Oliver Stone's George Bush biopic, 'W.'


GerryShannon

Recommended Posts

I have no plans to see "W". I consider Oliver Stone probably the most dishonest person in Hollywood. I thought his movie "JFK" made a hero of one of the dishonest district attorneys in the United States. Only Mike Nifong of Duke fame comes close to being as bad.

Jim Garrison deserves to be treated like regicides in Great Britain. His body should be dug up and hanged and left to rot.

You don't need to as me how I really feel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no plans to see "W". I consider Oliver Stone probably the most dishonest person in Hollywood. I thought his movie "JFK" made a hero of one of the dishonest district attorneys in the United States. Only Mike Nifong of Duke fame comes close to being as bad.

Jim Garrison deserves to be treated like regicides in Great Britain. His body should be dug up and hanged and left to rot.

You don't need to as me how I really feel.

Personally, I think Stone is an astonishing filmmaker - as for JFK, I know it's a load of tosh, but it's probably my favourite film of his. (I would definitely recommend Vincent Bugliosi's Reclaiming History, a mammoth tone that backs up the lone gunman theory and tackles all the greatest conspiracy theories, Bugilosi has a particular distaste for Stone and statements he made around the time of JFK's release). I think it was put best when a critic once equated Stone's JFK to D.W. Griffith's silent epic The Birth of a Nation - both masterfully created cinematic works of their time, but both present serious (and particularly in Birth's case, quite horribly morally depraved) distortions of recorded fact. Even some popular conspiracy enthusiastis are embarassed by Jim Garrison's cock-eyed persual of Clay Shaw and the alleged 'conspiracy'. There's a truly great array of resources here related to the film:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jfkmovie.htm

No way am I believing this will be anything of a truly definite take on Dubya and his legacy, (it looks more and more deliberately satirical), but it's a film most will be talking about - I look forward to checking it out. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me warn you, Gerry. You are from Ireland. I am sure you have a much more objective view of America's imperialism than some people on this board.

It may disappoint you to see it. However, some people who call themselves Objectivists cheer on foreign invasions of countries who are no threat to the USA. They make apologies for penny-ante autocrats like Mikhail Saakashvili and the butchers who have been running Israel since 1948. They love the fact that the US has given aid to goons and thugs like Franco in Spain. They just love the fact that people who disagree with them are getting killed for the fact that they disagree.

These people, of course, are cowards. They would never openly initiate an act of violence against a person who disagrees with them. But secretly, deep in their sick minds, they absolutely, positively love the killing. They admire a murderer who acts on feelings that they have repressed. It's partially because they simply have trouble feeling anything. A coward is numb and has trouble feeling anything at all. The thing I can't figure out is what attracts these kind of people to Objectivism in the first place.

Some of us have a rational and realistic view. Justin Raimondo of antiwar.com has been heavily influenced by Rand, for example. I fear that many rational people already have left the movement in disgust. Ten years ago, the Objectivist forums I frequented were much different.

Thus, I'm not surprised that some people are upset that Oliver Stone is criticizing Bush. For some people who call themselves Objectivists, Bush simply gets a free pass because he is the leader of wars that they love. These same people have criticized harshly just about every other American president who has come before him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gerry:

Chris has to be back at the home by 12:00AM EST to take his paranoia meds.

Occasionally, he actually makes a point that is supported by a piece of evidence that has some probative value, but he actually visits reality as a tourist.

Adam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, boy: "The butchers who have been running Israel since 1948."

Could it be that they have been excluded from other professions?

--Brant

Many people go into politics because they aren't good for anything else. That fits the current President perfectly. I imagine it applies to Israeli "leaders" as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, boy: "The butchers who have been running Israel since 1948."

Could it be that they have been excluded from other professions?

--Brant

Many people go into politics because they aren't good for anything else. That fits the current President perfectly. I imagine it applies to Israeli "leaders" as well.

Strike one!

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris,

I don't understand what you are getting at. You know for a fact that Justin Raimondo is seen around here as a the equivalent of a Rothbardian Lindsay Perigo, so I wonder what the purpose of singing his praises are.

