennon Jack Coleman Peter Coyote Lindsay Crouse Suzanne Cryer Matt Damon Dana Daurey Vincent D'Onofrio David Duchovny Olympia Dukakis Charles S. Dutton Hector Elizondo Cary Elwes Shelley Fabaras Mia Farrow Laurence Fishburne Sean Patrick Flanery Bonnie Franklin John Fugelsang Janeane Garofalo Larry Gelbart Melissa Gilbert Danny Glover Elliott Gould Samaria Graham Robert Greenwald Robert Guillaume Paul Haggis Robert David Hall Ethan Hawke Ron Howard Helen Hunt Anjelica Huston LaTanya Richardson Jackson Samuel L. Jackson Jane Kaczmarek Melina Kanakaredes Casey Kasem Mimi Kennedy Jessica Lange Tea Leoni Wendie Malick Camryn Manheim Marsha Mason Richard Masur Dave Mathews Kent McCord Robert Duncan McNeill Janel Moloney Esai Morales Ed O'Neill Chris Noth Peter Onorati Alexandra Paul Seth Peterson CCH Pounder David Rabe Alan Rachins Bonnie Raitt Carl Reiner Tim Robbins Mitch Ryan Susan Sarandon Tony Shalhoub William Schallert Martin Sheen Armin Shimerman Gloria Steinem Marcia Strassman Susan Sullivan Loretta Swit Studs Terkel Lily Tomlin Blair Underwood Dennis Weaver Bradley Whitford James Whitmore James Whitmore, Jr. Alfre Woodard Noah Wyle Peter Yarrow Howard Zinn -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =----- |
|
#4
05-03-2003, 02:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
Or Yosemite Sam!
|
|
#5
05-03-2003, 03:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
K30a wrote:
Or Yosemite Sam! or Elmer Fudd  -- http://www.kencofish.com Ken Arnold, 401-781-9642 cell 401-225-0556 Importer/Exporter of Goldfish,Koi,rare Predators Shipping to legal states/countries only! Permalon liners, Oase & Supreme Pondmaster pumps Please Note: No trees or animals were harmed in the sending of this contaminant free message We do concede that a signicant number of electrons may have been inconvenienced. |
|
#6
06-03-2003, 04:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
On Wed, 05 Mar 2003 10:08:46 -0500, KenCo wrote:
K30a wrote: Or Yosemite Sam! or Elmer Fudd http://www.wvgazette.com/section/Columns/2003030410 James Haught Why does President Bush crave war? WHAT GALLS me most about President Bush is his cocky little smirk - the self-righteous look of a shallow man. Somehow, Bush seems to strut. Even though he lost the popular vote in 2000 and was put in office by Republican Supreme Court justices, he exudes a sort of swagger, as if he richly deserves the most awesome power ever placed in the hands of any human. Never before has a U.S. president clamored for war as he's doing. It's glaringly obvious that Bush wants to attack Iraq, his father's old enemy, with no provocation and no actual evidence of Iraqi wrongdoing. He's eager to fire 3,000 deadly missiles into the small, decrepit, defenseless country, killing God knows how many people. Time columnist Joe Klein wrote that Bush seems "to ricochet between piety and puerility... always bathed in the blinding glare of his own certainty." In Tuesday's New York Times, Nicholas Kristof said: "It's impossible to understand President Bush without acknowledging the centrality of his faith. Indeed, there may be an element of messianic vision in the plan to invade Iraq and 'remake' the Middle East." The cover story of the latest Newsweek explores the president's unusual religiosity, his involvement in naive Bible-study groups, his past declarations that only Jesus-worshippers go to heaven, and his embrace of born-again fundamentalists who now "form the core of the Republican Party, which controls all of the capital for the first time in a half-century." "Bible-believing Christians are Bush's strongest backers," the magazine notes. "...He is busy tending to the base with pro-life judicial appointments, a proposed ban on human cloning.... They are, by far, the strongest supporters of a war - unilateral if need be - to remove Saddam.... "Bush advisers know that many Americans - and much of the world - see him as a man blinded by his beliefs (and those of his most active supporters) to the complexities of the world." Born to wealth and political power, Bush was an obnoxious near-alcoholic in the 1980s, the magazine says, then he plunged into evangelical religion as a cure. "It was goodbye Jack Daniels, hello Jesus," a friend said. Now he leads prayer sessions in the White House and repeatedly proclaims his devotion to Jesus. But he's a contradiction of the compassionate Christ, in my view. Jesus opposed the death penalty ("He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.") But Bush presided over hundreds of executions as Texas governor - an all-time record of putting people to death - and voiced no qualms about it. Jesus cared most for the poor, the little people. But Bush has showered trillion-dollar tax giveaways on America's rich, and wants to give them trillions more. He ignores 44 million "working poor" Americans who can't afford medical insurance. Jesus said "blessed are the peacemakers" - but Bush scoffs at every peace initiative, every concession that might avert war. Americans are living through a strange time. The cocky president is hellbent for war, and the public is powerless to do much about it. Worse, few can fathom what's driving him. Observers can only guess at his possible motives. It's a disturbing puzzle. |
