Tuesday, July 28, 2015

The 250 (of 1001) Greatest Movies Of All Time : Reddit

"So over the past few months I have been carefully creating a system using the most popular movie rating systems available online, as well as general movie data, to determine the greatest movies of all time."
I started off by gathering ratings from IMDB (User/Critic Average), Rotten Tomatoes (Tomatometer, Critic Average, Audience Score, User Average), Metacritic (Critic Average, User Average) and Letterboxd (User Average). I was then able to determine a rating (out of 10) for each individual rating and therefore come up with an average rating for each site. Each site’s average rating was then weighted fairly so that no site’s ratings were favored above the rest.
The next step was to make sure that each film was treated fairly. Other top movie list’s like IMDb’s Top 250 removes films that have under a certain viewing number (25,000 I think), but rather than ruling out films that may have been overlooked by the general audience (especially older films), I opted to alter these films score by carefully deducting points depending on how many people have seen it, and therefore voted on it. I also thought it was needed to make sure that recent films (released within the past 36 months) were also not favored, as it usually takes 3 years for the average rating to settle down. So I also added a deduction to these films that fell under this rule.

This process took a lot of tweaking to get right, but I am more than happy with the final result. Hopefully you all are to. 
You can find the full 1001 Movie list in the following online lists, as well as a list outlining the available films on NETFLIX (US): 
iCheckMovies: 1001 Greatest Movies of All Time
Letterboxd: 1001 Greatest Movies of All Time
IMDb: 1001 Greatest Movies of All Time
Letterboxd: Available films on NETFLIX (US) 
250 List after the jump

"3rd Planned Parenthood Sting Video Reveals Profit Strategy, Insider's Gruesome Account"

"Today, the Center for Medical Progress unveiled their third video detailing the sale of baby parts from aborted fetuses on behalf of Planned Parenthood. This video details an on camera interview from whistleblower Holly O’Donnell, a phlebotomist and “procurement technician” at StemExpress. It also includes sting footage of another Planned Parenthood official describing in detail the sale of fetal body parts."


Link to video

"Camille Paglia: How Bill Clinton is like Bill Cosby"

"In exclusive Salon interview, the cultural critic finds parallels between Cosby and Clinton, takes down modern p.c."
The banner on the Drudge Report this morning is that Kathleen Willey is starting a site to collect harassment claims against Bill Clinton. New York magazine, meanwhile, has the stories of 35 women who say they were raped or assaulted by Bill Cosby. I wonder if you see a connection between the two stories: Would Bill Clinton’s exploits be viewed more like Cosby’s if he was in the White House now, instead of in the 1990s?

Right from the start, when the Bill Cosby scandal surfaced, I knew it was not going to bode well for Hillary’s campaign, because young women today have a much lower threshold for tolerance of these matters. The horrible truth is that the feminist establishment in the U.S., led by Gloria Steinem, did in fact apply a double standard to Bill Clinton’s behavior because he was a Democrat. The Democratic president and administration supported abortion rights, and therefore it didn’t matter what his personal behavior was.

But we’re living in a different time right now, and young women have absolutely no memory of Bill Clinton. It’s like ancient history for them; there’s no reservoir of accumulated good will. And the actual facts of the matter are that Bill Clinton was a serial abuser of working-class women–he had exploited that power differential even in Arkansas...

I was enraged! My publicly stated opinion at the time was that I don’t care what public figures do in their private life. It’s a very sophisticated style among the French, and generally in Europe, where the heads of state tend to have mistresses on the side. So what? That doesn’t bother me at all! But the point is, they are sophisticated affairs that the European politicians have, while the Clinton episode was a disgrace.

KLEM FM

Living in the Pabst...


The Pogues --the band the Dropkick Murphies will never be.

Monday, July 27, 2015

The Case of the Prolific Peer



My dear Holmes

Once again I must trouble you as your most humble petitioner, Inspector Lestrade. It has been some time since I have stopped requesting assistance in the troubling matter of the disappearance of Lord Douchebag which you might not recall as it happened several years ago. That curious case had dragged on and on but is now considered dead. It seems to have escaped the notice of so many who at one time claimed the deepest interest and concern, but who have gone on as though nothing had happened. It is as though Lord Douchebag never existed. However now I must trouble you with a new matter that has disturbed the innermost sanctum of Scotland Yard.

