More Trash from the Village Voice
You know, I never liked the Village Voice when I lived in New York and this film review of Homecoming, a horror film with--get this, dead veterans, coming out of their graves to get to the voting booths to eject the president who sent them to war-- makes me like the paper even less. The review was so childish that I thought it was a parody at first, but alas, it was not.The only good news from this review is the following quote from the director:
Thank goodness something good came from Moore's last picture. Thanks to Larry's Blog for pointing out this review.
What I love about these liberal filmmakers (which is, like, all of them) is that they have never gotten past the adolescent idea that what they are doing is the progressive work of genius that tells the real truth about what is going on. It's not. It is just simple boring propaganda that no one wants to see--unless you are at an Italian film festival, a self-righteous American Filmmaker or the Democratic National Committee who spent millions on DVD's of Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11. Dante says that that the point of his pitiful zombie B-rated flick (I'd give it more of an F for poor imagination) is to inspire other filmmakers to make better versions of films about the atrocities of Iraq.
Perhaps, instead, it should be a wakeup call to right-leaning filmmakers to make films that expose the nonsense these liberals spout. We are already off to a great start with filmmakers like Evan Coyne Maloney with Brainwashing 201 and Michael Moore Hates America
by Michael Wilson.
Update: This comment is too funny to leave in the comment section--"Dead people voting for Democrats? That's just art imitating life." Here is some video that explains the whole thing.
Update II: In honor of giving more money to right-leaning books and art etc.--here is the book
I am going to request for Christmas (actually--that would be Hanukkah for me).
You can't do theatrical political movies; people don't go to them. You can't do them on television, because you've got sponsors," he says. "Michael Moore's last picture made a lot of money, but he was vilified for it so much he's practically in hiding."
Thank goodness something good came from Moore's last picture. Thanks to Larry's Blog for pointing out this review.
What I love about these liberal filmmakers (which is, like, all of them) is that they have never gotten past the adolescent idea that what they are doing is the progressive work of genius that tells the real truth about what is going on. It's not. It is just simple boring propaganda that no one wants to see--unless you are at an Italian film festival, a self-righteous American Filmmaker or the Democratic National Committee who spent millions on DVD's of Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11. Dante says that that the point of his pitiful zombie B-rated flick (I'd give it more of an F for poor imagination) is to inspire other filmmakers to make better versions of films about the atrocities of Iraq.
Perhaps, instead, it should be a wakeup call to right-leaning filmmakers to make films that expose the nonsense these liberals spout. We are already off to a great start with filmmakers like Evan Coyne Maloney with Brainwashing 201 and Michael Moore Hates America
by Michael Wilson.Update: This comment is too funny to leave in the comment section--"Dead people voting for Democrats? That's just art imitating life." Here is some video that explains the whole thing.
Update II: In honor of giving more money to right-leaning books and art etc.--here is the book
I am going to request for Christmas (actually--that would be Hanukkah for me).
posted by Helen at 2:13 PM
78 Comments:
Dead people voting for Democrats? That's just art imitating life.
ronin1516:
Good question. I have a few thoughts and a link to a post of Glenn's that you might find interesting.
I think that art, film etc. has to have a great amount of emotion involved in order for it to affect people. If a poet, artist, filmmaker can make the audience feel--that is the hallmark of success. Those who are left-leaning seem to base reality more on feeling than logic--whereas libertarians and others seem to use logic more than emotion.
If you are a thinker and you follow through consistently, you tend to go into business, computer science etc. where those talents are rewarded. Have you tried hanging around with most filmmakers? I did while producing my film, "Six", and I can tell you, I was the only one who was adamant about a schedule, making sure everyone was on time, working methodically. The filmmakers did things when they could, did not follow through on comittments unless I threatened them at times etc. I think one also has to be extremely introspective, almost to the point of being rather narcisstic and self-indulgent to create. And even if one is talented at creating--the lifestyle that some of these writers, artists etc. lead is rather parasitic and as a result, they want others to care for them--hey--they have genius or so they think and someone-the government etc. should pay for the privilege of just having them around to create--just for the sake of creating. Most right leaning types do not feel this way--they are out making money to support themselves and I think, are geared more toward personal responsibility which means less time to create.
The other problem is we are not usually welcome in these circles. I used to keep a big George Bush sticker on my car to irritate some of these artists. The networks are not that interested in producing shows that are right leaning as it goes against their politics. I think if we started putting more emphasis and money in the form of programs and grants to younger right-leaning artists--things might change. Here is a link to some more info:
http://instapundit.com/archives/002252.php
“I see dead people.”
“In your dreams?”
[Shakes his head no]
“While you’re awake?”
[Nods yes]
“Dead people like, in graves? In coffins?”
[Shakes his head no again]
“At the polls. . . I see dead Democrats at the polls.”
Ronin1516 aka: 4:13 PM -
The other night, in an inspired moment of rooster crowing imitations, I took my friends to school by throwing myself into the part – it was a glorious performance. I bobbed and weaved and scratched the floor and from the depths of my fowl soul I summoned all that was within me as I cried out to the imagined rising sun. O, to be so lost in character – I was a barnyard God for a moment. It was thoroughly liberating. But I think the lesson here is clear: You try throwing yourself into the role of a chicken and then try thinking clearly about politics.
Also, I’ve had serious discussions with other artists about the validity of a story, in which a man is purported to have lived for years on only cigarettes and sunshine. Where do you begin an assault on such reality flaunting illogic?
“Can’t we all just get along?”
“Man is born free, but everywhere he’s in chains.”
“My reality is. . .”
