18 scary movies and books for Halloween

Kerri and I discussed scary movies on Wednesday. Here are the titles mentioned.

These are both films and books:

“The Exorcist”

“It”

“The Shining”

“Psycho”

“In Cold Blood”

“The Amityville Horror”

“Let the Right One In”

“Wizard of Oz” (Not horror, but those monkeys!)

Here are the rest of the movies mentioned:

“I Saw What You Did”

“The Watcher in the Woods”

“Near Dark”

“The Last House on the Left”

“Nosferatu”

“From Dusk till Dawn”

“Invasion of the Body Snatchers”

“Pi”

“Requiem for a Dream”

“Black Swan”

“The Fourth Kind”

  • Duane

    Accountability is important, however, I question the value of transparency. Transparency is a valued objective, however, I feel its value is damaged by the slanted reporting of the MSM in recent years. A classic example is that now “water-boarding is reprehensible” as stated in the recent hearing, but drone strikes are humane.
    Water-boarding was stopped by executive order of President Obama, but he condones the use of drone strikes even with the possibility of collateral damage and killing of innocent people. We do not know how many innocent people have been killed, is that transparency?

  • Steve the Cynic

    Armed drones should be operated by the military, not the CIA. There was a time when the spy agency’s job was to spy. It’s the military’s job to break things and kill people on our behalf, when needed. The only conceivable reason not to have the military involved in these drone attacks is to attempt to avoid the appearance that they’re acts of war (though they certainly are).

    • JasonB

      I would think the military would want these strikes to be seen as “acts of war”, and would want to take responsibility. The US has always stated that we are at “war” with terrorists. They characterize terrorists as non-conventional combatants without a country or a battlefield, and used this to justify non-conventional ways to combat them, like drone strikes.

      I don’t know, is the military distancing themselves from this issue?

      • snaab

        To add to your point. The White Paper outlines the strong position that since we are currently at war with al-Qa’ida, these strikes are both legal and moral. Over at Volokh, there is an interesting post on this issue of justification for these actions.

    • GregX

      Except the geneva convention for declaration of war, to which the US belongs, doesn’t know define acceptable behavior to a non-state agent/soldier.
      If the formal military takes over the war – they are bound by all sorts of requirements and conventions that have no mechanism for imposing the same on the terrorist “clubs” , networks,

      in reality – having the CIA run the programs is the only functional way to do it… short of putting blood money on the terrorists heads and hoping the people you pay don’t use the money to do worse things to your country.

  • Bobtuse

    Transparency & accountability are important if not essential. However, to our nation’s great peril, it’s nearly impossible for a nitwit-dominated US House and enfeebled Senate to provide well-considered oversight. Further, it would be a huge stretch to trust the twisted Robert’s Supreme Court to hand down well-considered decisions (cf. Citizens United debacle). It’s shocking that US drone strikes don’t constitute war crimes. Surely US drone strikes are not viewed in a favorable light in the court of global opinion. No matter how evil the victims prove to be, history will not look favorably upon this dark period of unchecked, stealth killing.

  • georges

    Good to see some liberals with the backbone to criticize Obama for the murders he is committing.

    Maybe the Nobel folks will find a way to take back that PEACE prize they so thoughtlessly gave to someone so monumentally undeserving.

    U.S. dead in Afghanistan under Obama: 1,549 (630 under Bush)

    Coalition dead under Obama: 2,208 (Bush: 1,049)

    U.S. wounded under Obama: 15,039 (Bush: 2,635)

    • Steve the Cynic

      Criticizing the government is a liberal thing to do. (Criticizing government [no definite article] is an anarchist thing; blind loyalty to the status quo is the epitome of conservatism.)

      • John

        Criticizing the government is a citizens responsibility, there is no party when it comes to that.

        • Steve the Cynic

          That criticizing the government is a citizen’s responsibility is a liberal idea. Unless you think liberal is synonymous with bad, why would you object to that? Only a knee-jerk ideologue would refuse to admit that both political poles have some good ideas, as well as some not-so-good ideas.

  • Jim G

    How can we hold our elected officials accountable without transparency? We can’t. This lack of transparency makes our democratic elections Potemkin villages, for show only. if all the decisions are made in the shadows by policy makers like Brennan. The rules of engagement must be openly debated and made known to the American voters.

  • bob hicks

    Transparency and accountability miss the point. Obama is killing American citizens without any regard whatsoever for due process. I thought we’d seen it all with Bush’s torture tactics, but Barry has done Dubya one better. I can’t help but note David Attenborough’s recent remark that humankind is a plague upon the earth.

    • Wally

      Honest, Bob, I didn’t see yours before I wrote mine, though we said much the same thing. But I’ll disagree about humans being a plague on the earth: dishonest, secretive, power-obsessed politicians are.

  • Regnar James

    So, Mr. BHO what is your next logical step…. Killer drone’s after
    CONUS “Terrorist’s”?