The Prime Minister has received several complaints regarding the writings of one Sir Henry Rider Haggard who has recently been promoted to the House of Lords. It appears that Sir Henry is too prolific for the comfort of certain readers who have the ear of the Prime Minister. His tales of the adventures of Allan Quartermain with its dusky maidens, heaving bosoms and savage Africans seem to disturb their somnolent complacency. They demand that he be censored and that he cease producing so much material as it drowns out other voices. They demand that less vigorous and earthy tomes be featured in the press and the literary world. They feel if these writings were given their proper due there would be more comment and interest when they are not superseded by more entertaining light weight fare. The Prime Minister would like to keep the peace and endeavored to inquire if you would intercede. As you are such good friends with the estimable Sir Arthur Conan Doyle perhaps he might speak to Sir Henry and get him to agree to stifle his talent and quiet his voice so that other less estimable fare might find an audience.

I hope all is well with you and Doctor Watson and wish that you convey my best wishes to your estimable brother Mycroft. I understand that he has moved to the country to immerse himself in his art and his work with young orphan boys. I understand that Lord Baden Powell has agreed to allow him to start a Scout troop which would serve to take up more of his free time and prodigious talents. I trust that he will remember that we can only do so much and that he will be more circumspect in his activities.


In any event give him my regards.

I remain as always,
Your obedient servant,
Inspector G. Lestrade
Scotland Yard
December 15, 1899

Book of J

Book of J Written by Harold Bloom is a very good book and you should buy it. Hardcover 1¢.

The book has a new translation of the J material by David Rosenberg, one-time editor in chief of the Jewish Publication Society. Rosenberg's translation adheres to the voice of straightforward rigorous raw Hebrew without any of the stylistic slathering of King James version that makes it so adorabe but homogenizes stark differences in voices that are apparent in Hebrew.

There are a few problems with Rosenberg's translation of all that J material, other translators and biblical scholars have noticed. Sometimes it just doesn't work. The goal: convey the idea you see there in Hebrew into English. (Gen. 27:36 "Was he named Jacob, heel-clutcher ... that he might jaywalk behind me, twice?" What is Rosenberg thinking? Come on. Earlier another example falls flat, Gen. 3:20 "No, he said, now, your sides split, count on it." Another example of dodgy translation is Rosenberg's description of Leah's eyes. The Book of J translation "excuisite," however the KJV that we know, "tender-eyed," and NEB translation, "dull-eyed" and way back to Septuagint, "sickly" eyes. 

Other than those picayune details, the story is rousing and progresses at a satisfying clip. You had all this material before, in chunks and spread around, all familiar episodes, all very odd happenings each with their own separate moral to be analyzed religiously with something brilliant extracted from each, but you haven't seen them strung together like this coherently with its own unifying theme of passing the blessing through all these strange occurrences through all these off people and their various foibles, by the cleverness of biblical women, while the patriarchs are bumbling around. 

The real wonder of the Book of J is Bloom's introduction and his commentary. Bloom is entertaining to read. He knows his proposal is outrageous and must be rejected, Bloom's assault on Western tradition too great to go unchallenged. He predicts them and counters their objections. Bloom bases his thesis on Rosenberg's new translation. This comprises one hundred pages and tells the story of the passing of the blessing from generation to generation. Stitching together all of the passages lifted from biblical text referring to God as Jahweh (J) or Yahweh, the stories around them, and including the spare bits written in this same tone, this same identifiable voice, the digging sarcastic use of puns. We know such collected works as bits and pieces of one larger nearly incomprehensible and contradictory collection of books, ancients knew them as separate scrolls. Scholars look at the scrolls with these characteristics independently and consider the whole lot in the same style, using the same language the same way consistently to be the work of an author that they refer to as J.

This is distinct from another author, another voice, who refers to God with the plural Elohim. Those passages and their like are attributed to E.  

J refers to Elohim too but only as angels and not as God. 

Scholars of biblical text hear another distinct voice, the work of a priest contributor who wrote Leviticus and who they refer to as P.

Also D for the author of Deuteronomy. 