Dude, I’m an actor, and a photographer — I’m a designer by trade — and I can act like a chicken all day long, but I sleep with a .45 under my pillow. I love my liberal friends, but I love my wife and family first, and when a strong man comes to my door and says he wants my home or he’ll cut my head off, I bar the door, go to my bedroom and pull out my .45 – it’s okay to act like a chicken, but it isn’t okay to be a chicken.
Jeff
My guess is that if "dead veterans of the current conflict crawl out of their graves and stagger single-mindedly", they'll probably be heading to the New York Times building.
seems no-one of our political persuasion seems to be doing much in ... writing novels, short-fiction, poems etc. I wonder why this is so.
Check out Alan Sullivan.
http://bilge.seablogger.com/
"I think that art, film etc. has to have a great amount of emotion involved in order for it to affect people. If a poet, artist, filmmaker can make the audience feel--that is the hallmark of success. Those who are left-leaning seem to base reality more on feeling than logic--whereas libertarians and others seem to use logic more than emotion."
With all due respect, this seems a little bit too much like the argument liberals use to explain why there's so few conservatives in the academy (i.e. that conservatives are dumb).
I think this:
"The other problem is we are not usually welcome in these circles."
is probably closer to the mark. Artists form little cliques -- they've been doing it for years, even before the whole Bloomsbury group thing -- and like all cliques, they tend towards a certain insularity. It just happens that, for whatever reason, the most influential cliques today are extremely left-wing.
Now, there may be something more -- and perhaps your description of the lackadaisical lifestype of the artist is part of it -- but I think that the fact that conservatives are unwelcome in the present art-world power structures is nearer the mark than any distinction in liberals' and conservatives' tendency towards feelings vs. thought.
Just taking Waugh as an example, Brideshead Revisited is, for all that it is full up with a romantic throne-and-altar conservatism, an extremely moving book. Now that I mention Waugh, though, it comes to me that libertarians may pose a different problem, because Burkean conservatives have a decidedly romantic strain in them -- recall Burke's little ode to Marie Antoinette -- and this romanticism might translate well into great emotive art. Yukio Mishima might be another, slightly more modern example of that sensibility. I'm unaware of any great artists who were specifically libertarian, but perhaps they are yet to come.
Piggybacking on Dr. Helen's comment, I would add that those who make their living with words don't like to think that words are not the solution to everything. Working at a psychiatric hospital, you see a lot of that. Staff, I mean.
Listen to Garrison Keillor get rolling on how it's the artists who eventually mean the most and make the changes. Yeah sure. It was Mongol poets who put Europe in such fear. 1% of artists do effect some culture change. The other 99% think they are in that 1%, or would be if this horrible society of ours didn't have such terrible values.
I have a son graduating from a conservative evangelical college this year, interning as a filmmaker in LA this semester. I think I'd better send this along.
Y'all pray for him, thank you.
" It was Mongol poets who put Europe in such fear."
But imagine if they were Vogon poets!
"Dude, I'm an artist."
Freely translated: "Dude, I never learned to think for myself, so I gotta be liberal."
gmroper. leave out the m and its groper.
"im loaded"
Freely translated: "Ive got to be Republican."
In our country we have saying: "If a Republican were to be elected mayor of Chicago, the voters would turn over in their graves!"
One more thing. What kind of cognitive spacewarp causes people to use the term "liberal" for pro-tax pro-hyperregulationists, then turn around and refer to tax cuts and deregulation as "liberalization?" The answer is that in an act of moral looting, collectivists have cloaked themselves in the word so they can pose as upholders of liberty even as they box in our lives and pick our pockets. I think you will agree with me and Orwell that corrupting the language is an abominably dishonest way to advance a viewpoint. Defying the fraud means never calling a left-wing statist a "liberal." Outside of those parts of the world where it is still used accurately, this means giving up on the word altogether. Sorry.
...can you explain why pretty much all the poets, writers of literary fiction, visual artists, film-makers and musicians tend to be of the leftist persuasion?
I ain't no puh-sychologist but that's pretty easy to 'splain.
You see, such artsy types are also embued with an outrageously HUGE feeling of superiority.
What most often goes unnoticed is, in parallel with their seeming devotion to socialism is a streak of elitism that cannot be got 'round.
Examples are the armed bodyguards accompanying the likes of Rosie O'Donnell, the massive "compound" featuring five large homes and numerous outbuildings that serves as the domicile of exactly TWO human beings, Barbra "Everyone Needs To Learn To Get Along With Less" Streisand and husband James Brolin (their annual water bill is in excess of $20,000--so much for "using resources wisely.")
In effect, Leftists KNOW they are so much smarter than the rest of us. Witness the fact that John F'in Kerry was hailed as "the thinking person's Presidential candidate" while Pres. Bush is still reviled as a nincompoop--even though both attended Yale, and Bush's GPA was actually HIGHER than Kerry's!
You see, they're SO much smarter than us because they say such "smart" things. Oh, not in actual words, but they THINK right....
I read an interesting article somehhere, probaly FrontPage, that outlined the history of lefty politics on poular American music.
The gist of it was that the Popular Front types of the 30's wanted to promote communism and radicalism through folk music: "This Land is Your Land", etc. This led to the folk/rock crossover of the 60's, after which leftism was de rigeur for rock.
see this:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1459
Personally, I'd say it's just a myth that the "majority" of "artists" are "liberal."
What we really mean is that within the established cliques and channels of the art world, only artists who tow the line gain any level of notoriety. What we're looking at here is a huge number of self-reinforcing network effects.
However, what we're not looking at is the rest of the world. If you look at people who are engaged in creative acts every day, the overwhelming majority of creative endeavors are not pursued with propagandistic ideological motivations. While liberalism might be overwhelmingly the expression of what considers itself "high art," art that takes place everywhere else doesn't share that ideology. The perception of creative endeavors as being aligned with liberalism/statism is just the result of our particular historical coincidence and selective blindness in only looking at a very tiny segment of all art.
"What we really mean is that within the established cliques and channels of the art world, only artists who tow the line gain any level of notoriety. What we're looking at here is a huge number of self-reinforcing network effects."
Yes! That's what I meant to say! Well, more or less.
oh oh where have i heard the argument that libertarians are logical and artists are emotional?? oh yeah, the good ol' men are rational and women are emotional.
what crap.
Joe Dante could go down as the Liberal Leni Riefenstahl, instead of Michael Moore.
So depressing...
I can barely watch anything anymore because the stupid actor is usually out there flapping his or her gums about how evil I am for supporting the war in Iraq.
I once befriended a musician in a high-profile band. He'd invite me to his house and play his unreleased tapes for me. He was very laid back and thoughful, with a huge library of books on eastern philosophies.
Eventually, I discovered that he thought the Jews were behind 9/11, and he also told me that our troops in Iraq were slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians with bayonet and napalm, but it was being covered up by the coporate media.
I had to purge my CD collection of his work.
Well according to Carribean theology “zombies” (a French word of African origin) are “dead men walking”…
And while listening to the latest wave of robotic Neocon platitudes churned out by the US military’s PR and Information Management Department, I remembered the words of a famous 19th century American philosopher of Gallic descent who once said of brainwashed pseudo-patriots “Now, what are they? Men at all? or small movable forts and magazines, at the service of some unscrupulous man in power?…
Visit the Navy Yard, and behold a marine, such a man as an American government can make, or such as it can make a man with its black arts—a mere shadow and reminiscence of humanity, a man laid out alive and standing, and already, as one may say, buried under arms with funeral accompaniments…The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing army, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse comitatus etc. In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense”
Truly, Thoreau’s prose was prescient in many ways…
dr victorino de la vega,
On this blog, I would at least like original trolling--no sloppy seconds please--you have left this same message on at least two other blogs--for goodness sakes, come up with some original content!
I think CatoRenasci pushes close to the key. I live in a large Univesity town with a pretty active local music scene. Since I make some music on the side, I've gotten to know many local "artistes." These opinions are just my own experiences, based on small unrepresentative samples.
Within that community, there's an intrinsic dislike for any art that's perceived as "corporate" -- record labels, mainstream radio, American Idol, etc. Unfortunately, that stuff tends to be quite popular and commercially successful. This leads, I think, to a pervading disdain for "regular" people. After all, if they're so bad at liking music, they're probably bad at other stuff too. Add to this the fact that most artistic types are intelligent and well-educated, and it's easy to end up with a technocratic mindset: government should be dominated by those that "know," because the regular folks are just too provincial, easily manipulated, or just plain dumb to really do what's best for the country.
Second, making art for a living is financially hard. If you're dedicated to art as a career, you're probably not working a traditional 9-5 job. Rock musicians I've known tend to work relatively low-paying service industry jobs, and classical musicians wind up doing a lot of private teaching. It's unsurprising that people in these situations tend to have a negative view of the private sector, and can't really sympathize with the economic ideas that are a huge part of modern conservatism.
Finally, and I think this is a big one, there's not really a tradition of conservative themed art. Liberalism is fundamentally utopian in character -- that's both its strength and weakness. It's easy to write songs about what's wrong with the world, and how it should be: war is bad, all you need is love, one day the workers will be free, etc. With the notable exceptions of patriotism, religion, and family -- which aren't popular art themes with the culturally liberal -- there just aren't many conservative ideas that lend themselves to artistic expression. How are you going to write a song about the flat tax?
Overall, though, I don't think most artistic people make a conscious, informed decision to embrace liberal ideologies. But when you combine all the factors of personality, education, lifestyle choices, and economic prospects you end up with a powerful bias towards the political left.
So how many illegal immigrant jihadists zombies get to vote in this movie?
From The Ghost Breakers (1940):
Geoff Montgomery: A zombie has no will of his own. You see them sometimes walking around blindly with dead eyes, following orders, not knowing what they do, not caring.
Larry Lawrence: You mean like Democrats.
La plus ca change…
Ah, the black arts of the US government. . .
US Military:
Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble;
Fire, burn; and caldron, bubble.
Secretary of Defense:
O’ well done! I commend your pains,
And everyone here shall share in what we get. . .
Good Lord, Dr. Victorino de la Vega, where on earth would your freedom to limit discourse in academia to the confines of your ideology be without a well disciplined military? Maybe Thoreau had the luxury of contemplating a military peopled with poet warriors who brandished their predilections before duty and honor – but it’s not a practical solution to real world problems, is it? Without a military composed of well disciplined men and women willing to hold the line under fire, what would happen to the Machiavellian plot of the modern academic to enforce political correctness on campus?
By all means, celebrate your bourgeois Walden – your postmodern enclave of academic elitists – while men and women of character subjugate their gut twisting fears in the name of duty and honor to protect your freedom. Have a holiday. Rejoice in the irony that while you condemn the military for understandable public relations strategies, academics like yourself inexcusably limit the free exchange of ideas on campus – but isn’t that essentially the same as an Information Management Department? Bask in your hypocrisy.
