>>16599567 lb
Banned- Reddit project
Anon got curious, alas too late. I slept thru the whole shebang, catching up on No Tables and such.
Potential duplicate, if anon missed it, sorry:
Crimo video, much of the same images, creepy music. "When Johnny Comes Marching Home" audio. "American History X" scene.
They went all out for this one. Not well, but E for effort..
>Seems to me the blue states are going to use every shooting event (whether organic of FF OPS) to add more and more BS
Seems like that's always been the playbook. Bumpstocks. Useless and stupid bumpstocks, just to chip away at our rights and turn hard left.
On a positive note today, up to 900 Mercs bought it in Syria.
Filturd
With lyrics
Detained, at the minimum
>>16600487 lb/pb
>Red Rose of Socialism
Makes anon kek in Citizen Kane
Red Rose/Rosebud
Gore Vidal, in one of his less forthright moments, claimed that Rosebud was Hearst's name for his mistress Marion Davies's "tender button", and that this was the real reason for Hearst's objection to the film. Vidal is cagey about the source of the story, though he knew Marion Davies, and Mankiewicz was well acquainted with both Hearst and Davies.
If this theory is true, it's possible to see the final scene as a disingenuous end to a hatchet job on Hearst, included by Mankiewicz to get it past the censors. When asked, as well he might have been, if Rosebud had any saucy connotations, Mankiewicz could widen his eyes and explain it was all about the little sled, of course.
More intriguingly, there's a possibility that Mankiewicz was trying to slip Rosebud not past the censors, but past Welles. Pauline Kael, in her essay Raising Kane, says Welles always said of Mankiewicz: "Everything concerning Rosebud belongs to him". Welles's point, Kael explains, was that the grand opera was his, while the cheap gimmicks were Mankiewicz's, but it does seem clear that Rosebud was in no way Welles's idea, and Welles was much less acquainted with the Hearst story than Mankiewicz.
Why might Mankiewicz want to get one over on Welles? For plenty of obvious, petty reasons; both were egotistical men, and the writer's attitude to Welles is on record: "There, but for the grace of God, goes God." Welles at this time was in his mid-twenties and indulged by the studio in anything he chose to do, given to temper tantrums, and dismissive of older, supposedly wiser counsel, such as that of Mankiewicz. In short, Welles was very like the young Kane. (Kael says the young Hearst was not given to tantrums, so it's tempting to suppose that Kane is a mix of Hearst and Welles.)
All of which is very much as may be, and a mystery likely to remain so. But, as with so much in life, perhaps the real answer to the mystery of Rosebud is the most straightforward. Alfred Hitchcock coined the term McGuffin to mean an item of immense importance to the characters, at the centre of the plot, but which "to me, the narrator, [is] of no importance whatsoever". Many writers have used the idea humorously - David Mamet's The Spanish Prisoner uses increasingly implausible dei ex machina to keep from us the nature of "the process" everyone is desperate to get hold of.
Mankiewicz, for his life of Hearst, needed a hook, something to keep the audience stringing along though they already knew the story. The Rosebud - whether or not it has any deeper biographical significance - is a textbook McGuffin, complete with cheeky references to its irrelevance; the acknowledgement at the beginning that it's just "an angle", and the closing speech, which tells us we'll never learn anything from a McGuffin. And last but not least, the thrillingly pointless discovery that Rosebud is something utterly banal. Rosebud is, after all, Mankiewicz's private joke. Not on Hearst, not on Welles, but on us.
https://www.theguardian.com/unsolvedmysteries/story/0,,1155656,00.html
Those were the last aircraft at the Base pre-closure. Anon still misses that sound.