McCain was called "Hamlet." Movie now...'Hamlet 2'

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Spooks like to co-opt potentially damaging slogans and domain names, too.

John McCain was once characterized in an interview cited in a lengthy article on his political career as a wishy-washy guy always wondering what to do, especially during his role in the Keating Five scandal.
He was called "Hamlet."

Gosh, that would be bad for him if his current campaign was called "Hamlet 2."

What coincidence. A movie set in ARIZONA just opened on August 29,2008, just before the Repub convention...with that very title!

Whew. No danger of that tag being used on McCain now.
Gosh that works out pretty well for him, doesn't it? Now we can focus on his fake maverick image and not that ugly past.

Any idea how many decoy movies have been made for McCain?
He's been extremely important to the Pentagon ever since he started helping cover up the left-behind Vietnam War POW/MIA's. McCain does some heavy lifting for the Warfare State because they've got hooks in him from his family and POW days.

http://www.wmsa.net/People/john_mccain/ariz-republic_chap_V_1999.htm
.....

'ALWAYS HAMLET'

The five senators, including McCain, seemed like a united front to Black.

''They presented themselves as a group,'' Black said, ''and DeConcini is the dad, who's going to take the primary speaking role. Both meetings are in his office, and in both cases it's 'we' want this, with no one going, 'What do you mean we, kemo sabe?' ''

According to nearly verbatim notes taken by Black, McCain started the second meeting with a careful comment.

''One of our jobs as elected officials is to help constituents in a proper fashion,'' McCain said. ''ACC (American Continental Corp.) is a big employer and important to the local economy. I wouldn't want any special favors for them. . . .

''I don't want any part of our conversation to be improper.''

Black said the comment had the opposite effect for the regulators. It made them nervous about what might really be going on.

''McCain was the weirdest,'' Black said. ''They were all different in their own way. McCain was always Hamlet . . . wringing his hands about what to do.''

My, what a nasty discrediting image. Damn the 1960s!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamlet_2

Plot

An unsuccessful actor-turned-worse-high-school-drama teacher, Dana Marschz, rallies his Tucson, Arizona, students as he conceives and stages a politically incorrect musical sequel to Shakespeare's Hamlet in order to save the school's drama department in a midst of budget cuts.

[Fresno_Layshaft]

I seem to be in the minority of people here, in believing that you post this stuff intentionally to piss people off.

But I'm telling you, Hugh, I don't buy it. I don't think you're a sincere nutjob. I think you're a prankster. The transparent, ridiculous, stupidity of this particular post should clue most people in, if they're sitting on the fence in regards to your epic "Key Word Hijack Media Inoculation" joke/performance piece.

It's time you come clean, and take a bow.

[justdrew]

I do dimly remember mcain being called hamlet like. but now who's hamlet? :

Republicans were cheered by McCain's showing at a forum at the Saddleback evangelical megachurch last weekend.

His answers were snappy and crisp, in contrast to Obama's nuanced approach.

"Obama presented thoughtful answers as if he was in a conversation or at a seminar," said Dennis Goldford, a professor of political science at Drake University, Iowa.

"On the other hand you don't want a president who is Hamlet, who can't decide anything. McCain spoke in bumper stickers.

"Bumper stickers are easily digestible."
source

[Nordic]

Hugh's posts have lately become more and more bizarre.

[compared2what?]

It may be a local bias, but I think of that sobriquet in a presidential-campaign context as belonging exclusively (at least as far as the press goes) to Mario Cuomo -- that the allusion had been made wouldn't be enough to override there being a player with that nickname and reputation already.

Also, it doesn't have entirely negative connotations. Hamlet is a sympathetic character, and profound in his indecisiveness not dithering and flippy-floppy. So it doesn't strike me as being such a deal-killer that defusing it would be mandatory.

Though that could just be me.

[mentalgongfu2]

I seem to be in the minority of people here, in believing that you post this stuff intentionally to piss people off.

has there ever been a poll taken?

If so, I haven't weighed in. I don't think there's ever been any attempt to gain consensus on the "nutjob" question, either, though plenty of threads have offered people the chance to express opinion. Having personally (not clinically) known several psychologists, I am loathe to call anyone crazy. The people I know who define sanity are not to be trusted. And in an insane world, the only sane posture is one which the outside world would deem crazy.

[Penguin]

Besides, I bet that most of us posters here WOULD be labeled clinically insane if we were so stupid as to open up about our views to members of the Professional Mental Healthists. I wont call anyone crazy - except maybe myself: that I can take responsibility of.

[brainpanhandler]

Polonius:
What is the matter, my lord?


Hamlet:
Between who?


Polonius:
I mean, the matter that you read, my lord.


Hamlet:
Slanders, sir; for the satirical rogue says here that old men
have grey beards, that their faces are wrinkled, their eyes purging
thick amber and plum-tree gum, and that they have a plentiful
lack of wit, together with most weak hams; all which, sir, though
I most powerfully and potently believe, yet I hold it not honesty
to have it thus set down, for yourself, sir, shall grow old as I am, if
like a crab you could go backward.