Such uncivil discourse in a time of crisis – these are difficult days indeed. Dr. Victorino de la Vega, come to my home and I’ll ply you with Schnapps, we’ll dance with our women to the joyous strains of Eagles of Death Metal, and celebrate our freedom. If we’re drunk enough, and you’re very good, I’ll teach you, as an actor, how to throw yourself into the role of a chicken. Who knows, if it comes naturally to you – and I think it will – I might even write a part for you in my next play, and you can take the stage and cluck to your hearts content.
Jeff
Well, the only thing I want less than conservative artists is liberal artists. We have too much political agitprop as it is and personally I just find it boring. Real art doesn't come with a voter registration card.
Why are they liberal?
Try writing a simple script about a bunch of poor, good-hearted, young, energetic, uneducated, migrant workers trying to get what they feel they deserve out of their middle-aged, mean-spirited, lazy boss.
Now write a simple script about an inspired, hard-working, entrepreneurial, ingenius inventor, trying to keep the profits he earned before they are taken away by poor, young, uneducated, energetic migrant workers who somehow think he owes them something.
Put the two scripts side-by-side, and see which one is more engaging.
Entertainment is all about becoming disengaged from reality. Sometimes, oftentimes, while lying to yourself, pretending that you're immersing yourself in it.
Hi Eric,
I think that setting up networks for right-leaning writers, filmmakers, etc. is a great idea. It is difficult to break into the liberal media. On a small scale, when I have given interviews or done a talk show etc. and said something that the host does not like, they just edit it out! I once pointed out to a host of a talk show that he had mistakenly blamed the gun culture for the violence of girls by pointing out that all the girls on the show had killed their victims with a knife. The actual show aired without a mention of my words. Hmmm... wonder how we get people to fund right leaning artists and writers?
An up and coming actress (sorry, can't remember her name) said, 'why should I express a political opinion and offend half my audience?'
Do any of them really believe they change their fans' opinions? Or even educate them? I can't recall any one telling me they changed their mind on an issue because an actor showed them the error of their ways.
As the lady said: Shut up and sing.
Retread
Helen,
One way to promote conservative artists would be to create a web portal leading to artist’s blogs and websites. Conservative political blogs could give the portal(s) high visibility, generating traffic for the artists, and giving their work exposure to appreciative audiences.
Eric: I agree with you. I don't mind so much a political message i disagree with. I at least want them to buy me dinner and a movie first.
I think though their are many political themes of a conservative american nature that get ignored.
not to mention of a social conservative nature.
I think they are ignored because the folks "in power" in the media empires don't relate to those experiences because most of them have lived in privilege their whole lives.
The struggle of a man to raise his family, and get ahead in a system where he's taxed to death and up to his eyes in debt because of a media that is toxic which promotes "lifestyle" desires.
This man suffers from a daughter who is raised to believe by the schools that every man is a rapist and his son becomes distant from him.
This man is isolated from his family and his community and just holds tightly to his work. Then one day he has an idea, a great idea, and gets ready to take on the system to become a Man in a society where manhood is scorned and become a father to his children, who has a real active part in the lives of his children.
I could come up with some more ideas... good compelling stories don't need a political stamp they need to be -good- stories
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
- Helen,
Just like words such as “Engaged”, “Liberal”, and “Cause”, “Artist(e)” came to our vocab from French at a time when Paris attracted the best and brightest among young American and British aspiring writers, politicians, and diplomats.
Concepts such as “militant artist” or “liberal intellectual” were born in19th century France, at a time of exceptionally high political polarization whereby painters, sculptors, and poets were encouraged to leave the “ivory tower of Romanticism”, participate fully in public life, and take sides with “the oppressed” be they workers, miners, immigrants, Blacks, Jews...etc.
It’s no coincidence that the main artistic school of thought of the era was called “Naturalism”, the underlying assumption being that a “progressive artist” should always “imitate” real life as much as possible, and therefore stay away from frivolous/right-wing “romantic” metaphors…blah blah blah
Emile Zola is the ultimate representative of that 19th European school of thought…Ironically, in those Halcyon days, the American artistic elite held radically opposed views- not anymore unfortunately...
Emerson, Thoreau and their neo-“individualist” disciples despised the European propensity to deliberately mix art with politics and economics. To them, the urban proletariat was not more worthy of sympathy than say big-city bureaucracy be it corporate or governmental: they searched for creative inspiration and artistic meaning within themselves, far from the vulgar noises and chatters of Paris, Washington or Hollywood!
Vic is a fraud, by the way, the lone staff member in a think tank that exists only in name. I skip right over him now. He has become ubiquitous among the blogs I frequent.
Daniel and Cato hit the nail on the head. I was an early 70's theater major -- what a maroon.
C.S Lewis bemoaned the fact in his day that there were no literary and culture magazines which were anything but modernist and leftist. He encouraged severl startups.
We now have New Criterion, First Things, City Journal -- I'm sure I'm leaving something important out. If you want to encourage a more conservative -- or at least not doctrinaire liberal -- culture I recommend you seek these out.
assistant village idiot--
It is difficult to address you with the word idiot--you seem too sensible. Thanks for the info on alternative books and art--I have already found a book I want to order from New Criterion-others can check it out at:
http://newcriterion.com/constant/books/rama/
These ideas for a pro-Bush response to the liberal artistic establishment are a start, but what you really need for it is Pentagon money. We are at war, after all, and the Fifth Column is attacking from its Hollywood base.
Contemplate the fact that "artists," as we usually interpret the word, are and have been for centuries social parasites. Their withdraw from the stressful humdrum into a make-believe world of "creative pursuits" is justified by self-serving rationale. Some very few produce enduring works. The overwhelming remainder produce dreck that, with some luck, reduces to recyclable refuse.
