Air America Ratings Disaster

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
121

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Joe Weider wrote:
Movie example.
Runaway Jury–Gene Hackman, Dustin Hoffman etc.

The book involved the suit of the tobacco industry for knowing cigarettes are addictive and nasty.
The movie was changed to be a lawsuit against the gun manufacturers.
The gun makers were cast as big fat sloppy “Boss Hogg” types.
And all the actors were clamoring to be in it. I think Hoffman even did it for free or reduced.

Tobacco is far more evil than guns…but how many actors/hollywood people smoke v. are anti-gun?

From IMDB:
The Ugly: The script is really bad. How bad you say? It took almost four writers to outline the story, which bare in mind does not follow the book at all. The dialog is great in places and bad in others, and the whole structure of the film is paper-thin which is easily to blow holes thru. The story runs out of gas in the half way point of the film and the ideas express seems more like a bias view of what the law should be than a realistic view of what the law really is. I think the biggest offence the movie makes is changing the text of the original novel and making about guns other than big tobacco. John Grisham’s original novel was hugely entertaining and down right poignant in its views about justice. This film seems like it has not idea where it’s at from time to time and lacks a coherent narrative to even try to explain the stuff that is going on right in front of you.

Even with the good points, the bad does out weight the good here. It’s a decent film because of the acting of Rachel Weisz and Gene Hackman but they like the viewer are let down with a script that lacks conviction for the subject it covers and a real point of view that expresses the feelings of the reality of the gun issue.

I agree with every word of this. The movie sucked as far as the script is concerned and the change of the plot from the original book outline is too great for words. If there was ever an anti-gun movie, this would be it. For the effort to blanket an entire movie industry as “liberal propoganda”, this may be the only film that you can actually credit with that. [/quote]

Thanks Prof. You said all anyone had to do was show you one movie.
I showed you one movie, off the top of my head yet…and you won’t accept it.
You’ve proven everything The Mage and RJ have said about you.

122

[quote]vroom wrote:
I am a conservative, not a Republican. Obviously you are too ignorant to know the difference.

There are liberal Republicans, and conservative Democrats. Obviously this is over your head as much as anything we have been discussing here.

Oh please.

ProfX certainly doesn’t need me to defend him, but damn, he does a great job of hammering you guys into shreds. He points out thinking faults, unsupported conclusions, exaggerations and so on, regardless of the heaping abuse that is tossed his way.

Yes, other people do the same as well – with respect to argumentative errors, myself included. However, the fact he makes you look silly and pisses you off doesn’t make him wrong either.

Seems to me there is a lot of label slapping and label avoidance going on around here… and lots of pots calling the kettles black.[/quote]

Vroomie, please.
You know better than that. You are better than that. X heaps abuse on people far more than he’s abused.
Like when he calls everyone who doesn’t agree with him names?
Be a man and grow a pair once.
He only makes us look silly because you’re flopping around in the muck with him, despite your tedious protestations to the contrary.
In other words…I think Mage and RJ and even Cream make X look much more silly than he’s ever been able to make anyone else look.
He never argues any points, merely changes his stance to avoid having to acknowledge when someone’s proven him wrong. You do much the same, and then dance about yelling how you’re not able to be labelled.
The end of that is now.
You call yourself a libertarian–and you may be. But you’re also a liberal person, and you have problems with people who actually have beliefs–I don’t know why, maybe it’s because we threaten you, maybe it’s because you think it’s not intellectual to have beliefs. But goddammit, there are things that are wrong, and so there must be things that are right.
And believing strongly in things doesn’t make me or Rain silly, it doesn’t make us weak, and it doesn’t make us wrong.
When you have nothing to stand for you topple over at the first good wind.
Which in your case, is shown by the number of times you change position and stance around here.
And your willingness to leave someone hanging out to dry.

123

On what vroom wrote:

Whising doesn’t make it true. If so Kerry may have been president. Prof X never made anyone look silly.

Opinions are opinions and haven’t a different one doesn’t make you wrong.

