On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:22:23 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Dave Hall wrote:
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 20:02:21 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


Who has criticized the networks? Besides jps, that is. You mean to say
that a decent movie about war can be made *without* foul language?

Save those facetious questions for someone else, John. Movies without
that
language were made at a point in history when the country was still
living a
fairy tale existence. But, they can still be historically accurate in
their
own way.


So you feel that when we lived in a time of greater respect, and
consideration for other people, and had better manners, that was
living a "fairy tale" existence?

You obviously are not well-read. The language to which you are objecting
has always been in use. All that really has happened is that much of
what is called "censorship" has been eliminated. In days of old, "cuss
words" were kept out of movies because of the censors, not because such
words were not being used in ordinary discourse.


There is no need to be crude, rude, and abusive. If you can't get your
point across without having to resort to the lowest common
denominator, then I would suggest that you are what you watch.

Dave

You are what you watch? Dang. Last night, I watched a DVD of one of my
favorite literary heroes, fellow by the name of Stephen, wander through
the streets of Dublin, and, as I watched, I was reminded of all the
lovely anglo-saxon language in that work of art. Since, according to
you, I am what I watch, from now on, you can call me James...James Joyce.

You dirty, dirty man!

Heh - anybody with a girls last name is a pansy.....um........

Hmmmm - never mind. :)

Later,

Tom