Friday, July 6, 2012

Uh, Try Nobody 2

What would be my answer to the question, "So, who, in your opinion, has ever played 'going ballistic' better than Lee J. Cobb?'

19 comments:

  1. and here is something that might make WD go ballistic.

    This, and the fact that the total of Nobel peace prize nominations for George W. Bush is greater than the total of ICC and UN sanctions, resolutions, indictments, etc over WD's imagined "Bush war crimes".

    ReplyDelete
  2. My idea of hell on earth....a 1000 mile Grayhound bus trip seated next to WD....where's my pistol.

    ReplyDelete
  3. No disrespect to wd, but I still gotta go with Mr. Cobb's Johnny Friendly in "On the Waterfront" and his juror 3 in "12 Angry men' as THE most ballistic ever.......Yes, Russ, that in fact would be difficult.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have to admit I'd never heard of Lee J. Cobb before I saw this post. Was he more ballistic than Ty Cobb?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think so, in those 2 films (dude, you really gotta see "On the Waterfront" and "12 Angry Men") especially.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "I think so, in those 2 films (dude, you really gotta see "On the Waterfront" and "12 Angry Men") especially."

    I saw an episode of "Cheers" last night. The Woody character was being especially spiteful and mean. Someone asked him why, and he explained that the community theatre production of "Twelve Angry Men" he was involved in was 6 actors short, so he had to be twice as angry.

    ReplyDelete
  7. dmarks: and here is something that might make WD go ballistic.

    No, I wouldn't go ballistic over that. The story is hilarious. He didn't win. This individual who nominated him is a joke. bush promoted war, killing, destruction, making terrorism much worse, and war profiteering. He should "win" a conviction for war crimes and a date with the executioner.

    Rusty: My idea of hell on earth... a 1000 mile Grayhound bus trip seated next to WD... where's my pistol.

    If you wanted to shoot yourself because I refused to talk to you I wouldn't try to stop you. I'd ask you to get off the bus first though.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dimes to donuts, dmarks, that he had to play juror 3.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hey, wd, Noam Chomsky thinks that Mr. Obama also needs to be brought in front of a Nuremeurg caliber tribunal and be prosecuted for his war crimes. Hey, maybe they can try them together - and FDR, too for his flagrant violations of the Geneva conventions of 1864. I mean, how cool would that be, huh?

    ReplyDelete
  10. WD said: "bush promoted war, killing, destruction, making terrorism much worse, and war profiteering."

    All of these opinions are unsubstantiated. You are just pissed that Bush won the election and the boob who claimed to have created the Internet when he didn't lost.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Glad I wasn't on the jury in '12 Angry Men'. I think the perpetrator went free....

    ReplyDelete
  12. I often wondered about that, BB Idaho. Could it possibly be that juror 3/Lee J. Cobb had it right?

    ReplyDelete
  13. dmarks muzzily said: All of these opinions are unsubstantiated.

    That bush promoted war, killing, destruction, making terrorism much worse, and war profiteering is totally 100 percent substantiated.

    Also, I'm pissed that the SCOTUS got away with annointing the loser bush, and not the candidate that actually won... Al Gore.

    ReplyDelete
  14. With the possible exception of the war profiteering one, you could absolutely be describing Mr. Obama there, too, me-buck.

    ReplyDelete
  15. WD: "Also, I'm pissed that the SCOTUS got away with annointing the loser bush, and not the candidate that actually won... Al Gore."

    That's alternate history. Gore won only in your mind. You are a lousy citizen and a piss-poor American: you only respect democracy when it goes your way. When it doesn't you lie about it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. WD said: "That bush promoted war, killing, destruction, making terrorism much worse, and war profiteering is totally 100 percent substantiated."

    The reality? There's a case to be made either way in all of this. But you have a rabid hatred of Bush that makes you lie about him and present one-sided arguments, always.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.