124

I wonder if anyone around here actually knows some of the differences and similarites between liberals and libertarians? Probably not, it doesn’t fit into the neat little polarized view of politics we have in these parts.

–

Joe,

I will readily admit to tossing abuse around, and I am generally heaped with abuse from people as well.

If anyone needs to grab a pair around here, its you, always pandering to the quick joke, dishing out insults like they are going out of style, then getting your panties in a knot if anyone calls you on anything.

Blast away at me all you like. Call me every name in the book. Use “jokes” to belittle me. Say I’m “weak as water”. Just grab a pair and stop crying every time you get it back.

125

[quote]Joe Weider wrote:

Thanks Prof. You said all anyone had to do was show you one movie.
I showed you one movie, off the top of my head yet…and you won’t accept it.
You’ve proven everything The Mage and RJ have said about you.
[/quote]

I didn’t say that at all. No where in this thread did I claim that you only had to show one movie to equal a liberal bias across the board in movies. I asked him to show me one to back up his claim. I wouldn’t expect you to even grasp the difference.

You showed ONE movie that is against guns. How does this equal the claims made by mage? How does this equal the military always being shown as the evil entity in movies? That is what he wrote. How does this show that cops are always shown as dumb or the bad guys? He wrote that as well.

Are all liberals against guns? You all claim I am a liberal. I am not against guns. Shit, I’m in the military and am trained to use them. Does being against guns make this a liberal movie? I won’t deny that it had an agenda. I do deny a liberal bias across the board in movies as claimed.

Your logic is stunning, however. You clearly missed the point of every post made in this thread if you thought one movie would back up the claims made. Then again, that doesn’t surprise me at all.

126

I personally think that the whole “Hollywood Liberal Agenda” thing is a lot of smoke with no substance…

Read my lips…

HOLLYWOOD BELIEVES IN MAKING MONEY…MOOLAH…BLING…

That’s it…

Mufasa

127

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
I personally think that the whole “Hollywood Liberal Agenda” thing is a lot of smoke with no substance…

Read my lips…

HOLLYWOOD BELIEVES IN MAKING MONEY…MOOLAH…BLING…

That’s it…
[/quote]

I think your assertion would hold a lot more weight if Hollywood wasn’t so full of left-wing activists. If it were as you say, We wouldn’t have M. Moore with a VIP seat at the DNC. Janine Garafolo would just be a another comedic actress, and perhaps Sean Pean would have stayed at home during the run up to war.

But that’s just my opinion. I can tell you one thing - Hollywood gets very little of my money when I know that even a portion of it will be going into the wallets of left-wing activists.

128

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I think your assertion would hold a lot more weight if Hollywood wasn’t so full of left-wing activists. [/quote]

One could also claim that if politics hadn’t become so muddled with “affilitiation wars” that none of the people you mentioned would have a voice. It isn’t like Janine Garafolo is the voice of liberals. She’s a freaking comedian. I am amazed that you give her or Sean Penn so much credit.

129

Yes, well, Arnold implies that Hollywood is conservative too… you will unfortunately see this vast liberal, or conservative, conspiracy everwhere you look.

There are liberals and conservatives all over the place. Some sectors of the economy actually possibly draw more of them. I suspect there might be a few conservatives in the oil business, but I’m not certain.

130

[quote]Professor X wrote:
One could also claim that if politics hadn’t become so muddled with “affilitiation wars” that none of the people you mentioned would have a voice. It isn’t like Janine Garafolo is the voice of liberals. She’s a freaking comedian. I am amazed that you give her or Sean Penn so much credit.[/quote]

I never said she was the voice of liberals - once again your lack of comprehension rears its ugly head. Sean Penn? Yeah - we don’t want to give any credance to an Oscar nominee - that would make it too easy.

How about Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Oliver Stone, Babs, Tom Hanks, etc.

make excuses all you want - Hollywood is a leftwinger’s wet dream.

131

[quote]vroom wrote:
There are liberals and conservatives all over the place. Some sectors of the economy actually possibly draw more of them. [/quote]

Which is what I was saying. I simply said I won’t put any of my money in the wallets of those that are left-wing political activists.