In the absence of business endeavors and constructive creativity (scientific research, engineering, architecture...) that occur in advanced cultures, there is no discretionary wealth. Without discretionary wealth there is no investment in "art" or a viable "art scene." And, for that matter, various general subsidies that enable "art" will not develop.
My personal bias is that artists TEND to fall into a broad grouping of people from many callings who, for whatever reason, either avoid or are incapable of critical thinking. Their worldview is based on how they *feel* about an issue, not a logically defensible position arrived at by (internal or external) analysis, argument and debate.
And yes, there are recognized sources (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator comes to mind) which suggest that more women than men (75% versus 35% respectively according to the MBTI) have a propensity toward feeling-based decision mechanisms. This is not a bad or good thing, just a difference thing and one that nature probably has a use for.
General Mola Vidal, Senator McCarthy and Adolf Hitler were damn right: we must immediately get read of all these Mohammedan “FIFTH columnists” and their suspiciously complacent friends be they Soviet-style Pinkocats à la Nancy Pelosi, or even worse Buchanan-style Republican “enemies of freedom/liberty/Zion”….blah blah blah….ZZzzzzzzzzz”
Frankly, it’s no coincidence Koranic collaborators are called “fifth columnists”: ever heard of the proverbial fifth pillar of Islam?
Not to mention these bastards’ subversive penchant for “five prayers per day”!
I’m sure our liberty-loving authorities keep a tab on the frequency of their suspicious knee-flexing prayers…etc.
Down with converts!
Long live freedom!
Long live el presidente Bush!
auld pharte,
Yes, there is definitely an artistic temperament that is more prone to feeling, etc. as described by the Myers-Brigg. According to Jung (which the Myers-Brigg is based on), the introverted intuition type can be either an artist, seer or crank. Such a person has a visionary ideal that reveals strange, mysterious things. These are enigmatic, 'unearthly' people who stand aloof from ordinary society. They have little interest in explaining or rationalizing their personal vision, but are content merely to proclaim it. Partly as a result of this, they are often misunderstood.
I took the Myers Briggs a long time ago and was an INTP--the T being the thinking component and I believe the type I was described as was a kind of intropective mad scientist type. I was not sure whether to take that as an insult or a compliment.
Dr Helen,
I test as an INTJ, a type that tends to go into engineering and is proportionally dominant among business executives. The MBTI is a useful tool in discussions of this and related subjects because Thinking (T) and Feeling (F) occupy the same dimension and therefore are represented by the tool as "type opposites."
PS
And I was born in Knoxville, many moons ago.
This vic guy is like performance art moonbattery I think.
Personally, having been married to a fundamentalist (fundamentalist feminist, that is), I tend to lean toward the "liberals know they are both right and righteous" point of view, which in and of itself would contribute to thinking they are vastly superior to the Republican thugs who are running the AIDS victim concentration camps. For me, the best proof in (virtual) print is the Jane Smiley piece about the Unteachable Red States. Liberals just get weirded out when the American people don't listen to their betters like Jane Smiley or Jane Fonda.
lord jiggy:
Yeah--I guess we can ask Ted Turner how that went!
Also, I would like to thank Helen for the heads up about this belligerent review in the Village Voice of Joe Dante's "Homecoming". Particularly where the reviewer accuses the Bush White House of hypocrisy. Childish indeed.
But that's just the review; what about the movie itself? We have no television and we are unlikely to ever rent this movie. If someone here could watch the show from beginning to end and explain everything terrible about it, that would be very useful.
Hey greg,
Since you have set yourself up as our armchair critic here--why don't you take the honor yourself?The movie is on Showtime--you can report back after you have seen it and we can critique your critique.
As I said, we don't have a TV. We have a TV display for movies, but we have no antenna and no cable.
Besides, even if I did see "Homecoming", I'd be in danger of liking it.
Greg,
I thought you would.
"Michael Moore's last picture made a lot of money, but he was vilified for it so much he's practically in hiding."
I think moore was vilified for lying throughout most of the movie, not for making a lot of money
I also liked review by Dennis Lim. That's because I'm a childish person. I like calling people hypocrites.
Actually I only like calling some people hypocrites. Only Presidents of the United States. Every President has been a hypocrite. The only difference is that when conservative Presidents betray their principles, they harm only themselves and their families; when liberal Presidents do it, they damage the nation.
For example, the official biography of George Bush says that he is for limited government. I think that that is a hypocritical claim. I see little semblance of limited government in his spending policies; the only real limits are on the tax side. On the other hand, while this may be privately embarrassing to the Bush family, where is the harm to the national interest?
....and THERE goes Greggie the Troll! I think he scented the other troll, and decided to pile on.
Helen, no reason to reply to him (heck, or to any of us). It's like the saying about wrestling with a pig: it wastes your time, gets you all muddy, and the pig likes it.
Debate is one thing. Trolls are quite another.
The difference between hypocrisy and putting your best foot forward is mainly one of self-honesty. That, in turn, drags in the concept of humility. As Lewis wrote "He who thinks he is not conceited is very conceited indeed."
Humility is certainly not President Bush's strong suit. Pat Robertson said that he was like "a Christian with four aces".
It occurs to me that a lot of Americans generally want a president who is a zealous nationalist. How much humility can you really expect from any such politician?
Perhaps all of us could be a bit more humble, yes? Including commenters on this blog?