|
#7
06-03-2003, 05:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
It would be nice if the uneducated amongst us would learn just a smattering (at least enough to get by as an adult), and maybe learn a bit about the US Electoral College. On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 11:00:36 -0500, Walter P. Schlomer wrote: On Wed, 05 Mar 2003 10:08:46 -0500, KenCo wrote: K30a wrote: Or Yosemite Sam! or Elmer Fudd http://www.wvgazette.com/section/Columns/2003030410 James Haught Why does President Bush crave war? WHAT GALLS me most about President Bush is his cocky little smirk - the self-righteous look of a shallow man. Somehow, Bush seems to strut. Even though he lost the popular vote in 2000 and was put in office by Republican Supreme Court justices, he exudes a sort of swagger, as if he richly deserves the most awesome power ever placed in the hands of any human. Never before has a U.S. president clamored for war as he's doing. It's glaringly obvious that Bush wants to attack Iraq, his father's old enemy, with no provocation and no actual evidence of Iraqi wrongdoing. He's eager to fire 3,000 deadly missiles into the small, decrepit, defenseless country, killing God knows how many people. Time columnist Joe Klein wrote that Bush seems "to ricochet between piety and puerility... always bathed in the blinding glare of his own certainty." In Tuesday's New York Times, Nicholas Kristof said: "It's impossible to understand President Bush without acknowledging the centrality of his faith. Indeed, there may be an element of messianic vision in the plan to invade Iraq and 'remake' the Middle East." The cover story of the latest Newsweek explores the president's unusual religiosity, his involvement in naive Bible-study groups, his past declarations that only Jesus-worshippers go to heaven, and his embrace of born-again fundamentalists who now "form the core of the Republican Party, which controls all of the capital for the first time in a half-century." "Bible-believing Christians are Bush's strongest backers," the magazine notes. "...He is busy tending to the base with pro-life judicial appointments, a proposed ban on human cloning.... They are, by far, the strongest supporters of a war - unilateral if need be - to remove Saddam.... "Bush advisers know that many Americans - and much of the world - see him as a man blinded by his beliefs (and those of his most active supporters) to the complexities of the world." Born to wealth and political power, Bush was an obnoxious near-alcoholic in the 1980s, the magazine says, then he plunged into evangelical religion as a cure. "It was goodbye Jack Daniels, hello Jesus," a friend said. Now he leads prayer sessions in the White House and repeatedly proclaims his devotion to Jesus. But he's a contradiction of the compassionate Christ, in my view. Jesus opposed the death penalty ("He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.") But Bush presided over hundreds of executions as Texas governor - an all-time record of putting people to death - and voiced no qualms about it. Jesus cared most for the poor, the little people. But Bush has showered trillion-dollar tax giveaways on America's rich, and wants to give them trillions more. He ignores 44 million "working poor" Americans who can't afford medical insurance. Jesus said "blessed are the peacemakers" - but Bush scoffs at every peace initiative, every concession that might avert war. Americans are living through a strange time. The cocky president is hellbent for war, and the public is powerless to do much about it. Worse, few can fathom what's driving him. Observers can only guess at his possible motives. It's a disturbing puzzle. |
|
#8
06-03-2003, 05:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
Walter P. Schlomer wrote:
Even though he lost the popular vote in 2000 Jeez, could we give this up already? -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =----- |
|
#9
06-03-2003, 05:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
Two words for the idiot, Electoral College. On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 08:59:22 -0800, joe wrote: Walter P. Schlomer wrote: Even though he lost the popular vote in 2000 Jeez, could we give this up already? -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =----- |
|
#10
07-03-2003, 05:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
Don't look now but I think Koe McCarthy is back.
