The Rampant, Irresponsible Political Thread

[Donald]

Nonsense. When I believe in deity-sanctioned wife beating and a litany of equally reprehensible actions, then I will be as bad as those I preach against. Tell me how you came to the conclusion that my lack of respect for them meant that I am just as bad as them.

You don't tolerate them just as they don't tolerate you. It's the same thing.

[Dr Maturin]

You don't tolerate them just as they don't tolerate you. It's the same thing.

This is where people like you and people like me are different. You are quick to equate my actions with the actions of them. I will tolerate an Islam that goes through a great awakening and there are some -- albeit few and threatened -- Muslim scholars and imams working towards that goal. I will not tolerate the chanting in the streets on 9/11, the disrespect to women, the slavery, etc. However, the way that I refuse to tolerate them contrasts greatly to the way that they refuse to tolerate me. If you are unable to recognize that, then you are nothing more than a moral relativist and apologist for savage brutes.

[David Panzer]

Of course there's relativism. If you were born in the middle east, you'll probably be muslim or jewish.

If you were born in India, you'll be a hindu.

There isn't a single religion in the world that says "We're not going to bullshit you. We made this up after a crazy night involving bowling midgets, smoking blunts, gallons of homemade moonshine, and magic mushrooms. Hey, at least we're honest with ya"

So of course you're going to believe that the religion that you've known since childhood is the one right one.

[Radhil]

That's not in the slightest what he's talking about.

[Donald]

This is where people like you and people like me are different. You are quick to equate my actions with the actions of them. I will tolerate an Islam that goes through a great awakening and there are some -- albeit few and threatened -- Muslim scholars and imams working towards that goal. I will not tolerate the chanting in the streets on 9/11, the disrespect to women, the slavery, etc. However, the way that I refuse to tolerate them contrasts greatly to the way that they refuse to tolerate me. If you are unable to recognize that, then you are nothing more than a moral relativist and apologist for savage brutes.

Many of those who are not tolerant of the Muslims have a nuke the whole Middle East theory. I'm not saying that's you but many have that opinion and that *is* just as bad as what some of the Muslims and Islamics do.

[Dr Maturin]

Many of those who are not tolerant of the Muslims have a nuke the whole Middle East theory. I'm not saying that's you but many have that opinion and that *is* just as bad as what some of the Muslims and Islamics do.

Well, the nuclear option should be left open in terms of warfare if need be, but nuking the entire non-Israeli Middle East isn't an option.

[Dr Maturin]

Hi, Kevin.

So tell me why you think that Oscar winners are not awarded for their politics.

[frulad]

I'm not Kevin, but I can think of two examples off the top of my head.

Clint Eastwood- Registered Republican, 2 Oscars for Best Director, 2 more nominations in same category plus the Irving G. Thalberg Award

Elia Kazan- Whom, after naming names to HUAC in 1952, went on to win 1 Best Director Oscar and receive 5 other Oscar nominations as well being awarded an honorary lifetime achivement Oscar in 1999.

(I'm assuming, based on your past posts, that your underlying premise is "When have the liberal elite of Hollywood not given awards to anyone but their own?"...)

[Karachi Vyce]

Eastwood MAY be registered Republican, but he's not the type of Republican that fits the norm. Maybe he's one of Arnold type Republicans, the ones that are more liberal than Southern Democrats.

And there was a shit storm when Kazan was given the lifetime achievement award. Don't you remember how quite a few actors / actresses refused to stand and applaud him when he received his award?

Hollywood is still full of liberal DOUCHES.

[Dr Maturin]

Million Dollar Baby was a preachy, painfully obvious advocacy of assisted suicide. Unforgiven? The politically-themed movies tend to be awarded when a Republican is in office.

But all of that is really immaterial. The sheer amount of movies that were political outweigh reasonable selections. This is a fact that cannot be disputed.

[frulad]

Unforgiven? The politically-themed movies tend to be awarded when a Republican is in office.

Unforgiven came out while Bush I was still in office and won its Oscar only a few months after Clinton was sworn in. (The other nominees were The Crying Game, A Few Good Men, Howards End and Scent Of A Woman.)

[Dr Maturin]

Unforgiven came out while Bush I was still in office and won its Oscar only a few months after Clinton was sworn in.

Exactly.

(The other nominees were The Crying Game, A Few Good Men, Howards End and Scent Of A Woman.)

Yeah...

[frulad]

Eastwood MAY be registered Republican, but he's not the type of Republican that fits the norm. Maybe he's one of Arnold type Republicans, the ones that are more liberal than Southern Democrats.

From what I've subsequentally read, I would tend to place Eastwood closer to Livertarians than Liberals.

And there was a shit storm when Kazan was given the lifetime achievement award. Don't you remember how quite a few actors / actresses refused to stand and applaud him when he received his award?

I still have the video tape somewhere in my apartment, though I don't have time to hunt it down now. My recollection is that maybe about half of those in attendance did not applaud. That's their right. Other people (like myself in this case) were able to separate their feelings for the man's work from their feelings over what he did in front of HUAC.

Hollywood is still full of liberal DOUCHES.

Thank you for raising the bar of etiquette for this debate...

[frulad]

Let me lob the ball back into your court then, LiM. You assert, if I'm following what you're saying, that films get Oscars for political reason more so during Republican presidential administrations. The following is a list of Oscar Best Picture winners from the Reagan, Bush I and Bush II eras. Please substantiate your claim with explanations.

1980- Karmer Vs Kramer
1981- Ordinary People
1982- Chariots Of Fire
1983- Ghandi
1984- Terms Of Endearment
1985- Amadeus
1986- Out Of Africa
1987- Platoon
1988-The Last Emperor
1989- Rain Man
1990- Driving Miss Daisy
1991- Dances With Wolves
1992- Silence Of The Lambs
2000- American Beauty
2001- Gladiator
2002- A Beautiful Mind
2003- Chicago
2004- Lord Of The Rings: Return Of The King
2005- Million Dollar Baby
2006- Crash
2007- The Departed

[Karachi Vyce]

Crash was pretty much given for political reasons, as it was all about how racism is bad. In the most heavy-handed way possible. Thanks, Hollywood, I would have never figured it out without you.

That film was complete and utter shit, BTW. Just absolutely terrible. The Oscar should have gone to, no kidding, the gay cowboy film.

All that said, I think LIM is perhaps taking the wrong approach. The Oscars are more likely to give awards to INDIVIDUALS either because they're left-wing darlings (examples: Al Gore, Michael Moore) or rather because they feel that the role that person was playing is some sort of important message to America. It doesn't happen EVERY year, but it does happen, I would say, enough so that it's not uncommon.