Stephanie, I appreciate that you like the film (I did too; it's a hoot!) but either the premise of the film flew completely over your head, or you weren't paying attention at all.

The film is NOT a prequel. Anyone even a little familiar with Star Trek will spot the inconsistencies almost immediately, starting with the death at the beginning of the story. Abrams hasn't "invented a back story" - the backstory of ST has been well-established for decades.

What he's done is figure out a story rationale for messing with the characters and their histories. Clearly, Abrams wants to make more ST films, and also clearly, the ST history already established didn't suit him. So by using the conventions of the ST universe, he's managed to change things around. It's quite clever, but definitely NOT the history of this universe.

(Without spoiling it, I can say that anyone who knows ST well, and knows the conventions of science fiction, can deduce the basic idea by going to the film's IMDB page and looking at the list of characters.)

This is a wonderful film, no doubt about it. (40-year ST fan talking here.) Some of the changes are small, some quite big, some surprising. The casting is wonderful. (At first I thought Zach Quinto resembled the original Spock, but after a while I realized he didn't - but he has that...look.) The ship is hot, the uniforms are classic (yay!), and the story is nimble and well-thought out. Setting aside the issue of the Enterprise - the finest vessel ever commissioned by Starfleet - apparently having crappy sensors and no brig, it's just as cool and fun and fast and cheerful as I'd hoped.

But no, it's NOT a prequel.

Single payer kills patients dead.

So would that be why every single person in Canada and Britain DIES if they go to the doctor, not to mention a hospital? Because single-payer kills, right? Which means that no one who uses it ever survives, right?

What a MAROON.

Considering that if Luntz's efforts succeed, more people in the US will die unnecessarily (as they have been doing for quite a while now) because they have no insurance, I say he should be tried and thrown in prison. It's one thing to give advice on political matters, but this goes far beyond that. This is life and death, and anyone instrumental in blocking legislation that will assure healthcare for EVERYBODY should be held accountable for the misery and death he will cause. Period.

and about the Republicans - hell yes! Do keep spewing your moronic garbage and showing off your ignorance, guys. The more you howl, the better everyone else feels.

I love the smell of desperation in the morning. Smells like...victory.

Many in Detroit would say that General Motors and Ford already have.

Yes, they have. And GM destroyed every single EV1, the FULLY electric car, for reasons of monetary gain. The cars were available ONLY on lease, and the SECOND the federal mandate to develop alternative cars ran out, GM crushed them all, without a moment's hesitation and against the will of the people who desperately wanted to keep them. Some drivers offered $100,000 for their cars. Nope, said GM. How's that for avarice and mendacity? (I know all this because I was selling cars at Saturn when the EV1 came out, and I got to see how much people loved them, and how devastated they were when the goons came to snatch them away.)

So please don't come at me tooting GM's horn (pun intended) because MAYBE they'll come up with a fucking hybrid. They ALREADY had a car that would have solved an enormous amount of problems, but didn't give a shit whether anyone actually wanted them or not. And I'm supposed to buy one of these half-assed consolation cars? FAT. FUCKING. CHANCE.

It's either an electric or nothing. I'm getting quite accustomed to riding the bus, and comfortable too. I'm not going to part with my hard-earned money just to prop up these idiotic companies' reluctant "efforts" to do what they SHOULD be doing whole-heartedly, thank you very much.

"Woo-hoo"?

As usual, your professionalism just shines through, Tracy.

Lemme know how that Pulitzer campaign works out.

What the hell is it with the "feminists" at Salon, who immediately get googly-eyed over any hateful nitwit, so long as she's a woman, famous for at least five minutes, and somebody's attacking her? It doesn't seem to matter how hateful or false, as long as she's a woman and somebody disagrees with her, you girls start with the "I feel sorry for you!" and "poor poor you"! News flash: having a vagina and a big mouth does not automatically render you worthy of interest, attention or sympathy.

I can't believe you people are defending this plastic slab of ignorance. How utterly pathetic.

Google accounts are more often associated with people’s real names, because they correspond to their email accounts, while YouTube usernames tend to be silly and cryptic monikers.

That's naive! I have many email accounts, but only one has any real-world info, and that's the one I use to pay for things. It's NOT the one I use to send emails.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - anyone who splatters their real-world info onto the net is just asking for trouble. Your real name and any real info should be something that is FORCED out of you, only when you absolutely must cough it up.

Some of you people are taking this article WAAAAYY too seriously. Lighten up, already.

So does this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYZDDSTsomE

Blazing Saddles: The Obama Edition

I cannot TELL you how much it tickles me that we have a geek in the Oval Office.

That's all I have to say.