| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
 Posted - 02/21/2006 : 5:18:24 PM
|
DIE, MODERATE LIBERTARIAN SCUM!!!!
I just want to make it clear that the post above was aimed ONLY at Long Cut. Well, and anyone who happens to exactly share is views. And, I wanted to rant for a bit. But you guys can see where the frustration is coming from, right? "We have enemies" should not be the end of the debate, in any era.
And even if the debate gets heated, I think it's important to have said discussion. This is a political place, political arguments are going to happen. I make it my business to visit this place so that I can get an ideological work out; that's one of my major issues with some of the people with whoom I clash politically, so it would be hypocritical if I spent all my time at lefty sites going "Boy, we sure are correct about everything, aren't we?" And I offer you guys the courtesy of coming here and offering you an honest debate. No, please, no need to thank me.
I consider it sort of the right-wing mirror of Chud, actually: primarily a movie site, but with a political bent.
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
 |
|
|
TheFoywonder
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
833 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2006 : 6:02:42 PM
|
The only reason CHUD has a political bent is because that Devin Faraci guy is in charge of it now and he can't help but not insert his politics into most of the stories he does, not to mention his inability not to behave like an insufferably smug prick on the message boards. The guy really is the poster boy for holier than thou liberal elitism and his overbearing personality has run off tons of people from the site's message boards, including most of the conservative voices over there.
Now Playing in Foyeurism at Schlocktoberfest.Com:
BALLAD OF THE NASTY HERO - An overlooked gem of 80s action cheese gets it due
Plus: B-WARE THE BLOG is alive at http://www.livejournal.com/users/foywonder |
|
|
|
Long Cut
Archdeacon of Jabootu
19 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2006 : 6:11:24 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by UnknownSubject
quote:
Originally posted by Long Cut
See, what you posted here and what I've reproduced is a classic example of what I was saying. Whilst "the consequences of denying who you are" might make for some drama in calm times, in the midst of a world war they are, to put it bluntly, irrelevant to the point of insignifigance. Sorry, but the love story of two gay cow(sheep)boys in love simply pales before the monumental task of defeating hordes of Islamist radicals bent on murdering all of us and reducing the concepts of freedom and liberty to historical footnotes.
Okay, we aren't even going to come close to seeing eye-to-eye on this. I must have missed the memo when the attack on radical Islam became a world war and all movies should support the actions of the US military.
Oh, and I noted the irony of you quoting "Casablanca" - a very human story set during a world war - to justify dismissing another human story as being pointless during wartime.
Well, considering that the war involves countries the world over, on every continent, I'd call it a "World War". And nowhere did I suggest that ALL movies should support it. I'll take just ONE!
Recall that, during WWII, those movies that mentioned the war at all universally supported it, and those that had nothing to do with it even gave it a nod here and there. Oh, we wound up WINNING that one in four (for us) years. It's called a total national will to win. Maybe, just maybe, having something like 90+% of the US population all for victory helps a bit, don't you think? Note, I have no problem at all with people disagreeing with this or that aspect of the war, such as the Iraq campaign (and I would hope that no one has an issue with the overall war against Al Queda), it's just that such discussions are best kept private, and reserved for appropriate times...like during the victory party. I've no patience with pols and hacks from EITHER party making hay on it by demagoging it to death.
As far as the "Casablanca" reference goes, it was at that point in the movie that Rick realized that there were much bigger things afoot in the world than himself and his love life, and that it was the right thing to do to let Ilsa go...not for her, but for the Cause. That's the point I was originally trying to make...that there ARE much larger things afoot nowadays than simple relationship issues. I'm not, once again, calling for such movies to be eliminated, far from it. However, my question is, why is Hollywood seemingly IGNORING the far larger human drama that comes with war? why pretend that a struggle that will affect the history of the world isn't happening?
Sheesh, toss us a frickin' bone, huh?
--------------------------------------------------
"My father was a drunk, a gambler, and a womanizer. I worshipped him!"...CWO Paul Brenner |
|
|
|
Long Cut
Archdeacon of Jabootu
19 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2006 : 6:41:21 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Prankster
Wow. Just...wow.
I think what you mean to say is "Didn't you hear? Bush critics are not allowed to win arguments anymore, because of 9/11."
