Wow, not only do you not know what you're talking about, but you appear to be a basket-case. Here's the reality: weekend figures can be accurately predicted based off of Friday. Battle LA was predicted to drop "near" 70% and it dropped 59.1%, which is fairly close. "Accurately predicted" doesn't mean that a percentage can be determined down to the dot, but that by Friday night, you will know whether a films having a good drop or a bad drop.

Rainbowtrout was right, Battle LA did have a terrible hold. You're dillydallying about the exact percentage when the hold was still terrible, which goes against what you were saying.

I don't care if someone spray-paints the next Mona Lisa - if it's on my property, I'm going to erase it.

What the bloody hell are you talking about? Rainbowtrout is completely right - Battle: Los Angeles is having a near 70% drop this week. Weekend grosses can be accurately predicted based off of Friday's gross. No crystal ball needed.

I didn't find that movie to be left-wing at all. Or good for that matter.

I thought the crux of the film was that Douglas just couldn't handle life anymore and went berserk. Sure, he's an angry white guy, but he also took out his rage on a neo-nazi, rich white golfers, a McDonalds stand-in, etc, and a Korean store-owner, African-American street thugs, etc. I think the film is more apolitical than anything.

Yep, I can't take issue with anything you say there. I think we're on the same page. Sounds like a great trip too - there's nothing like being out in the wild (er, well, country at least), out of the hustle and bustle of the city. I think it's been about seven years for me too - although as far as I can remember, I only ever caught one real good keeper in my fishing career.

Yeah, it does sound like we agree and we are disagreeing over semantics.

I think my main point in the beginning was against this idea that it's cool to kill animals, which I've started to see a lot. I'm not entirely against hunting - hell, I eat meat - but when people start thinking it's cool to kill animals, it disturbs me. That's when you start getting people killing animals simply for their own enjoyment - walking home the other night, I saw a dead cat that clearly looked like it had been killed and then dumped on the sidewalk, which is frightening.

No, they are not synonyms. "Cool" is slang, and hence finding a concrete definition for it is troublesome, but I think if you look at it's usage in English language, you'll see it's used in a very different fashion than "good". Wearing sunglasses is described as "cool". The guy who's a real charmer with the ladies is often described as "cool". There's nothing "good" about that, it's just hip and fashionable.

I'm not trying to separate the fact in any way whatsoever. What I'm saying is that there's a difference between a soldier killing to defend his country and a soldier killing because he thinks it's "cool" to kill people. Both acknowledge they have to kill, but their reasons, their motivations, the entire context is different. And that's important.

You say you divorce all intentions or motivations from an action, which I find bizarre to say the least. That would mean you see no difference between bombing a country for the purposes of defending our country and bombing a country just for the hell of it. Context matters, as do intentions, motivations and justifications. That's not even against the concept of objective morality: it's just acknowledging there's more to life than actions. The logical extension of your argument is that since one American war is justified, all American wars are justified. Since one hunter is justified for providing for his family, the other is justified simply because he wants to shoot something. Because one soldier is justified killing someone to protect his country, another soldier is justified to kill someone because it will be fun.

That's absolutely horrible about your cat - that's one of my biggest fears for my own.

There is so much insensitivity towards animals on the right, and I find it bizarre. It's entirely reactionary and I've never understood why, just because one group is extreme, people have to go to the opposite extreme at the expense of their compassion. I find it bizarre how the left and the right could be so opposed on the issues of animals and abortion, which I personally see as two sides of the same coin: protecting the vulnerable. There's something to be said for the fact that most serial killers start off torturing and mutilating animals.

Of course, the kid saying the cartoon was "cool" is not that great of an offense. What disturbs me more is that the dad would be proud of this - kids will be kids, they can be cruel at times, and they are still learning, but the dads reaction disturbs me.

From above: "You can't just judge the action, you have to take into account the reasons, the motivations lying behind the actions". There's a difference between someone hunting for food and enjoying the sport of it and someone hunting because they take personal pleasure in the pain of other things. Same action, but there's a distinction.

Also, I stopped fishing because I didn't want to hook fish's mouths, most of which were too small to keep. I recognize that is a part of the act. That still doesn't change the fact that I never enjoyed that aspect or enjoyed the pain I was causing - I enjoyed the challenge, the sport, the game of it all.

I think you make the grave mistake of taking "good" and "cool" as synonyms. They're not. Yes, war is necessary. Yes, war can be good and in those circumstances when it is, there is nothing wrong with at all with it. But "cool"? Really? The word that's a synonym for "excellent", "hip" and "fashionable"? I think if you ask most soldiers, they would say they chose to go to war to protect our freedoms, because it was the right thing to do, because they had a duty to their country. Not because they thought it would be "cool" to bomb buildings and shoot at other people.

I knew a guy like that back in high school. He wanted to join the military so he could blow things up and kill people (not that he was likely to make it in). And yes, that was sadistic. You can't just judge the action, you have to take into account the reasons, the motivations lying behind the actions. That's the difference.