|
|
#11
07-03-2003, 05:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
That should read Joe McCarthy. Got to learn to type with my fingers instead
of my toes  |
|
#12
07-03-2003, 12:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
joe wrote in :
Walter P. Schlomer wrote: Even though he lost the popular vote in 2000 Jeez, could we give this up already? Yeah, shut up Al and go home. You lost now get on with your life. And shave that ratty looking beard too! |
|
#13
07-03-2003, 01:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
Slight correction, you and I (I assume you, I know I) are not elected representitives, we can "blacklist" anyone we desire with no ramifications other than them losing money. Even if this organized blacklist succeeds and the lowlives are run out of hollywood, it is OK, as it was not government sponsored. You blacklist/boycott every day. WHy do you buy a generic product over a non-generic? Why do you buy your favorite brand over one you have found to not be your favorite? It is a very American thing to do, as long as it is *not* the government doing it. Wouldn't you agree? On Fri, 07 Mar 2003 05:42:47 GMT, wrote: That should read Joe McCarthy. Got to learn to type with my fingers instead of my toes |
|
#14
08-03-2003, 02:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 16:55:09 GMT, Bill Marcy
wrote: It would be nice if the uneducated amongst us would learn just a smattering (at least enough to get by as an adult), and maybe learn a bit about the US Electoral College. U. S. Electoral College __________________________________________________ ___ How about direct nation-wide election by the People? It is called progressive election! (see last paragraph) __________________________________________________ ___ Frequently Asked Questions Prepared by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration. How did the terms "Elector" and "Electoral College" come into usage? Who selects the electors? What are the qualifications to be an elector? How does the Electoral College elect the president? How does the Electoral College process work in my State? Is my vote for President and Vice President meaningful in the Electoral College system? Must electors vote for the candidate who won their State's popular vote? How is it possible for the electoral vote to produce a different result than the nation-wide popular vote? Why do we still have the Electoral College? What proposals have been made to change the Electoral College system? How do the 538 electoral votes get divided among the States? What is the difference between the Winner-Takes-All Rule and Proportional Voting, and which States follow which rule? Can citizens in U.S. Territories vote for President? What would happen if two candidates tied in a State's popular vote, or if there was a dispute as to the winner? References How did the terms "Elector" and "Electoral College" come into usage? The term "electoral college" does not appear in the Constitution. Article II of the Constitution and the 12th Amendment refer to "electors," but not to the "electoral college." In the Federalist Papers (No. 68), Alexander Hamilton refers to the process of selecting the Executive, and refers to "the people of each State (who) shall choose a number of persons as electors," but he does not use the term "electoral college." The founders appropriated the concept of electors from the Holy Roman Empire (962 - 1806). An elector was one of a number of princes of the various German states within the Holy Roman Empire who had a right to participate in the election of the German king (who generally was crowned as emperor). The term "college" (from the Latin collegium), refers to a body of persons that act as a unit, as in the college of cardinals who advise the Pope and vote in papal elections. In the early 1800s, the term "electoral college" came into general usage as the unofficial designation for the group of citizens selected to cast votes for President and Vice President. It was first written into Federal law in 1845, and today the term appears in 3 U.S.C. section 4, in the section heading and in the text as "college of electors." Who selects the Electors? The process for selecting electors varies throughout the United States. Generally, the political parties nominate electors at their State party conventions or by a vote of the party's central committee in each State. Electors are often selected to recognize their service and dedication to their political party. They may be State elected officials, party leaders, or persons who have a personal or political affiliation with the Presidential candidate. Then the voters in each State choose the electors on the day of the general election. The electors' names may or may not appear on the ballot below the name of the candidates running for President, depending on the procedure in each State. What are the qualifications to be an elector? The U.S. Constitution contains very few provisions relating to the qualifications of electors. Article II, section 1, clause 2 provides that no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector. As a historical matter, the 14th Amendment provides that State officials who have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States or given aid and comfort to its enemies are disqualified from serving as electors. This prohibition relates to the post-Civil War era. A State's certification of electors on its Certificates of Ascertainment is generally sufficient to establish the qualifications of electors. How does the Electoral College elect the President? For a complete explanation, please visit our Electoral College Procedural Guide at: http://www.archives.gov/federal_regi...al_guide.html. The following is a summary of the Electoral College process for election year 2000. Key Electoral College Dates and Events November 7, 2000 - General Election: The voters in each State choose electors to serve in the Electoral College. As soon as election results are final, the States prepare seven "Certificates of Ascertainment" of the electors chosen, and send one original along with two certified copies to the Archivist of the United States. December 18, 2000 - Meeting of Electors: The electors in each State meet to select the President and Vice President of the United States. The electors record their votes on six "Certificates of Vote," which are paired with the six remaining original "Certificates of Ascertainment." The electors sign, seal and certify