Um, nothing I posted suggests or implies that that is my position. Do you always use strawmen in that manner?
quote:
If Hollywood is wrongheaded in making movies about homosexuality because you personally don't find it "relevant" (though I suspect both homosexuals and those who are adamantly opposed to them would disgree with you) then perhaps I can take issue with the concept of devoting discussion after discussion to the eeeeeeevils of Hollywood by the party that currently holds all the political power in America, and which is abusing said power to horrendous degrees?
When did I say anything of the sort? All I wanted was for Hollywood to give the larger events taking place around us (events that, for good or ill, will affect the entire planet for decades, possibly centuries, to come) a little movie recognition. I didn't say they SHOULDN't make movies about gays, or anyone else. Sensitive, aren't we? Oh, and how exactly is "the party in power" abusing its power any worse than its predecessor in power ever did? Seems to me that I have to cough up taxes either way to pay for vote-buying schemes. Chill out on the histrionics and drama, okay?
quote:
Let's face it, we all know what this McCarthy debate is really about. It's about the superficially-but-not-really-similar current debate about Guantanamo Bay
,
No one has even mentioned Gitmo on this thread. BTW, I have no problem with terrorists and dangerous enemy combatants being held in a secure location where they are no threat. Despite whatever you've heard, they're being treated well, and FAR better than their side treats ours. Would you prefer we just hung them? (Gee, this strawman stuff is fun)
quote:
The argument always seems to circle around to a simple formula: There WERE Communists in Hollywood. There ARE Muslim extremists who want to kill us. Therefore, the government can do whatever it wants. We can hold people without trial or any real indication that they are terrorists
...Besides the AK's they were aiming at us when caught. Where do you GET this stuff?
quote:
because hey, we're not as bad as Stalin! The worst example we can think of! We can violate freedoms that our forefathers fought and died to preserve, because people want to kill us! After all, in America's 200+ year history, they never fought a war before, so now the situation is totally different! Those laws and rights were just for the endless, idyllic period that was the 20th Century. After 9/11, they've become inconvenient. I'm sure Jefferson would have agreed.
Every war we have fought in our history has had, at some point, a period where certain rights were less easily excercised. This one is actually far BETTER than most in that regard, unless you've seen anyone arrested for sedition lately? Treason? Didn't think so. You need to do more research.
quote:
So kindly stop screaming that liberals "don't understand that there are people who want to kill us", then or now. We understand just fine, thanks.
Again, I've said no such thing. And incidentally, since you understand it so well, as you say, what do you suggest we do about it? We're doing our level best to kill the bastards, imprison the ones who surrender, and, where necessary, remove the governments that support them. And guess what! We're doing it without even having to force young Americans to fight if they do not wish to.
Dude, it's me and lots of guys like me that are in the middle of this thing. We're the ones doing the lifting, thank you very much. And you know what?
It purely makes my day when I read a post like yours. Because no matter that you think you're living in some fascistic hellhole (to judge by your posts), you STILL GOT TO SAY IT. And as long as you and other people like you continue to have the right to do so, my job is done.
But I do wish you'd climb down off your high horse of righteous indignation and do some real research before you spout off. If you're gonna talk, at least try to avoid repeating what you read on MoveOn.Org. It's about as reliable as that Oxy-Contin gobbling Limbaugh.
My whole point, since it's gotten lost in this little love-in, was not that Hollywood needs to make less of the movies about relationships and "love", or about "realizing who you are". It is that they might make a few dollars more if they actually paid a modicum of attention to the fact that that's not ALL that's going on in the world.
Like I said, I'd take even ONE lousy movie. Lord knows, they've made plenty of the other kind.