Remeber the big pissing match we had recently about TV shows? And the consensus then, and now, is that if you don’t like it don’t watch it.

Which is what I was saying. I can’t help it if somebody else here feels the need to argue with a fence post.

132

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I never said she was the voice of liberals - once again your lack of comprehension rears its ugly head. Sean Penn? Yeah - we don’t want to give any credance to an Oscar nominee - that would make it too easy.

How about Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Oliver Stone, Babs, Tom Hanks, etc.

make excuses all you want - Hollywood is a leftwinger’s wet dream. [/quote]

Why do you care about the personal politics of some actors? Unless they produce the film or direct it, they have little say in how a movie comes across or the deeper message. You honestly view movies this way? I don’t see why you even leave the house. Nothing but Arnold S. movies and Ronald Reagan westerns for you, huh? Wait, can you throw in that line about my lack of reading comprehension again? It hasn’t gotten old just yet.

133

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Why do you care about the personal politics of some actors? Unless they produce the film or direct it, they have little say in how a movie comes across or the deeper message. You honestly view movies this way? I don’t see why you even leave the house. Nothing but Arnold S. movies and Ronald Reagan westerns for you, huh? Wait, can you throw in that line about my lack of reading comprehension again? It hasn’t gotten old just yet.[/quote]

I was replying to what Mufasa said. I stated what I do personally as a matter of choice. My thought process does not involve whether or not ProfessorX thinks I am making sense.

For whatever reason you seem to have your panties in a bunch over my personal decision not to support left-wing activists. That is affecting your life how?

As for the reading comprehension problem - there are programs out there for adults who can’t read. Maybe they have classes on how to comprehend as well. If not just read slower. It’s not a race.

134

On what Professor X etc. wrote:

I see political leanings in a lot of films. Bruce Willis, Tom Selleck and Mel Gibson lean right and it shows in their movies.

A ton of actors lean left and it shows in their films too.

There are also plenty of movies that don’t appear to make any political points.

Why all the discussion when it is so obvious?

135

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:

Why all the discussion when it is so obvious?[/quote]

Do I truly need to retype why there is so much discussion? It was stated that the military is always presented as the evil entity. It was presented that cops are always the bad guys or dumb unless they are the lead character. Exaggeration is the issue. Blanketing an entire form of media is the issue. Much the same way that it is constantly rehashed on this forum that every news outlet is liberally biased save for Fox news and conservative blogs, the stretching of the truth is the issue.

I honestly want to know…did you truly not understand that from the other posts in this thread? Or is it that, instead of actually reading what was written, you assumed what my stance was?

136

[quote]Professor X wrote:

It is funny how you keep turning to insults simply because you can’t defend one thing you wrote. I quoted you directly in every response to you. I asked specific questions that you tried your hardest to get around and you end with this? That was weak. Why not simply go back and actually backup your claim of most movies being liberal with an agenda. Nothing you have posted makes me believe for a second that you are so mentally superior that you can call me “ignorant”. In fact, quite the opposite. I challenged you. You faltered. [/quote]

No you didn’t. You twisted everything I said into something else and refused to even listen to anything. Pure blind ideology and nothing more.

You repeatedly put words into my mouth and twist the meaning at every chance. This was not a debate, but a fucking game to see how you could twist everything I said. Spin Spin Spin.

It is not that I am unwilling to debate, but I am unwilling to play these stupid games. Most of what I was saying was attempting to correct your twisting of my statements, and you still continue to do so above. How many times do I have to say I didn’t say all or even most?

137

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
On what Professor X etc. wrote:

I see political leanings in a lot of films. Bruce Willis, Tom Selleck and Mel Gibson lean right and it shows in their movies.

A ton of actors lean left and it shows in their films too.

There are also plenty of movies that don’t appear to make any political points.

Why all the discussion when it is so obvious?[/quote]

Hey Zap. This is the true state of affairs.

But mostly it is not overt, but subtle. Mostly it is a result of the beliefs of the people making those films, and when a large percentage of them lean to the left, that is the way things will lean.