    Then the next logical step would be what???? Target US citizens
    that do not believe in your socialist agenda?

    Welcome to the Brave New World.

    DTOM

    • GregX

      Corporate America has been running “Brave New World 2.0″ for 60 years. Your wages are depressed, customer-citizens are financial milk cows – when they are tapped out . the corporations boot them to the curb, lock them out of the game and turn them into hamburger and wallets.

      Corporate America …. the the “MATRIX” built by your former friends.

      • georges

        Just replace Corporate/Corporations in the above post with “Government”…..then it will make perfect sense.

        Har

        Of course, there are the times when Government and Corporations hold hands and cohabit………..dragging us all into the abyss……..

        HarHar

  • georges

    Everyone will remember what Barack Hussein Obama said 4 years ago……
    ……..that he would have the “most transparent administration in history”.
    But, then, he IS a Democrat. Therefore, no one really believed him. Har

    • kevins

      by what metric do you assert that the O admin is not the most transparent in history? Consider the history. If you could actually support your assertion, then you could, with some intellectual competency, capitalize your IS or for that matter your D

  • Gary F

    What do you think the Nobel Peace Prize Committee thinks?

    • JasonB

      As I recall the praise when Obama won was somewhat muted because he hadn’t really achieved anything to merit it. The intent was they hoped he would do something to merit it. I don’t think drone strikes are what the committee had in mind.

  • Wally

    I didn’t think any president could be worse than W. Bush, operating with impunity, vis a vis killing people. But B.O. is worse, more secretive, less transparent. He may say he will make things more open, but then sign executive orders to hide even more information from we who pay the bills.

  • John

    Obama is creating terrorism throughout the middle east and now here at home. There has been NO transparency or accountability of the truth throughout his administration. I thought once a Democrat became president again we would have some real transparency but it seem to have gotten much worse, Bush was bad but Obama is worse. Be afraid.

  • Rich in Duluth

    Yes, to both. Our government represents us, which makes us responsible for its actions. We can’t make an informed decision as to the reelect of this government unless we know what actions are being taken and who is making the decisions.

    Personally, I think the killing of civilians, by drone or any other device, is a crime, just as I thought the invasion of Iraq was a war crime.

  • david

    Transparency is always better in government, but that is not the real issue here. It’s only being brought up as a political issue. If a Republican was in charge and doing it (which they would be) the Democrats would be taking issue with it as well. The real problem is it’s a short term solution making the long term problem worse. But hey isn’t that the American way? Be it in government, business,or our own personal dealing we prefer not to have to think about the long term ramifications. Killing a few key leaders in al qaeda today might be making us safer in the present, but is only perpetuating the vicious circle. Maybe it’s time to reconsider the whole strategy.

  • GregX

    I don’t think the American people are ready to look at themselves, let alone their government, with transparency and accountability.

    We can’t throw bankers in jail, shut down SuperPAC’s or regulate guns in a sensible way. We don’t trust each other enough.

    It isn’t transparency we need… its the ability to trust.

    • georges

      Trust………..?

      Just who is it you want to put your trust in?

      Obama? Bush? BillyBoy Clinton? Or the other prevaricator in the family….Hillary?

      How about MPR? The “commercial-free” radio. Non-commercial radio, one of their talking heads will say, just before she (Cathy Wurzer, et al) launches into a dozen advertisments for Wall Street bankers, Insurance companies, law firms, breweries, and anyone else with a buck in her pocket. (look around these pages) (by the way, Cathy makes more money in basic salary than the Governor of Minnesota, as did Gary Eichten before he retired…..and may still, in pension……but don’t trust them to tell you about it)

      How about putting your trust in those who tell you they are taking away your Rights, but it is for your own good? Or, how about the ones who rant and rave in righteous indignation at Bush for eight years, then suddenly find themselves without vocal cords, or eyes, or brains, when Obama does the same exact things?

      One might put ones trust in them…….but one would only be begging for disappointment.

      Female values have taken over…..and are now the norm. Which means trust is out, feelings are in. You can trust a female……to do whatever she “feels” at any given moment…..even if she felt the exact opposite 5 minutes ago.

      Sane people do not live that way.

      • Steve the Cynic

        The remarkable thing is, those sponsors you allude to are entities that would generally support conservative causes, yet folks like you rail against MPR & NPR for being too liberal. What gives?

      • Sue de Nim

        Are we really better off with unchecked male values, georges? All the worst dictators and despots in history have been male. The best monarchs Britain ever had (when they still mattered) were Elizabeth I and Victoria. Almost all mass murderers are male. It was hyper-competitive, incautious men on Wall Street who crashed the economy in 1929 and again in 2008. Historically, one of the reasons given for the institution of marriage was to civilize men. Without women’s voices for balance, the “values” that seem to prevail are aggression, domination, expansionism, imperialism, and so forth. I think your contempt for females arises from the fear of what you don’t understand and can’t control. I feel sorry for any females who happen to have you for a relative or an in-law.

        • georges

          Yes, Sue, we are really better off with male values than we would be with female values.

          Indeed, it is the aggressivness of the male, the drive to explore, expand, dominate and create that has given us ALL of the advances our species has brought forth on this planet.

          Without the male abilities, we would not have computers, phones, electricity, hydraulics, cars, ships, trains, insulin, indeed, medical knowledge of any kind, or the sciences at all, or the arts, even in rudimentary form.

          With only female abilities, it might be fair to say we would still be living in caves, dressed in animal skins, but it would be inaccurate, as we would not be living at all….we would have died out long ago, failed completely as a viable species.

          By the way, Elizabeth I was a figurehead, the country was really ruled by men, and Victoria had no power, the monarchy was already dead as the seat of government.

          What men ARE has created everything we have, good and bad. We must accept that there will be despots, and we must deal with them, in order to get the good stuff.

          But, most are smart enough to see, as they hover over their keypad or I-pad, that what MAN has created is billions of times better than being an extinct species. Everyone owes their very lives to maleness.

          Because the men have conquered and created, it is now safe for women to come out into the open and flourish. Value it, and give a big “Thank You” to the men who made it possible. We didn’t do it for you, as our standards are much higher than that, but you are, nevertheless, the recipients of the world made by male values and abilities.

          Enjoy

          • Sue de Nim

            Like all bigots, you interpret history in light of your prejudice.

  • TomR

    The White House categorizes drone strikes as “legal, ethical and wise.” If so, why the need to cover them up? Why not be transparent?

    Why do they claim “single-digit” civilian deaths when independent sources show much higher numbers?

    This is a sad legacy. Read the report “Living Under Drones” and then think about the terror we inflict.

  • Ann M

    I don’t think Russia tells the world what it is doing. Sometimes we are a little too concerned about transparency. We wouldn’t have caught Osama if we had revealed our methods. It is good to have a system of checks and balances, but in national security, some things should not be told to the whole world.

    • TomR

      I don’t think Russia is the standard we should hold ourselves to; that is a pretty low bar. However, your comment is a good one about not having to disclose everything publicly before it happens. I think judicial review before and full disclosure after operations are a good start.

      Most importantly, if we are going to make these targeted strikes, we better have the right information, and we must have appropriate definitions of what is an imminent threat.
      Follow-up strikes that hit first responders or strikes at a funeral should be considered as war crimes.

  • Nothing to Do

    The fight is and has really always been a police action rather than war, and in police you always want transparency and accountability, else you grow a police state and undermine democracy. We really have little democratic oversight of the CIA, let alone the Homeland Security State.

    But more importantly does aggressive police or secret military work for the long haul? Is militarism sustainable? I’ve heard it said that what Pakistani people want is for their military to be doing the job we have taken as our right, and what will improve our image is for their students to be able to come to our country to study. What could be better than this? Treating countries as vassal states and killing their extremists for them while our infrastructure falls behind industrialized nations?

    The war model is itself suspect as an appropriate model of democratic governance. The war against poverty, the war against drunk drivers, the war against abortion, the war against drugs, the war against terrorism, the various wars against diseases where we throw poisons around rather than create a strong ecosystem… the war against our government waged by the Tea Party, the war against men waged by feminists. We are indeed sowing our own destructive seeds through policies of extermination, and only think of treating the side effects of these efforts with more medicines, drones, spies, police and weapons. Heck, why not put guns around the shoulders of every teacher and school bus driver… no wait, arm the children. They can learn to shoot! When they start shooting each other, well, I’m sure we can figure out how to put those delinquents in a corrective school. The NYT just had an article about such an academy recently closed in Marianna Florida. A lot of bloody mattresses there suppressing young Black terrorists…

  • Scott44

    Gee, lets make it harder and tuogher for those of us that have owned guns since we could walk. Hey why not make the offenders do real time, no time off for good behavior. Just my thinking capital punishment!

  • mike

    These are SHOCKER movies and far from what a thinking man/woman would find scary or macabr

    Instead try:
    Braum Strokers Dracula by Coppala. Exactly what would YOU do for eternal love?

    The Ninth Gate. Johnny Depps searches for a book. He gets in deeper than he plans as he becomes obsessed with the book. Roman Polanski’s direction and the camera slow place adds to the suspense.

    Angel Heart. Micky Rourke goes looking for a missing person and finds out more about himself than he bargained for.

    Scilence of the Lambs

    The Fly

    Sweeny Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet street.

    Let the right one in

    Troll Hunter (hilarious and excellent special effects)

    Rosemary’s Baby

  • Sue de Nim

    If that’s your attitude, georges, why do you waste your time trying to reason with us inferior beings who will obviously never be persuaded by your brilliant logic? One would suppose you’d think it beneath your dignity to cast your pearls before us swine.