On 2/15/23 8:57 AM, RichA wrote:

You're very concerned about Baldwin apparently but you are too much of a
eunuch to talk about the constant barrage of mass shootings due to
Republican assholes deliberately misinterpreting the Second Amnendment.
How droll.

On 2/16/23 12:06 AM, RichA wrote:
> On Wednesday, 15 February 2023 at 18:45:47 UTC-5, trotsky wrote:
>> On 2/15/23 8:57 AM, RichA wrote:
>>
>>
>> You're very concerned about Baldwin apparently but you are too much of a
>> eunuch to talk about the constant barrage of mass shootings due to
>> Republican assholes deliberately misinterpreting the Second Amnendment.
>> How droll.
>
> After shootings, they bulldoze schools. But Baldwin has to go back and "finish his (low-budget) masterpiece."

Who the fuck are you quoting, vegetable?

In article <e98eb944-9db0-4c8b-ae87-b297145bbb41n@googlegroups.com>,
RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, 15 February 2023 at 18:45:47 UTC-5, trotsky wrote:
> > On 2/15/23 8:57 AM, RichA wrote:
> >
> >
> > You're very concerned about Baldwin apparently but you are too much of a
> > eunuch to talk about the constant barrage of mass shootings due to
> > Republican assholes deliberately misinterpreting the Second Amnendment.
> > How droll.
>
> After shootings, they bulldoze schools. But Baldwin has to go back and
> "finish his (low-budget) masterpiece."

This may have nothing to do with what Alec Baldwin wants or doesn't
want. Baldwin's film is likely insured against non-completion. Even
the death of a star wouldn't stop the insurers from demanding the film
be completed, if at all possible. Ex: Brainstorm, with Natalie Wood,
who died during production.

A Friend wrote:
>RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Wednesday, 15 February 2023 at 18:45:47 UTC-5, trotsky wrote:

>>>You're very concerned about Baldwin apparently but you are too much of a
>>>eunuch to talk about the constant barrage of mass shootings due to
>>>Republican assholes deliberately misinterpreting the Second Amnendment.
>>>How droll.

>>After shootings, they bulldoze schools. But Baldwin has to go back and
>>"finish his (low-budget) masterpiece."

>This may have nothing to do with what Alec Baldwin wants or doesn't
>want. Baldwin's film is likely insured against non-completion. Even
>the death of a star wouldn't stop the insurers from demanding the film
>be completed, if at all possible. Ex: Brainstorm, with Natalie Wood,
>who died during production.

It's real cute how trots ignores that hours before the mass shooting
at Michigan State there was a crazed man in Brooklyn with a history of
violence in psychotic episodes who rented a U-Haul truck in order to murder
pedestrians on a sidewalk. Or the father of the Highland Park shooter
who now faces felony charges for signing his son's state firearms permit
application while the son was still under 21 (although he purchased the
guns after turning 21). But trots doesn't want to debate Rich. To trots,
mass murder is all the excuse he needs to make gay lames and sexual
insults. Rich just wants to troll feed.

Several governors back, yeah, Blagojevich proposed to demolish a school
after one of these terrible crimes but the community stopped it.

And of course projects must be completed. How else will anyone put up
financing in future if they have no assurance that they won't lose all
their money?

A major project allowed to be left incomplete with no terrible
tragedy was Something's Got to Give (1962), but maybe investors got Move
Over, Darling (1963). Even with studio financing, you can't just shut
things down. I never understood how it was allowed to happen.