Finally, and this is where so many reviews by knowledgeable authors break down, R for redactor, a group it is believed, who re-collected, reassembled, reworked all of that previous collected wisdom of ages into a national identity that can be rallied, one to be proud of, one with relevance, a real reason for being with a solid history to be proud of. Following Babylonian slavery, enter the dreaded redactors who collectively and wisely for their precise time, rewrote their history to be more glorious with King David receiving particular attention. Deeds of various characters are syncretized into the character of David, the redactors being not 100% tidy over bundles of scrolls left trails of their deeds by omitting crucial changes of name here and there thus we see tidbits of another person with another name who faced the goliath and not David for one particular instance. It was of crucial importance  for the redactors to make a national hero of David. 

From David, the glory of Solomon's reign followed by his son Rehoboam whose reign experienced shrinking of the kingdom and of prestige. Members of the court would be unpleased with what they saw happening around them due to the leadership of a king less qualified than his father. It is believed the writing of J takes place during this period due the number of crass puns. The base reading of Hebrew allows puns on "shrink" and the name Rehoboam, "Oh how great thou art, how expansive thou art, oh Rehoboam, oh Rehoboam." Driving that point repeatedly when the kingdom is actually shrinking dramatically, the cedars of Lebanon no longer available, international trade diminishing considerably to nearly nothing, wealth and the flow of wealth decreasing worryingly. The voice seems peculiarly feminine, the use of language feminine, the caginess feminine, all the heroes and quick witted characters are women and all the biblical patriarchs are bumbling fools. Even God can be argued with, bargaining down for a search for one righteous person in a sinful city before he destroys it. God's actions are irrational, he acts on his whim. God creates Adam by playing with mud pies as children do and slaps Adam together patty-cake patty-cake quick as you can, in his image, then spends a good deal of time with creating a superior creature of Eve. The entire Eden episode is not so much eating of the fruit of knowledge, nor the tree of life, rather to show how disproportionate God's punishment and how irrational the chief patriarch. The original J is not a particularly religious work.  

The women react to events as given and by superior wit and guile and willingness to do whatever it takes they control the passing of blessing of God from son to son to son. A patriarch is tricked because the favored brother was hairy and the patriarch blind. The blessing traded by a brother for a bowl of soup for examples. 

Why do the critiques of the literary critique of Harold Bloom's Book of J go wrong at the point of discussing J the author in Rehoboam era and having lived the Solomon court and experienced the immediacy of David's nation-building heroism? Each scholar knows it all redacted but slip in critiquing  J the original as if she were writing from un-redacted space. David is myth. He's been redacted. A member of Solomon's and of Rehoboam's court would have known the real David and not the redacted David. Critiques of J must consider redacted David and Solomon and Rehoboam and J.



Why isn't there a Viral Video about this?



New York Post July 27, 2015
A judge agreed Monday to dismiss the charges against a couple arrested at the posh Soho Grand Hotel in May after they allegedly drunkenly dropped their toddler on the floor — provided they continue therapy for a year.
Kristian Jensen, 46, and his wife, Lauren, 37, both of Manhattan, didn’t not have to admit guilt as part of the agreement with prosecutors in Manhattan Criminal Court.
The duo were pounding drinks when the buzzed mom dropped the 2-year-old girl at around 6:30 pm May 17, police said.
Concerned hotel staff called the cops on the couple, who were celebrating Kristian’s birthday.
When cops showed up in the lobby and threatened to take the toddler away Lauren collapsed on the floor, and Kristian charged at the police, according to law-enforcement sources.
The Jensens were charged with resisting arrest, acting in a manner injurious to a child under 17 and obstructing governmental administration.
“We appreciate the decision by the district attorney’s office to dismiss this case,” said defense lawyer Alex Spiro.

So here you have your typical hipster entitled parents who don't want to give up their lifestyle of drinking and partying so they bring their kid to one of the most expensive and exclusive bars in NYC so they can drop it on it's head. Let's make a viral video of that!

"Who Did He Tell You That To?"