--------------------------------------------------
"My father was a drunk, a gambler, and a womanizer. I worshipped him!"...CWO Paul Brenner |
|
|
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2006 : 6:45:57 PM
|
No, there's always been a Chud Politics forum, which is what I'm referring to, and it's always been left-leaning. And we all know that Jabootu would never eeeeever insert politics into an article, right? :)
And Long Cut...are you seriously implying that "90%" of the population (wouldn't it have been a lot more than that in WWII, too? Like 100%?) is NOT for victory? The problem comes when we try and determine what it is we're exactly for victory in. It sounds like a simple question, but the more you think about it, the vaguer it gets. This inability to define the conflict is one of the issues I have with Bush. However, the only people who are seriously saying "Gee, I hope Osama Bin Laden takes over the US, and that America as we know it is utterly destroyed!" are our enemies--our actual enemies, not just "Liberals who ask pesky questions." The vast majority of the people opposing the war aren't even "opposing" it in one sense (that pesky vagueness again--frankly, I don't think we should be lumping it into one big "War on Terror" anyway), they just have issues with how it's being conducted. But saying, say, that you're opposed to the war in Iraq tends to cause people to assume all kinds of stuff about you, because of all the political "Packaging" that's been going on. For example, I have serious issues with the Iraq war, to the point that I guess you could say that I'm opposed to it, but I essentially have no problem with the Afghanistan one.
You really need to be careful about these broad generalizations.
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
|
|
|
Long Cut
Archdeacon of Jabootu
19 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2006 : 6:48:14 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Prankster
DIE, MODERATE LIBERTARIAN SCUM!!!!
Hey, what's wrong with moderate libertarians? We're all for legalizing pot. And we're all about staying out of your bedroom. In fact, we'll even keep the Islamists from bothering you. As a bonus, we'll keep the Religious Right off your backs, too, at no extra charge.
And we'll do it whilst lowering your taxes. C'mon, where ya gonna find a better deal than that?
--------------------------------------------------
"My father was a drunk, a gambler, and a womanizer. I worshipped him!"...CWO Paul Brenner |
|
|
|
Tork_110
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
360 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2006 : 7:32:18 PM
|
PWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWNED!
Oops, sorry. On a video game message board, some idiot would have said that by now. |
|
|
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2006 : 7:53:09 PM
|
Let me quote you from the earlier post:
"Whilst "the consequences of denying who you are" might make for some drama in calm times, in the midst of a world war they are, to put it bluntly, irrelevant to the point of insignifigance. Sorry, but the love story of two gay cow(sheep)boys in love simply pales before the monumental task of defeating hordes of Islamist radicals bent on murdering all of us and reducing the concepts of freedom and liberty to historical footnotes."
The only possible conclusion I can take from this is that you don't think that Hollywood should make movies about certain subjects while there are other, "more important" subjects to be tackled. I deduce this from the fact that you brought up "Islamic radicals" apropos of nothing. This is, to be blunt, ridiculous. It makes it sound like you're saying that any possible argument, on anything, can be trumped with "Yes, but we're at war with people who want to kill us, so your concerns don't matter." What's especially disheartening about this is that a lot of people have been using this same line of reasoning, if I may call it that, in other forums. It is, very simply, a deflection, not an argument.
Further, your contention that "Hollywood is making movies about gay cowboys instead of important things" suggests that all the decisions in Hollywood are made by one guy at a desk somewhere. I really don't think anyone involved in making Brokeback Mountain was obligated to say "Well, I know we all like this short story about gay cowboys and want to make it into a movie, but there aren't enough films out there about how bad Osama is, so we're going to have to make a movie about that instead."
(Frank Miller's about to draw a comic about Batman fighting Osama Bin Laden. Satisfied?)
quote:
Originally posted by Long Cut
Oh, and how exactly is "the party in power" abusing its power any worse than its predecessor in power ever did?
...
No one has even mentioned Gitmo on this thread. BTW, I have no problem with terrorists and dangerous enemy combatants being held in a secure location where they are no threat. Despite whatever you've heard, they're being treated well, and FAR better than their side treats ours.
Long Cut, you are being deliberately disingenuous by saying "No one has mentioned Gitmo". On several levels. My original point was that we can all see the parallels between the McCarthy debate and the current happenings (I mentioned a number of different issues, which you reduced to "Gitmo"). However, you did bring up "Islamist radicals", out of the blue no less, so I really think this discussion has been broached, and feigning surprise ill becomes you.
And despite whatever YOU'VE heard, the people in Guantanamo Bay are being held without trial, after several years, in conditions that are at least as bad as the average prison, in violation of the Geneva conventions, which the US has never felt the need to openly flout before to my knowledge. Each individual is a different case, and yes, a lot of them may be terrorists. But there's a legal process to be employed in situations like this, and it hasn't been. Instead these people are being treated as guilty until proven innocent, because "we can't afford to be wrong".