If you wish to discuss ideas, please discuss them. If your intent is simply to insult people in the manner of Perigo or Raimondo, please do it over at Perigo's or Raimondo's places. They like that kind of discourse. I don't and I believe many on OL don't either.

It's out of place here and you convince no one, so it's even useless hostility. Where is the gain in that?

We built this place to avoid that kind of stuff. Please take it to the proper venue, or at least away from this one.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris,

Let's put it this way. I am interested in encouraging the good, not provoking the bad. Think Law of Attraction if all else fails.

I am sick and tired of discussing hatred and witnessing expressions of it. I have a couple of hate issues like PARC that are kept alive on OL because of the vicious attack against Barbara. (Thank goodness that one is coming to an end.) But I don't want to wallow in hatred. My life is too valuable for that.

Let's do it this way. Analyze and discuss here. Then take that information and hate elsewhere with it. I value your mind, but not your heart if it is filled with spite.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand what you are getting at.

I am trying to sort out the psychology of the pseudo-Objectivist who favors American imperialism. Such beliefs are not based on reason or reality, and these people have shown time and time again that they will blank out reality even if it is right in front of their face. These people get some type of emotional payoff from supporting American aggression, just as the smoker gets an emotional payoff from smoking.

You know for a fact that Justin Raimondo is seen around here as a the equivalent of a Rothbardian Lindsay Perigo, so I wonder what the purpose of singing his praises are.

Are you a mind reader? How exactly do you know that I know or do not know something? That is the first time I have heard him called that on this forum. I have observed only one person here make a negative comment about Raimondo, and that person can barely write a complete sentence.

I was not "singing his praises." Please confine your arguments to things I actually post here. There is nothing for you to gain by making things up, unless you are trying to create an argument where none exists. Actually, this might also explain your very poor attempt to tell me what I know.

I was pointing out that Justin Raimondo has acknowledged Rand's influence and that he actually supports an America-first foreign policy. Gerry may not know that.

If you wish to discuss ideas, please discuss them.

Do you wish to discuss ideas?

I don't and I believe many on OL don't either.

Plenty of them like it.

It's out of place here and you convince no one, so it's even useless hostility.

It's an observation. Just as it is not possible to reason with the alcoholic about his drinking, it is also not possible with people like Yaron Brook when it comes to the issue of American imperialism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris,

I am not going to bicker with you.

I am an alcoholic.

I have stated what I have to state and I request that you try to respect what I am getting at. (I believe you are intelligent enough to understand that, although I do not read your mind. btw - I find it odd to see you complain about that when you make long posts reading the minds of people you don't like.)

But now I want to move on and use the precious unrepeatable minutes of my life for something other than bickering and hatred.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no plans to see "W". I consider Oliver Stone probably the most dishonest person in Hollywood. I thought his movie "JFK" made a hero of one of the dishonest district attorneys in the United States. Only Mike Nifong of Duke fame comes close to being as bad.

Jim Garrison deserves to be treated like regicides in Great Britain. His body should be dug up and hanged and left to rot.

You don't need to as me how I really feel.

Personally, I think Stone is an astonishing filmmaker - as for JFK, I know it's a load of tosh, but it's probably my favourite film of his. (I would definitely recommend Vincent Bugliosi's Reclaiming History, a mammoth tone that backs up the lone gunman theory and tackles all the greatest conspiracy theories, Bugilosi has a particular distaste for Stone and statements he made around the time of JFK's release). I think it was put best when a critic once equated Stone's JFK to D.W. Griffith's silent epic The Birth of a Nation - both masterfully created cinematic works of their time, but both present serious (and particularly in Birth's case, quite horribly morally depraved) distortions of recorded fact. Even some popular conspiracy enthusiastis are embarassed by Jim Garrison's cock-eyed perusal of Clay Shaw and the alleged 'conspiracy'. There's a truly great array of resources here related to the film:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jfkmovie.htm

No way am I believing this will be anything of a truly definite take on Dubya and his legacy, (it looks more and more deliberately satirical), but it's a film most will be talking about - I look forward to checking it out. :)

Shannon; I wanted to reply to your additional comments about JFK. I do like Reclaiming History. It is mammoth work which I suspect many people who saw the movie will never read.