In article <tslhro$39jto$1@dont-email.me>, Adam H. Kerman
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> A Friend wrote:
> >RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>On Wednesday, 15 February 2023 at 18:45:47 UTC-5, trotsky wrote:
>
> >>>You're very concerned about Baldwin apparently but you are too much of a
> >>>eunuch to talk about the constant barrage of mass shootings due to
> >>>Republican assholes deliberately misinterpreting the Second Amnendment.
> >>>How droll.
>
> >>After shootings, they bulldoze schools. But Baldwin has to go back and
> >>"finish his (low-budget) masterpiece."
>
> >This may have nothing to do with what Alec Baldwin wants or doesn't
> >want. Baldwin's film is likely insured against non-completion. Even
> >the death of a star wouldn't stop the insurers from demanding the film
> >be completed, if at all possible. Ex: Brainstorm, with Natalie Wood,
> >who died during production.
>
> It's real cute how trots ignores that hours before the mass shooting
> at Michigan State there was a crazed man in Brooklyn with a history of
> violence in psychotic episodes who rented a U-Haul truck in order to murder
> pedestrians on a sidewalk. Or the father of the Highland Park shooter
> who now faces felony charges for signing his son's state firearms permit
> application while the son was still under 21 (although he purchased the
> guns after turning 21). But trots doesn't want to debate Rich. To trots,
> mass murder is all the excuse he needs to make gay lames and sexual
> insults. Rich just wants to troll feed.
>
> Several governors back, yeah, Blagojevich proposed to demolish a school
> after one of these terrible crimes but the community stopped it.
>
> And of course projects must be completed. How else will anyone put up
> financing in future if they have no assurance that they won't lose all
> their money?
>
> A major project allowed to be left incomplete with no terrible
> tragedy was Something's Got to Give (1962), but maybe investors got Move
> Over, Darling (1963). Even with studio financing, you can't just shut
> things down. I never understood how it was allowed to happen.

I remember reading a piece a very long time ago that said Something's
Got to Give was designed to lose money in the first place. (The film
was eventually turned into a documentary.) Sometimes a film will
intentionally be made to lose money. It's for tax or foreign-exchange
purposes.

Hooray for Hollywood.

On 2/16/2023 11:55 AM, A Friend wrote:
> In article <tslhro$39jto$1@dont-email.me>, Adam H. Kerman
> <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> A Friend wrote:
>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, 15 February 2023 at 18:45:47 UTC-5, trotsky wrote:
>>
>>>>> You're very concerned about Baldwin apparently but you are too much of a
>>>>> eunuch to talk about the constant barrage of mass shootings due to
>>>>> Republican assholes deliberately misinterpreting the Second Amnendment.
>>>>> How droll.
>>
>>>> After shootings, they bulldoze schools. But Baldwin has to go back and
>>>> "finish his (low-budget) masterpiece."
>>
>>> This may have nothing to do with what Alec Baldwin wants or doesn't
>>> want. Baldwin's film is likely insured against non-completion. Even
>>> the death of a star wouldn't stop the insurers from demanding the film
>>> be completed, if at all possible. Ex: Brainstorm, with Natalie Wood,
>>> who died during production.
>>
>> It's real cute how trots ignores that hours before the mass shooting
>> at Michigan State there was a crazed man in Brooklyn with a history of
>> violence in psychotic episodes who rented a U-Haul truck in order to murder
>> pedestrians on a sidewalk. Or the father of the Highland Park shooter
>> who now faces felony charges for signing his son's state firearms permit
>> application while the son was still under 21 (although he purchased the
>> guns after turning 21). But trots doesn't want to debate Rich. To trots,
>> mass murder is all the excuse he needs to make gay lames and sexual
>> insults. Rich just wants to troll feed.
>>
>> Several governors back, yeah, Blagojevich proposed to demolish a school
>> after one of these terrible crimes but the community stopped it.
>>
>> And of course projects must be completed. How else will anyone put up
>> financing in future if they have no assurance that they won't lose all
>> their money?
>>
>> A major project allowed to be left incomplete with no terrible
>> tragedy was Something's Got to Give (1962), but maybe investors got Move
>> Over, Darling (1963). Even with studio financing, you can't just shut
>> things down. I never understood how it was allowed to happen.
>
>
> I remember reading a piece a very long time ago that said Something's
> Got to Give was designed to lose money in the first place. (The film
> was eventually turned into a documentary.) Sometimes a film will
> intentionally be made to lose money. It's for tax or foreign-exchange
> purposes.
>
> Hooray for Hollywood.

Is that the new name for the latest remake of 'Springtime for Hitler'?