It is not always intentional. There are those with political agendas, but most are just trying to make films, and sometimes their political beliefs leak in. Not because they intended it, but because of their belief system, it naturally leads in that direction.

138

[quote]The Mage wrote:
No you didn’t. You twisted everything I said into something else and refused to even listen to anything. Pure blind ideology and nothing more.

You repeatedly put words into my mouth and twist the meaning at every chance. This was not a debate, but a fucking game to see how you could twist everything I said. Spin Spin Spin.

It is not that I am unwilling to debate, but I am unwilling to play these stupid games. Most of what I was saying was attempting to correct your twisting of my statements, and you still continue to do so above. How many times do I have to say I didn’t say all or even most?[/quote]

The Mage wrote:
How are cops portrayed? Ever in a good light? Only when they are the main character, and even then they are only one of maybe a couple of non idiot, non corrupt cops.

The Mage wrote:
Then there is the military, always the evil entity that has to be fought.

None of that is twisting anything. You wrote that. I called you on it. Period. Those are direct quotes from you that you typed. You weren’t trying to be funny or making a joke. You were being serious. Instead of simply admitting that you overgeneralized, you try to act as if I am “spinning” what you wrote.

Listening to many of you go on and on about liberal views being spread through all facets of life as if you are victims gets old fairly quickly, especially when it isn’t anywhere near the level you claimed it to be. That is not spin. It is the truth and the only reason I wrote what I did in this thread to begin with.

139

[quote]No you didn’t. You twisted everything I said into something else and refused to even listen to anything. Pure blind ideology and nothing more.

You repeatedly put words into my mouth and twist the meaning at every chance. This was not a debate, but a fucking game to see how you could twist everything I said. Spin Spin Spin.[/quote]

Hey, I’ve been on the receiving end of this line of bullshit numerous times. Generally it means that someone was able to disprove your comments, but that your own idealogy won’t let you acknowledge that.

All ProfX has been arguing is that you haven’t got any proof to show there is some vast liberal movement behind the movie industry. He’s taken your comments and shown they don’t hold up under scrutiny, no matter if you still choose to believe it.

Talk about twist twist twist and spin spin spin…

140

vroom:

(My little thread here has taken a bit of a strange twist, but then again don’t they all?)

Because there happen to be republicans who are in movies does not mean that most of the folks in Hollywood are in fact republicans. I thought it was obvious to even the most die hard liberls that Hollywood turned left a long time ago and has not stopped! However, it’s not only Hollywood per se, but the entire field of entertainment.

Let’s take a quick look at some facts related to the field of entertainment (TV/Music/Movies) and where their money goes relative to politics.

On average over the past 14 years about 70% of all money coming out of these three areas (TV/Music/Movies) and into the political realm goes to democrats! Does that perhaps tell you anything about their political leanings?

Take a look for yourself:

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.asp?Ind=B02

John Kerry got almost 250% more in contributions from the entertainment industry than did George Bush. Other liberal notables who cleaned up with entertainment dollars: Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer, Howard Dean, Charles Schumer etc.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.asp?Ind=B02

Here is how it effects those of us who watch. When someone reaches star quality, (pick one), they are able to pick and choose the film, song or TV show that they want to do.

If that script has a conservative bent, it usually does not get done (by those particular stars). At a certain point those liberal stars in question have pretty much all the money that they need and then they simply want to push their political agendas, as they feel they are helping the world that way.

With that stated, conservatives do the same thing as well. The only problem is that there just are not that many conservative stars, or production houses, distributors etc. to balance out the industry.

It’s not simply the stars who are liberal either. Most of the large production houses are also quite liberal, Time Warner for example donated $2,835,540 to political parties in 2004. Guess how much of that money went to democrats? A whopping 78%! Similarly Viacom gave 81% of their “political money” to democrats. Disney 71% to democrats. To be sure there are some companies which favor the republicans, but to few to even come close to striking a balance:

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/contrib.asp?Ind=B02

It’s a fact, not my opinion the entertainment industry is liberal, ate every level and has been for quite a while. I don’t even think that they deny it at this point.

I think that some of you should stop looking foolish and start looking at the facts!