The comparison to Birth of a Nation is good. I must add that no one takes Birth of a Nation seriously today.

It is good having you on OL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They make apologies for penny-ante autocrats like Mikhail Saakashvili and the butchers who have been running Israel since 1948.

Please reveal your adjectives for Hamas, Hezbollah, the PLO, and Putin. How do they compare to the people you named?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris:

"They make apologies for penny-ante autocrats like Mikhail Saakashvili and the butchers who have been running Israel since 1948."

I wish you had taken my course on Argumentation and Debate, so you would not present such ineptitude when you advance an "argument".

See below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begs_the_question

You attempt to argue with fallacious premises that you never establish, nor do you define any of the key terms in your "premises".

Sorry to be so direct, but you are becoming tedious and I think you are better than that, although I am becoming convinced that your petulance is counter productive to your goal.

You should take to heart and mind Michael's counsel to you.

Adam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you a mind reader? How exactly do you know that I know or do not know something?

Funny comment from someone who spewed this nonsensical bit of psychologizing

They just love the fact that people who disagree with them are getting killed for the fact that they disagree

and

These people, of course, are cowards. They would never openly initiate an act of violence against a person who disagrees with them. But secretly, deep in their sick minds, they absolutely, positively love the killing. They admire a murderer who acts on feelings that they have repressed. It's partially because they simply have trouble feeling anything. A coward is numb and has trouble feeling anything at all.

I bet they are also child molesters whose mommies didn't pay enough attention to them, right? Or is that just you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please reveal your adjectives for Hamas, Hezbollah, the PLO, and Putin. How do they compare to the people you named?

Hamas, Hezbollah, and the PLO are fanatical, violent theocrats. They are suicide bombers who harm non-military people and children. Does that work for you?

I have even went so far as saying: "If we weren't buying their oil, they would be crawling on their stomachs eating worms and bugs."

I have never given any group of Islamic savages a free pass. The question is: What is your motivation is giving Israel a free pass? None of these Israel worshippers have ever denied that they give Israel a free pass. You try to deflect from this reality, by asking me for my opinions on groups that I consider barbarians. I know quite a few of Jews who don't give Israel the kind of free pass that non-Jewish pseudo-Objectivists do.

Putin is not religious, of course. He's just a typical Russian apparatchik who is looking out for his own power and that of his cronies. He's actually much better than the Islamo-fascists. He doesn't claim to be on "a mission from god." And a woman can at least walk down the street in a miniskirt in Moscow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is your motivation is giving Israel a free pass?

Are you trying to show your habit of allegations with zero evidence?

But I'll give you two more chances. 1. Fork it up. 2. Put the Israelis you declaim (who more exactly?), Hamas, etc. on a scale of -10 (worst) to +10 (best).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is your motivation is giving Israel a free pass?

Are you trying to show your habit of allegations with zero evidence?

But I'll give you two more chances. 1. Fork it up. 2. Put the Israelis you declaim (who more exactly?), Hamas, etc. on a scale of -10 (worst) to +10 (best).

I've read all Chris's posts on this thread--well, the whole thread. I don't see the language that is being reviled as extreme.

= Mindy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gerry:"Personally, I think Stone is an astonishing filmmaker."

I agree. What I like best about his work is that his characters--for good or for bad-- always are larger than life, a quality sadly absent from today's filmmaking. If it weren't for his politics, he's the man I'd like to see directing Atlas Shrugged.

I keep reading that for many years he has wanted to do a remake of The Fountainhead. And he just might be able to do it. It's not unusual for leftists to see themselves as defenders of individualism-- note High Noon, and Judgment at Nuremberg. If that's how Stone sees the message of the book, he could do a superb job.

Barbara

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now