 
Link to video

"4 poll numbers that should unnerve Hillary Clinton"

"Four poll numbers came out over the weekend that are decidedly sobering for Hillary Clinton's presidential prospects in 2016."  
"The first two come from NBC/Marist College polls conducted in Iowa and New Hampshire. In Iowa, 23 percent more people saw Clinton in an unfavorable light than a favorable one; in New Hampshire, that gap is 20 points."

What is your go-to icebreaker?

Top voted Reddit answers...
Me: "Titanic."
Other person: "What?"
Me: "Sorry, not a good icebreaker."

Having graduated college, I've had to replace the ever potent "So what's your major?" with "So what keeps you busy these days?" It slightly more open than "what do you do [for a living]," since it could allow someone to open up about a hobby or interesting pursuit.

Did you see that ludicrous display last night?

"So..giraffes. Do you think they're too tall?"

Hey Seattle!

"How’s that $15 an Hour Minimum Wage Law Working Out for Ya?"
Evidence is surfacing that some workers are asking their bosses for fewer hours as their wages rise – in a bid to keep overall income down so they don’t lose public subsidies for things like food, child care and rent.

Full Life Care, a home nursing nonprofit, told KIRO-TV in Seattle that several workers want to work less.

“If they cut down their hours to stay on those subsidies because the $15 per hour minimum wage didn’t actually help get them out of poverty, all you’ve done is put a burden on the business and given false hope to a lot of people,” said Jason Rantz, host of the Jason Rantz show on 97.3 KIRO-FM.

The twist is just one apparent side effect of the controversial -- yet trendsetting -- minimum wage law in Seattle, which is being copied in several other cities despite concerns over prices rising and businesses struggling to keep up.

Some long-time Seattle restaurants have closed altogether, though none of the owners publicly blamed the minimum wage law.

“It’s what happens when the government imposes a restriction on the labor market that normally wouldn’t be there, and marginal businesses get hit the hardest, and usually those are small, neighborhood businesses,” said Paul Guppy, of the Washington Policy Center.

panicle

Panicle is a  cluster of flowers, (berries, seeds) arranged at the end of a stem such as oats. If the main branch zig-zags for each flower stem then the panicle is raceme. A proper panicle is open, compact or intermediate, if tightly packed and dense then the panicle is considered a spike such as wheat and rice.

You can expect the hieroglyphic symbols for basic language sounds to be pictures of basic things in nature surrounding the early Egyptians who devised the written language, part of their immediate and intimate environment. For example you can guess "water" right off for pretty much any culture close to nature in hieroglyphic or painted on a teepee or anywhere. (sometimes it's a curly-cue, and splash strokes in kanji) However the Egyptian symbol for "i" sound and "y" when doubled is baffling to both students and to professionals because the texts available are wrong on this rather important instance. Everyone learns this specific language building block incorrectly. Gardiner himself describes it as flowering reed. The esteemed James Allen and Manley & Collier too describe the symbol as a reed leaf.

It's confusing. They are confused.

There are reeds and sedges depicted in hieroglyphics and in Egyptian art. Papyrus is a reed, but nothing in the stages of papyrus resembles this hieroglyph. We can also expect the reed or sedge or grass to appear as an element of the vignette as art and not as words or letters or sounds, just the surface meaning as a reed (that happens to also be hieroglyphic) and depicted somewhere on walls as part of a story, and it is. [lion, ramses iii, medinet habu] The patch of this type of reed is behind the lion and we see the shape is the grass panicle and not any reed leaf.

The symbol for "i" is the panicle of one of three Egyptian tall grass species with heavy dense panicles that are blown by the wind to the side so that they look like a feather. (Another hieroglyph actually is a feather, the feather of Maat, an ostrich feather.) The stalks that the panicle grows on is useful resource all throughout the area even today. The tall stalks are hollow. like weaker bamboo. Lashed together they can be formed into rafts and into boats. Some of the boats quite large. Some species are used for arrows.



The leaves are fodder for animals. Oddly, one grass species is named Phrygmites australis obviously taxonomical placed well after ancient Egyptians used the plant. Phragmites has a nicely shaped panicle, it could be the Egyptian hieroglyphic "i." Were you to look you'd go, yeah, that's the one alright. Arundo donax is another Egyptian tall grass species and were you to look at that you'd go, oh yeah, now we're talking, that's the one. And then you look at Saccharum spondaneum and you go, c'mon now, are you kidding me, white? That has to be it.