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 2/16/23 1:55 PM, A Friend wrote:
> In article <tslhro$39jto$1@dont-email.me>, Adam H. Kerman
> <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> A Friend wrote:
>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, 15 February 2023 at 18:45:47 UTC-5, trotsky wrote:
>>
>>>>> You're very concerned about Baldwin apparently but you are too much of a
>>>>> eunuch to talk about the constant barrage of mass shootings due to
>>>>> Republican assholes deliberately misinterpreting the Second Amnendment.
>>>>> How droll.
>>
>>>> After shootings, they bulldoze schools. But Baldwin has to go back and
>>>> "finish his (low-budget) masterpiece."
>>
>>> This may have nothing to do with what Alec Baldwin wants or doesn't
>>> want. Baldwin's film is likely insured against non-completion. Even
>>> the death of a star wouldn't stop the insurers from demanding the film
>>> be completed, if at all possible. Ex: Brainstorm, with Natalie Wood,
>>> who died during production.
>>
>> It's real cute how trots ignores that hours before the mass shooting
>> at Michigan State there was a crazed man in Brooklyn with a history of
>> violence in psychotic episodes who rented a U-Haul truck in order to murder
>> pedestrians on a sidewalk. Or the father of the Highland Park shooter
>> who now faces felony charges for signing his son's state firearms permit
>> application while the son was still under 21 (although he purchased the
>> guns after turning 21). But trots doesn't want to debate Rich. To trots,
>> mass murder is all the excuse he needs to make gay lames and sexual
>> insults. Rich just wants to troll feed.
>>
>> Several governors back, yeah, Blagojevich proposed to demolish a school
>> after one of these terrible crimes but the community stopped it.
>>
>> And of course projects must be completed. How else will anyone put up
>> financing in future if they have no assurance that they won't lose all
>> their money?
>>
>> A major project allowed to be left incomplete with no terrible
>> tragedy was Something's Got to Give (1962), but maybe investors got Move
>> Over, Darling (1963). Even with studio financing, you can't just shut
>> things down. I never understood how it was allowed to happen.
>
>
> I remember reading a piece a very long time ago that said Something's
> Got to Give was designed to lose money in the first place. (The film
> was eventually turned into a documentary.) Sometimes a film will
> intentionally be made to lose money. It's for tax or foreign-exchange
> purposes.
>
> Hooray for Hollywood.

And hooray for Verman! He makes out like I'm too horrible to talk about
but there he goes, shooting his cyber mouth off without the spine to be
able to respond to a rebuttal. Did you have to finish vomiting before
replying?

On 2/16/23 9:24 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> A Friend wrote:
>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 15 February 2023 at 18:45:47 UTC-5, trotsky wrote:
>
>>>> You're very concerned about Baldwin apparently but you are too much of a
>>>> eunuch to talk about the constant barrage of mass shootings due to
>>>> Republican assholes deliberately misinterpreting the Second Amnendment.
>>>> How droll.
>
>>> After shootings, they bulldoze schools. But Baldwin has to go back and
>>> "finish his (low-budget) masterpiece."
>
>> This may have nothing to do with what Alec Baldwin wants or doesn't
>> want. Baldwin's film is likely insured against non-completion. Even
>> the death of a star wouldn't stop the insurers from demanding the film
>> be completed, if at all possible. Ex: Brainstorm, with Natalie Wood,
>> who died during production.
>
> It's real cute how trots ignores that hours before the mass shooting
> at Michigan State there was a crazed man in Brooklyn with a history of
> violence in psychotic episodes who rented a U-Haul truck in order to murder
> pedestrians on a sidewalk. Or the father of the Highland Park shooter
> who now faces felony charges for signing his son's state firearms permit
> application while the son was still under 21 (although he purchased the
> guns after turning 21). But trots doesn't want to debate Rich. To trots,
> mass murder is all the excuse he needs to make gay lames and sexual
> insults. Rich just wants to troll feed.

It's real cute how Adam H. Verman ignores the fact that a representative
sampling of one isn't statistically significant, whereas mass shootings
this year are averaging about 1.8 PER DAY. Verman is a fucking idiot,
of course, and shout out to Eunuch Derp here for not calling out Verman
for doing the EXACT SAME THING he accuses "Micky Dupree" of doing.