I agree. It has a small town feel for now. It’s bound not to last forever, but it does create a cohort of those of us who were here for the small town days.
I didn’t ask how you would prefer he be, I would prefer that too. I would not say he sucks though, at least compared to the status quo. But for you he sucks enough to make it the point of your (in my opinion) unhelpful and nuancephobic comment, in the context of celebrating progressive gains.
He’s taken heat for pursuing radical solutions to homelessness, he criticized aid to Israel before it was cool, and he got arrested for trying to hold ICE accountable.
So I’m asking who you would have supported instead. That’s all.
This seems like the kind of ridiculous purity test that divides potential coalitions. He’s got a ton of Jews and Muslims in his district but he was speaking out against aid to Israel before it was cool.
How would/did you vote differently? And other than what it means for how he serves his very divided constituents, why does the nuance of his position on Zionism matter here?
I genuinely question the intent of both comments you’ve made in this thread.
A modern human who has enthusiastically embraced barbarism. He should not have any freedom of movement whatsoever beyond that which could be measured in inches.
Justice is an empty room for the rest of his life with nothing to read or watch but the documentation of his atrocities. Over and over and over and over.
What's crazy about this, at least to me, is that you have in Emily Blunt one of the best at using and changing her voice in her acting. I always think of her and Tom Hardy as the best in this area. It's like they are voice acting on top of their normal acting. That's a poor way to describe it, but it's the best I can do.
I don't want to take anything away from any other aspect of Emily Blunt's toolkit as an actor. But using AI for any aspect of her voice acting is like trading a Bentley for a fucking Daewoo.
I’ve viewed it as artistic progression, plain and simple, similar to the Beatles, but I think we’re basically saying the same thing.
I kind of split the Beatles into before and after Revolver. Revolver is a truly brilliant album that also acts as a nice bridge between the two major eras that I think of the Beatles run. Their Beatle-Mania Pop Sensation era culminating (masterfully) in Rubber Soul on one side, their Concept era on the other. And Revolver an era unto itself; the Beatles Fully Embrace Getting Weird era.
I feel like OK computer represents a similar point in Radiohead’s artistry to Revolver.
But in both cases, I think these are more milestones in their artistic ability than an intentional shift leveraging their previous success. But I’m not sure you meant that this was intentional on their part, so I may just be agreeing with your nonopinion in a ruminative meandering way.
He’s incredible. He just played a show at the hot dog place near me and I missed it!