Although simple as can be it has never been so easy to draw the blown panicle due to the mystery behind it. Without really understanding what it is the problem is getting the lines just right. Doubly difficult with two side by side. Something is always off, just a tad but that tiny bit wrong throws off the whole thing, too fat, too heavy looking, too leaned over, taper is wrong, rarely does it come out right first time without some kind of correction. But now that its origin is understood then drawing it should be easy. Stalk first, blown by the wind, then the tapering panicle also blown by the wind.

It's so romantic. Imagining Egyptians floating by on their reed boats pasts these clusters and clumps as through a garden.

Now whenever I see these things sticking up in phrases, and they're everywhere, doubled for names like "Mary," beloved of something or someone, the rudimentary hoe that I showed you plus two of these reeds standing up like a clump in nature. It's beautiful. This combination is seen in names all the time. And now when I see them I'll see also the ancient people's  fondness for the things all around them, the constant sight of clusters of these spectacular plants.



Let's draw it again for the millionth time, now with the power of actually knowing what we're doing. 



Saccharum spontaneum
photo my paper.pchome.co.tw
photo pixabay.com
reed boat gb.fotolibra.com

KLEM FM


I got to tonight's song in a roundabout way, basing my choice on a rhyme with a word in "Meaty, Beaty, Big, and Bouncy" -- the name of the album where I first heard "I Can See For Miles."

Upon further perusal, I found an interesting term that I hadn't heard since I was a teen (or pre-teen):  "heavies." In late 60's, early 70's, "heavies" was slang for a certain style of music. It wasn't quite "heavy metal" (which didn't really exist yet); it had nothing to do with a song's gravitas. Here's a clue from Paul McCartney:
The song [I Can See For Miles] may have inspired The Beatles' "Helter Skelter". Paul McCartney recalls writing "Helter Skelter" after reading a review of The Who Sell Out in which the critic claimed that "I Can See for Miles" was the "heaviest" song he had ever heard. McCartney had not heard the song, but wrote "Helter Skelter" in an attempt to make an even "heavier" song than the one praised in the review.  link

Sunday, July 26, 2015

Hey I ain't the only one who thinks this way!



A very interesting blog post in Legal Insurrection today. It is about the "Red Pope."

It seems the favor-ability rating of Pope Francis has dropped from 76% in 2014 to about 59% today.

The Gallup poll is quoted as saying:
The drop in the pope’s favorable rating is driven by a decline among Catholics and political conservatives, two groups that have been ardent supporters of the modern papacy. Seventy-one percent of Catholics say they have a favorable image of Francis, down from 89% last year.


Pope Francis’ drop in favor-ability is even starker among Americans who identify as conservative — 45% of whom view him favorably, down sharply from 72% last year. This decline may be attributable to the pope’s denouncing of “the idolatry of money” and linking climate change partially to human activity, along with his passionate focus on income inequality — all issues that are at odds with many conservatives’ beliefs."

The blog post list the advisors that the Pope is listening to in regard to climate change. Including Cardinal Oscar Rodríguez Maradiaga “The ideology surrounding environmental issues is too tied to a capitalism that doesn’t want to stop ruining the environment because they don’t want to give up their profits.”

Conservative traditional Catholics have been the bedrock of the Faith here in America. The people who go to church on Sunday and pay the bills. Who put the money in the collection basket. People like the author of this blog post Leslie Eastman who said: 

"While I am not going to stop being Catholic over these developments, I must admit that donating to the Catholic Church is going to be more difficult. What Pope Francis and his cronies fail to realize is that the core of capitalism is not profit, but choice. Furthermore, choices must be made with real data and information, not manipulated facts supporting an agenda.

Currently, I have decided to adopt a page from progressives for handing contributions to my church: Go local. My donations will be used for parish support only, and none will be directed to papal efforts at promoting bad science and even worse economics."

I guess I am not the only one. I have been taking a lot of hits for being suspicious of this Pope and his agenda. His defenestration of Cardinal Burke was a canary in the coal mine. I guess it will take a little more time for the truth to be revealed. Is this truly a "Red Pope" or am I overreacting? I know I am not the only one who thinks along these lines.