the packages of electoral votes and immediately send them to the President of the Senate, the Archivist of the United States and other designated Federal and State officials. December 27, 2000 - Deadline for Receipt of Electoral Votes: The President of the Senate, the Archivist of the United States, and other designated Federal and State officials must have the electoral votes in hand. January 6, 2001 - Counting Electoral Votes in Congress: The Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes (unless Congress passes a law to change the date). How does the Electoral College process work in my State? For information on the electoral process in your State, you may wish to contact the Secretary of State of your State. For example, the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has a web page devoted to the electoral college: All About the Electoral College in Massachusetts. To find your Secretary of State, go to the web site for the National Association of Secretaries of State: http://www.nass.org. Is my vote for President and Vice President meaningful in the Electoral College system? Yes, within your State your vote has a great deal of significance. Under the Electoral College system, we do not elect the President and Vice President through a direct nation-wide vote. The Presidential election is decided by the combined results of 51 State elections (in this context, the term "State" includes DC). Your vote helps decide which candidate receives your State's electoral votes. It is possible that an elector could ignore the results of the popular vote, but that occurs very rarely. The founders of the nation devised the Electoral College system as part of their plan to share power between the States and the national government. Under the Federal system adopted in the Constitution, the nation-wide popular vote has no legal significance. As a result, it is possible that the electoral votes awarded on the basis of State elections could produce a different result than the nation-wide popular vote. Nevertheless, the individual citizen's vote is important to the outcome of each State election. Must electors vote for the candidate who won their State's popular vote? There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their States. Some States, however, require electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories -- electors bound by State law and those bound by pledges to political parties. Which States bind electors to popular vote results? Refer to Electors Bound by State Law and Pledges to find out. The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties' nominees. Some State laws provide that so-called "faithless electors" may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged. Today, it is rare for electors to disregard the popular vote by casting their electoral vote for someone other than their party's candidate. Electors generally hold a leadership position in their party or were chosen to recognize years of loyal service to the party. Throughout our history as a nation, more than 99 percent of electors have voted as pledged. How is it possible for the electoral vote to produce a different result than the nation-wide popular vote? It is important to remember that the President is not chosen by a nation-wide popular vote. The electoral vote totals determine the winner, not the statistical plurality or majority a candidate may have in the nation-wide vote totals. Electoral votes are awarded on the basis of the popular vote in each State. Note that 48 out of the 50 States award electoral votes on a winner-takes-all basis (as does DC). For example, all 54 of California's electoral votes go to the winner of that State election, even if the margin of victory is only 50.1 percent to 49.9 percent. In a multi-candidate race where candidates have strong regional appeal, as in 1824, it is quite possible that a candidate who collects the most votes on a nation-wide basis will not win the electoral vote. In a two-candidate race, that is less likely to occur. But it did occur in the Hayes/Tilden election of 1876 and the Harrison/Cleveland election of 1888 due to the statistical disparity between vote totals in individual State elections and the national vote totals. Why do we still have the Electoral College? The Electoral College process is part of the original design of the U.S. Constitution. It would be necessary to pass a Constitutional amendment to change this system. Note that the 12th Amendment, the expansion of voting rights, and the use of the popular vote in the States as the vehicle for selecting electors has substantially changed the process. Many different proposals to alter the Presidential election process have been offered over the years, such as direct nation-wide election by the People, but none have been passed by Congress and sent to the States for ratification. Under the most common method for amending the Constitution, an amendment must be proposed by a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress and ratified by three-fourths of the States. Should we go on Ad nauseum? |
|
#15
08-03-2003, 02:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New HollyWood Blacklist
Walter P. Schlomer wrote: On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 16:55:09 GMT, Bill Marcy wrote: It would be nice if the uneducated amongst us would learn just a smattering (at least enough to get by as an adult), and maybe learn a bit about the US Electoral College. U. S. Electoral College __________________________________________________ ___ How about direct nation-wide election by the People? It is called progressive election! (see last paragraph) __________________________________________________ ___ Frequently Asked Questions Prepared by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration. How did the terms "Elector" and "Electoral College" come into usage? Who selects the electors? What are the qualifications to be an elector? How does the Electoral College elect the president? this belongs in rec.politics are weird -- John Rutz I'm not Porg am not am not am so see my pond at: http://www.fuerjefe.com |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| New year , new place , new garden | Edible Gardening | |||
| Plants in Hollywood Movies | Gardening | |||
| grass seed in N. Hollywood, Calif. | Lawns | |||
| Transplanting Trees...New gardener...New poster | Gardening | |||
| New Zealand alpines - new photos | United Kingdom | |||
Linear Mode