Polonius:
[Aside] Though this be madness, yet there is method in't. -Will you walk out of the air, my lord?


Hamlet: Into my grave.


Hamlet Act 2, scene 2




Hamlet: A man may fish with the worm that hath eat of a king, and eat of the fish that hath fed of that worm.


Claudius: What dost thou mean by this?


Hamlet: Nothing but to show you how a king may go a progress through the guts of a beggar.


Hamlet Act 4, scene 3

[brainpanhandler]

I seem to be in the minority of people here, in believing that you post this stuff intentionally to piss people off.

But I'm telling you, Hugh, I don't buy it. I don't think you're a sincere nutjob. I think you're a prankster. The transparent, ridiculous, stupidity of this particular post should clue most people in, if they're sitting on the fence in regards to your epic "Key Word Hijack Media Inoculation" joke/performance piece.

It's time you come clean, and take a bow.

Hamlet:
How strange or odd soe'er I bear myself —
As I perchance hereafter shall think meet
To put an antic disposition on.

Act 1, scene 5


Hamlet: Do you see yonder cloud that's almost in shape of a camel?


Polonius: By th' Mass, and 'tis like a camel, indeed.


Hamlet: Methinks it is like a weasel.


Polonius: It is backed like a weasel.


Hamlet: Or like a whale.


Polonius: Very like a whale.


Act 3, scene 2

[kenoma]

I seem to be in the minority of people here, in believing that you post this stuff intentionally to piss people off.

But I'm telling you, Hugh, I don't buy it. I don't think you're a sincere nutjob. I think you're a prankster. The transparent, ridiculous, stupidity of this particular post should clue most people in, if they're sitting on the fence in regards to your epic "Key Word Hijack Media Inoculation" joke/performance piece.

It's time you come clean, and take a bow.

I always assumed Hugh's theories were elaborate viral marketing campaigns for the 'hijacking' movies.

[crikkett]

The people I know who define sanity are not to be trusted.

Can I use that?

To the grump/troll who pounced on HMW in the first comment, it's easy enough to see who originates a thread and then skip it, if you don't want to hear what he has to say, but it sure feels better to pollute us with your negativity doesn't it?

[H_C_E]

I bet that most of us posters here WOULD be labeled clinically insane if we were so stupid as to open up about our views to members of the Professional Mental Healthists.

I once knew a fellow who had been labelled 'crazy' by Officialdom. He was a street person in the Santa Cruz (Ca) area, who went by the name of Pan. He claimed to be the Magickal Child of Crowley. Fact is, he was quite rational, but his being deeply tuned into a spiritual\religious\mystical
wave length, that to anyone with scientific materialist training he'd sound nuts. When you can't\don't speak their language, you're bound to get hung out to dry.

As to Hugh, I think Fresno is onto something. Considering how rational and logical Hugh is when discussing other matters. I notice this when he weighs in on the subject of JFK. If he was truly dysfunctional, I think the KWH would show up everywhere.

Just to go on the record with this, I like Hugh. He's always been a nice, polite fellow when I've interacted with him. And he's durn bright too. This "place" wouldn't be quite the same without him.

HCE

[MacCruiskeen]

So, here's the argument in a nutshell:

1. An obscure movie is released, entitled Hamlet 2.

2. This prevents or at least discourages anyone from calling John McCain 'Hamlet', or from focusing on McCain's alleged indecisiveness.

Explain precisely how this works, please, Hugh. Because I can't see any way that 1 implies 2.

Thank you.

[MinM]

Matt Stone and Trey Parker are big-time Bush backers...

That's My Bush!

Episodes dealt (with deliberate heavy-handedness) with the topics of abortion, gun control, the war on drugs, drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and the death penalty. Every episode ended with George saying "One of these days Laura, I'm gonna punch you in the face!", a parody of Jackie Gleason's line from The Honeymooners, "One of these days, Alice... Bang, zoom! Right to the moon!"

The show was more of a spoof of the banality of TV sitcoms in general rather than a cutting political satire. As The AV Club put it: "[That's my] Bush!'s irresistibly gimmicky premise — a workplace sitcom centering on Bush and his wife Laura — represents a perverse act of extended misdirection. While audiences waited for Parker and Stone to tear into the Bush administration, they instead attacked the hoary conventions of 1970s and 1980s sitcoms...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/That's_My_Bush

So, there's that.

[brainpanhandler]

It may be a local bias, but I think of that sobriquet in a presidential-campaign context as belonging exclusively (at least as far as the press goes) to Mario Cuomo -- that the allusion had been made wouldn't be enough to override there being a player with that nickname and reputation already.

Also, it doesn't have entirely negative connotations. Hamlet is a sympathetic character, and profound in his indecisiveness not dithering and flippy-floppy. So it doesn't strike me as being such a deal-killer that defusing it would be mandatory.

Though that could just be me.

No, not just you dear lady.