Y'know, having read through this thread, the consensus seems to be that the vast majority of filmmakers are a bunch of lazy, navel-gazing, illogical nincompoops who could barely accomplish the sort of burger-flipping that would undoubtedly be their station if Hollywood wasn't around to bail them out.
Now, as Helen can no doubt tell us, filmmaking is an incredibly difficult process, even on a small scale. It requires more than just "feeling" and a narcissism-fueled sense of purpose to make a movie. One must do an inordinate amount of boring, detail-oriented business such as planning individual shots, getting finances together, choosing and working with some fairly complex equipment, etc., and that's just for something small and "indie." Big-budget productions (headed by all those dunderheaded Hollywood liberals, remember) have a small galaxy of other concerns to address.
Thus, I can only conclude that filmmaking does not, and never has existed, and that Hollywood is all some collective fever dream of the good, hard-working conservatives of the world. Quite an accomplishment, when you think about it.
Hmmm. Just because people work hard doesn't mean that the product is "good," friends. That is the Marxist conceit, that hard work creates excellence.
Of course filmmakers and directors work hard. But in the name of things that ACLU won't let one say in public, look at the bizarre stuff that many filmmakers say and believe! Spike Lee thinks that HIV was created in American labs to destroy the Black population of this country. Oliver Stone believes just about everything paranoid and conspiratorial one could imagine.
And Michael Moore...well, enough said.
All of these people work hard, and some of them make good movies. But why that is thought to have ANYTHING to do with national policy or politics is beyond me.
Lexington: What really bothers people here about the TV movie Homecoming is that they disagree with it. I'm not sure that anyone in the discussion has actually seen it, for one thing. If there is to be any criticism of the war in Iraq, it should be the effete kind that can be swatted away easily. It is very nice to have Hannity and Colmes instead of a real debate. Anyone less obsequious than Alan Colmes can be thrown out as a "hypocrite", a "fascist", "childish", or a "troll".
Personally I would like to see postings that directly address the war in Iraq, instead of ad hominem evaluations of war critics.
Greg sez: "Personally I would like to see postings that directly address the war in Iraq, instead of ad hominem evaluations of war critics."
I suppose you would, but of course that's irrelevant to the topic of leftist wankers in media. [/sarcasm]
That said, my theory on liberal tendencies amongst artistes is that it represents a birth defect, wherein both reason and accountability are absent to some degeree. Magical thinking predominates, and self-congratulatory behavior marks their productivity, all the way from diaper-filling to moviemaking about zombies.
Mapplethorpe was the reductio ad absurdum of the self-absorbed artist-nihilist, trying to pass off urine and porn as art, declaring the rest of us philistines who simply didn't understand how wonderful he was. Feh.
Mr. Levittown Irish –
You must chill! That said, I’m right with you on the artists aren’t parasites thing. I think it might be argued art is the world’s oldest profession – heh. Shaman priests and troglodyte artists – they’re as much a part of us today as they were then, and they’re just as important. I say this with only one caveat in mind: Today’s artists are no longer accountable to the larger community, and they’ve created enclaves in a disjointed society – the result is many have fallen victim to group think, only to wandered off the reservation. Still, a world without art is unthinkable – it’s naïve to imagine that creative expression and artistic inclinations are not a part of the fabric of our social psyche. Good call on naming just a few of the giants, (I have a fondness for John Singer Sargent, and Whitman’s “O Living Always, Always Dying” has always been a lovely lifelong companion – “o to disengage myself from those corpses of me, which I turn and look at where I cast them, to move on, always living, and leave the corpses behind!”).
On the bad Bush, war thing – you know, bodies piling up and all. Well, how about an honest debate. Or better yet, as I’m tired of flailing at the walls of denial with all of these so freely available nasty facts. For God’s sake do a little homework. I mean, I might have made an effort here, but you’d have to have at least thrown me a bone. Look, go read the Robb, Silberman report – page one I think is about all the farther you’ll have to go. If you dig a little more, you’ll find Joe Wilson selling a book while valiantly protecting the secret identity of his not-so-covert wife on the pages of Vanity Fair. Talk about liars!
Here’s a thought for you – if you’re all up in arms about the lies this administration is supposed to be telling all over the place, at least have the decency to represent yourself as something other than a partisan hack, by looking for just one minute at all of the idiotic shenanigans your hooligan Democrats are up to these days.
I’ll give you a few criticisms of Bush, but lying us into a war isn’t one of them – the Democrats, on the other hand are trying to lie themselves out of the war they voted themselves into. Charming cut and run bunch they are, I’ll tell you. I surely want them to be looking out for my posterior when the worst you can imagine hits the fan. It’d be comforting to someone like John Kerry had my back before he didn’t have my back.
Look, here’s the short of it: If you want to eat your puddin’ Dear Heart, you’ve got to pull your wooly head out of your arse.
All of my Love and Affection,
Jeff
Perhaps, instead, it should be a wakeup call to right-leaning filmmakers to make films that expose the nonsense these liberals spout. We are already off to a great start with filmmakers like Evan Coyne Maloney with Brainwashing 201 and Michael Moore Hates America by Michael Wilson.
Go forth, young wingnuts, and reclaim the glorious conservative filmmaking tradition that begin with The Birth of a Nation.
Helen wrote;
"If you are a thinker and you follow through consistently..."
(Allow me to finish the thought)
...then you MUST be a liberal. I've seen no evidence of thought or consistency from the right in the last 5 years.
Jeff wrote:
"I’ll give you a few criticisms of Bush, but lying us into a war isn’t one of them – the Democrats, on the other hand are trying to lie themselves out of the war they voted themselves into"
Did Bush lie? To be honest, we don't know, although from the reality-based side of the world, it sure looks that way.
Is admitting you made a mistake lying? Interesting thought, which would explain a lot about Bush et al. You might want to go back and count the House votes for the war.
By the way, you forgot "indeed". Heh.
“Go forth, young wing nuts, and reclaim the glorious conservative filmmaking tradition that began with The Birth of a Nation.”
Okay, that was pretty funny.
The Birth of a Nation was a sad piece of work, which is what the whole premise of Homecoming seems to be as well. Schlock is schlock.
Art can be subversive – many of the great Christian works of art have hidden critiques of the church, but I doubt Raphael, Michelangelo or Leonardo da Vinci would be thrilled by Dung Mary or Piss Christ. They were probably a bit too conservative
“Did Bush lie? To be honest, we don't know, although from the reality-based side of the world, it sure looks that way.”
Well, that’s on the right track – the Bush lied contingent doesn’t “know” he lied, but gosh darn it, it sure feels like he did. I’m sorry, but calling for a man’s head because you have a feeling doesn’t constitute “reality-based”.
“Is admitting you made a mistake lying? Interesting thought, which would explain a lot about Bush et al.”
Kind of like Jay Rockefeller’s original declaration of Saddam as an “imminent threat”, and his amazing, admitting no mistake, proclamation that Bush lied. Explains a lot about the Rockefeller et al, eh?
“You might want to go back and count the House votes for the war.”
You’re losing me here.
“By the way, you forgot "indeed". Heh.”
Now what the hell are you talking about?
Matt,
“While I'm sincerely touched that you would call my heart dear, thus trying to warm to me , I must take issue with characterization of my head as "wooly" as it most assuredly not, but rather it is a seething, samsonesque mane of pulchritude that invites much envy. Also despite my innate tolerance for all of the various sexual peccadillos in the world, my ass, (or arse if you prefer) remains an exit only orifice.”
Matt, you’re beautiful indeed. What a wonderful closer. Bravo! I certainly would enjoy looking at this issue with you over a beer or two. It would be much easier than doing this online, and I suspect much more entertaining.
Listen, I appreciate your effort – it was as Herculean as your hair is Samsonesque! I’m presently under the gun – I’ve been developing my personal website after the fashion of Zen Garden, with a variety of style sheets twisting the structure this way and that (my graphics are hot, buddy!). The very wrong thing about this is my wife and I have a magazine about to go to press, and I’m supposed to be doing real work! Bwaaa! Here’s the deal – I’ll print out your post and give it a fair shake. A quick assessment leaves me with my convictions intact, but I want to honor your hard work.
Oh, and for the record: If you have hair, I’m jealous.
Jeff
Matt,
Did you just cut and paste all of your “Ten Lies” from a piece by Christopher Sheer? I just found the copy after I responded to your post. Dude, I’ve seen all of these assertions and I’ve listened to the rebuttals, but where’s my damned cut and paste source? I’m feeling slightly ripped-off.
Jeff
Matt,
I’ll add your latest (12:47 PM) to my list and continue to read around the subject, though I have precious little time for a serious go at all of this business. Topics like this are always a bit of a bear.
You said, “Convictions are only deeply held beliefs. Some beliefs can shrivel under the cold light of fact.” I hope so. . . If I ever ask for a fair shake, I intend to give one – just so we understand one another.
My friend, I fear I’ll be pulling an all-nighter again tonight as this day is going to the dogs, but that there are worst problems to have is something we can agree upon. You, I gather are in for a similar evening, and I hope it goes well. Matt, I would definitely prefer a pint or two – I still think it would be a fine time, and maybe we’d both walk away just a little bit the wiser.
In lieu of détente on neutral ground, I’ll raise a glass here and wish you well as you come to see my point of view!
Jeff
Great to see disagreements with passion, but still with politeness and manners. I think that the political system likes Red and Blue types to fight. Not simply to disagree, but to fight and demonize one another.
Three cheers for Matt and Jeff above, who disagree while treating each other with respect.
That is how change can really happen, I think.
Just my two cents.
"Eric Blair"
Mr. Blair,
You are exactly right--if we stick to being civil here despite our differences, (easier said then done) we can all learn something.
It's really okay if you convert to the Instahack's religion. What is that again? I know it involves worshipping asses.
...and there we go with what sure looks like an attempt to insult our hostess. Thanks very much, quxxo.
Matt –
I FTP’d the magazine to the printer at 2 AM last night. Thank God! So I’ve been walking around like a zombie all day today. Anyway, here’s my thinking on the questions so far:
Holy Crap! What a mess! Sorry I can’t do this in a more timely fashion and get right to the whole job, but I thought I’d just look at 1 – 3 on the list for a start.
LIE#1 "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program ... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." -- President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.
“. . .the Bush administration did not lack for company in interpreting the available evidence as it did:
I can’t tell you why the French, the Germans, the Brits, and us thought that most of the material, if not all of it, that we presented at the UN on 5 February 2003 was the truth. I can’t. I’ve wrestled with it. [But] when you see a satellite photograph of all the signs of the chemical-weapons ASP—Ammunition Supply Point—with chemical weapons, and you match all those signs with your matrix on what should show a chemical ASP, and they’re there, you have to conclude that it’s a chemical ASP, especially when you see the next satellite photograph which shows the UN inspectors wheeling in their white vehicles with black markings on them to that same ASP, and everything is changed, everything is clean. . . . But George [Tenet] was convinced, John McLaughlin [Tenet’s deputy] was convinced, that what we were presented [for Powell’s UN speech] was accurate.
Going on to shoot down a widespread impression, Wilkerson informs us that even the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) was convinced:
People say, well, INR dissented. That’s a bunch of bull. INR dissented that the nuclear program was up and running. That’s all INR dissented on. They were right there with the chems and the bios.
In explaining its dissent on Iraq’s nuclear program, the INR had, as stated in the NIE of 2002, expressed doubt about Iraq’s efforts to acquire aluminum tubes [which are] central to the argument that Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear-weapons program. . . . INR is not persuaded that the tubes in question are intended for use as centrifuge rotors . . . in Iraq’s nuclear-weapons program.
But, according to Wilkerson,
The French came in in the middle of my deliberations at the CIA and said, we have just spun aluminum tubes, and by God, we did it to this RPM, et cetera, et cetera, and it was all, you know, proof positive that the aluminum tubes were not for mortar casings or artillery casings, they were for centrifuges. Otherwise, why would you have such exquisite instruments?
In short, and whether or not it included the secret heart of Hans Blix, “the consensus of the intelligence community, as Wilkerson puts it, “was overwhelming in the period leading up to the invasion of Iraq that Saddam definitely had an arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, and that he was also in all probability well on the way to rebuilding the nuclear capability that the Israelis had damaged by bombing the Osirak reactor in 1981.
Norman Podhoretz
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article.asp?aid=12005029_1
LIE#2 "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." -- President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.
The Butler report said British intelligence had "credible" information -- from several sources -- that a 1999 visit by Iraqi officials to Niger was for the purpose of buying uranium:
Butler Report: It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999. The British Government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger’s exports, the intelligence was credible.
The Butler Report affirmed what the British government had said about the Niger uranium story back in 2003, and specifically endorsed what Bush said as well.
Butler Report: By extension, we conclude also that the statement in President Bush’s State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa was well-founded.
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
LIE#3"We believe Saddam has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." -- Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the Press."
Matt – I think this one is interesting because the quote given in the 10 lies piece so selectively cut the quote as to give a whole new meaning to what Cheney said. - Jeff
And I think that would be the fear here, that even if he were tomorrow to give everything up, if he stays in power, we have to assume that as soon as the world is looking the other way and preoccupied with other issues, he will be back again rebuilding his BW and CW capabilities, and once again reconstituting his nuclear program. He has pursued nuclear weapons for over 20 years. Done absolutely everything he could to try to acquire that capability and if he were to cough up whatever he has in that regard now, even if it was complete and total, we have to assume tomorrow he would be right back in business again. . . .
We know he's reconstituted these [biological and chemical weapons] programs since the Gulf War. We know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons . . . .
Well, I think I've just given it, Tim, in terms of the combination of his development and use of chemical weapons, his development of biological weapons, his pursuit of nuclear weapons. . . .
And over time, given Saddam's posture there, given the fact that he has a significant flow of cash as a result of the oil production of Iraq, it's only a matter of time until he acquires nuclear weapons. [All emphases added.]
By Eugene Volokh
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-volokh063003.asp
I'll be looking at the others as well, but I don't know if I'll have the time to add them to this thread - as I said, I've seen these all before, but I like to track down my sources before I throw them up.
I hope you're catching up with your workload! (Still rather wanting a pint or two)!
Jeff
Oops, just looked at that last post (7:34 PM) and duly noted it was formatted in the least reader friendly manner possible.
*Note to Self: Edit then publish. Edit then publish.
Jeff
The VILLAGE(idiot)VOICE is no more different then the New Yotk Times just your avrage birdcage liner
this was an extremely interesting thread. want to hear conservative artists? turn on your local country music station.
p.s. i'll see your pint and raise you a shot of absinthe
Perhaps we went after Iraq because they had the weakest army out of our enemies. I would support attacks against: Iran, North Korea, Syria, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. But I'm not sure if our military could handle that many war fronts. Plus I think such an act might increase terrorism in the short run. Attacking Iraq might have increased terrorism, but I think more likely it just brought them out from hiding. Do you think terrorism will decrease if we pull out? There was terrorism before Iraq: 1970s Olympics, Cole bombing, embassy bombings, and 9/11.
希望大家都會非常非常幸福~
「朵朵小語‧優美的眷戀在這個世界上，最重要的一件事，就是好好愛自己。好好愛自己，你的眼睛才能看見天空的美麗，耳朵才能聽見山水的清音。好好愛自己，你才能體會所有美好的東西，所有的文字與音符才能像清泉一樣注入你的心靈。好好愛自己，你才有愛人的能力，也才有讓別人愛上你的魅力。而愛自己的第一步，就是切斷讓自己覺得黏膩的過去，以無沾無滯的輕快心情，大步走向前去。愛自己的第二步，則是隨時保持孩子般的好奇，願意接受未知的指引；也隨時可以拋卻不再需要的行囊，一路雲淡風輕。親愛的，你是天地之間獨一無二的旅人，在陽光與月光的交替之中瀟灑獨行.................
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
免費影片成人影城免費a網 免費視訊辣妹彩虹頻道免費短片交友av1688天使娛樂網辣妹妹影音視訊聊天室小魔女免費影片色情聊天室 ut我愛78論壇辣妹哈拉視訊聊天室台灣論壇女生免費視訊辣妹北台灣視訊aaa的滿18歲卡通影片視訊交友90739a片欣賞本土自拍天堂aa片免費看影片 情色小說免費成人卡通kiss168成人電影視訊妹 aa片免費看aa 片免費看sex888sex999免費影片免費視訊聊天
Post a Comment
<< Home