This is problematic to a lot of people for the same reason that rounding up all the black people in the vicinity of a crime scene because "one of them probably did it" would be. The logic being used to label some of the Gitmo detainees "potential terrorists" is shaky at best, and yet you, and many others, talk about them as if they had been tried and convicted of being terrorists. I want to make this very clear: most of the people in Gitmo have not been charged with any crime. They were arrested in Iraq and Afghanistan under a wide variety of circumstances that weren't neccessarily any more clear-cut than the average police arrest. Many of them may simply be enemy combatants, which is a very different thing from being a terrorist. Many of them may be innocent. If they're terrorists or terrorist collaborators, let's try them to determine their guilt or innocence, THEN punish them appropriately. The US's reluctance to do this is pretty disgraceful.
That's ONE example. Then there's the wiretapping scandal, Abu Ghraib, the blatant cronyism that led to all those deaths in Hurricane Katrina, and so on. How corrupt this administration is compared to others is irrelevant, like all Tu Quoque arguments. They're the ones in power right now, and they should be held accountable right now.
Below I stated that "not being as bad as a horribly oppressive regime" is not exactly something to be proud of, a statement which you obsfucated and then ignored, blatantly repeating the same argument. The fact that our enemies are worse than us is not an argument. It is not an excuse. The fact that I "get to make this post" does not excuse all ills. And if there were indeed periods in which "freedoms were less easily exercised" (such as...?) I don't see how that excuses abuse in the present. You keep accusing me of using straw man arguments, but everything I've said is a direct response to something you've posted here; meanwhile you accuse me of claiming that I live in a fascistic hellhole, while the difference between that and what I actually said (that the government is abusing its power) should be obvious.
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
|
|
|
Sentinel
Altar Boy of Jabootu
1 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2006 : 9:38:36 PM
|
Hollywood should go after McCarthy and make a dozen more movies about the Holocaust while they are at it.
Now...about Stalin's more numerous victims....hm....nothing.
Gee, wonder why? |
|
|
|
Ubiq
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
347 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2006 : 10:46:15 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Long Cut
My whole point, since it's gotten lost in this little love-in, was not that Hollywood needs to make less of the movies about relationships and "love", or about "realizing who you are". It is that they might make a few dollars more if they actually paid a modicum of attention to the fact that that's not ALL that's going on in the world.
Because, God knows, themes such as love or self-discovery haven't proven successful for the past few thousand years while works about topical subjects remain forever.
BM: I should have mentioned this at the beginning. I solve my problems with violence. |
|
|
|
zombiewhacker
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
1475 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2006 : 11:50:32 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by TheFoywonder
Zombie, if I misinterpreted anything you wrote and got personal in my attacks then I apologize. I'm venting more thany anything else. I've come across far too much of it over the past few weeks and months.
No problem. I never meant for things to get out of hand. Let's just smile, forget it, and move on.
So.... has anybody here seen Brokeback Mountain? I read somewhere it's about happy cowboys. |
|
|
|
TheKusabiBringsThePain
Altar Boy of Jabootu
8 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 01:21:23 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sentinel
Hollywood should go after McCarthy and make a dozen more movies about the Holocaust while they are at it.
Now...about Stalin's more numerous victims....hm....nothing.
Gee, wonder why?
Um, because that would be 'sympathetic to McCarthy', which must never, ever, ever happen?
The Repentance will come. |
|
|
|
TimLehnerer
Diocesan Ecclesiarch of the Sacred Order of Jabootu
USA
95 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 08:33:04 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sentinel
Hollywood should go after McCarthy and make a dozen more movies about the Holocaust while they are at it.
Now...about Stalin's more numerous victims....hm....nothing.
Gee, wonder why?
Somewhat similarly, why does every atheist character on TV or in a movie have to convert in the final reel? |
|
|
|
Long Cut
Archdeacon of Jabootu
19 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 09:13:19 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Prankster
And Long Cut...are you seriously implying that "90%" of the population (wouldn't it have been a lot more than that in WWII, too? Like 100%?) is NOT for victory?
Not at all. I'm saying that in the 1940's. 90+ percent of the people supported victory in WWII, and in fact, most worked to make that happen in any way they could. Certainly, there was far less nitpicking over the details then. Nowadays, it seems that anyone with an opinion, whether or not it's valid, feels qualified to judge what's good or bad policy.
quote:
The problem comes when we try and determine what it is we're exactly for victory in. It sounds like a simple question, but the more you think about it, the vaguer it gets. This inability to define the conflict is one of the issues I have with Bush. However, the only people who are seriously saying "Gee, I hope Osama Bin Laden takes over the US, and that America as we know it is utterly destroyed!" are our enemies--our actual enemies, not just "Liberals who ask pesky questions." The vast majority of the people opposing the war aren't even "opposing" it in one sense (that pesky vagueness again--frankly, I don't think we should be lumping it into one big "War on Terror" anyway), they just have issues with how it's being conducted. But saying, say, that you're opposed to the war in Iraq tends to cause people to assume all kinds of stuff about you, because of all the political "Packaging" that's been going on. For example, I have serious issues with the Iraq war, to the point that I guess you could say that I'm opposed to it, but I essentially have no problem with the Afghanistan one.
I actually agree with some of what you wrote here. Believe it or not, I do have some problems with how the war has been played out. I do realize, however, that I'm not privy to all of what the CinC knows, or how the "big picture" shakes out. Lacking all information, I have to go on the basics. We were attacked, and are responding as directed by the CinC.
It might sound hokey or quaint, but to do my job effectively, I must trust that my commanders know what they are doing. I'm also duty and honor-bound to support them, and my personal sense of propriety keeps me, a simple E-6, from presuming to tell them how to run it. Of course, were I a civilian,, I would have no such constrictions save my personal beliefs on the matter.
I actually think that the war should have been conducted more agressively. We should have declared war against the nations sponsoring terrorism, and waged that war until those nations surrendered, as in WWII. Again, however, I'm not privy to all the factors that led to the descisions taken.
I guess what really gets me is how, in this day and age, war has become so politicized, to the point that it has become just one more election issue. BOTH parties try to jockey for a position of advantage using it, when IMHO they should at least present a united front to the world. Hell, both Republicans AND Democrats both play at politics with the defense budget, and not always to the benefit of either the war effort OR the welfare of those fighting it.
quote:
You really need to be careful about these broad generalizations.
I'll try. you are correct that I do this a bit too much.
But I fear we've gotten a bit off-track. I wasn't trying to say that everyone should march in lockstep, or that Hollywood should escew all other topics in favor of the war. All I was doing was asking why they were seemingly ignoring it altogether when it is an obvious source of material for them. And sorry, to me at least, some topics do start to seem a bit "small" and irrelevant when you're in the middle of something this large. I lost colleagues at the Pentagon; I've spent over a year away from my family since this thing started. Friends of mine are even now on their way overseas. I've been in hair-raising situations. It's hard to come back and find some things important after that. The world has become far more than that to me.
--------------------------------------------------
"My father was a drunk, a gambler, and a womanizer. I worshipped him!"...CWO Paul Brenner |
|
|
|
TimLehnerer
Diocesan Ecclesiarch of the Sacred Order of Jabootu
USA
95 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2006 : 10:32:18 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Long Cut
But I fear we've gotten a bit off-track. I wasn't trying to say that everyone should march in lockstep, or that Hollywood should escew all other topics in favor of the war. All I was doing was asking why they were seemingly ignoring it altogether when it is an obvious source of material for them.
Generally, Hollywood takes a while to get around to making fictional movies about wars that America is fighting in--remember that John Wayne's The Green Berets was the only movie made about the Vietnam war during the war.
Similarly, there was an F/X television series called Over There that lasted for 13 episodes last year. The marketplace killed it (low viewer share = low advertising dollars = cancelled show).
Would you consider Fahrenheit 9/11 to be a Hollywood treatment of the Iraq war? It made nearly $114 million profit in its North American theatrical release, but it wasn't a dramatic interpretation, it was a documentary (please hold the "this movie was/wasn't a documentary argument elsewhere). |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked