Yeah, those racist Hollywood execs that have made millionaires and billionaires out of black actors and celebrities like Samuel Jackson, Chris Rock, Wesley Snipes, Oprah, Bill Cosby.......
Yeah, those racist Hollywood execs that have made millionaires and billionaires out of black actors and celebrities like Samuel Jackson, Chris Rock, Wesley Snipes, Oprah, Bill Cosby.......
Righties claim victimhood, whine like little princesses.
I'm sympathetic, I really am. Tears in my eyes as big as horseturds, honest...
I'm sympathetic, I really am. Tears in my eyes as big as horseturds, honest...
A little, when he's not saying something conservative. When he is, he's not, really.
He is more a cynic than a 'conservative' in his humor.
It's a little like Mark Twain's or Will Roger's anti-power comments ('I don't belong to any organized party, I'm a Democrat') being funny - and both were pretty 'liberal'.
Liberal because they, unlike today's Republicans, had a clue about corrupt wealth.
That's why you had, for example, Twain not only being a 'liberal' about something like racism in Huckleberry Finn, but a whole book called 'The Gilded Age' about the gross excesses of the rich he saw going on around him when concentration of wealth was high like it is now.
For example, O'Rourke could be a liberal when he says:
Another taking a poke at 'the people' more than anything 'conservative':
It's largely just that 'Libertarian streak' - liberals largely agree with this:
Not exactly something you'll hear from many Republican politicians:
One of his better known quotes has more truth than 'conservatism' about Republicans (bit of a straw man about Democrats):
And when I said when he's more 'conservative', he's not very funny:
Funnier, not political:
That's just the 'cynic' humor.
Want a better idea about 'conservative humor'? Watch the right-wing tv show they tried to make to 'counter' the Daily Show.
The influence of the US - the Obama administration was important to the Egyptian military refusing from the beginning to follow orders to attack the citizens, I've also heard.
The last episode of 'Game of Thrones' had an exchange where it was asked, when the leaders are in conflict, who will the soldiers follow, that said 'the side that pays them'.
The Egyptian military faced a question, did they want to back the dictator (who the US had supported for decades), by killing citizens, or not?
This time, the high amount of US - this time under Obama - worked out well for peace.
Other times, that same high amount of foreign influence can work for harmful things - think Reagan and backing death squads and terrorists in Central America, for example.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
I don't care what they say about you Craig, you're a smart fellow.
While true he is a cynic some of his Conservative stuff is funny
e.g.
Insatiable appetite.. irresponsibility... big government... it's all in there in succinct allegory we can all identify with. Man is just clever.
While true he is a cynic some of his Conservative stuff is funny
e.g.
Insatiable appetite.. irresponsibility... big government... it's all in there in succinct allegory we can all identify with. Man is just clever.
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,386
- 32
- 91
Liberal/conservative describes a mental outlook, not a set of political political stances. A 2011 conservative holds a variety of beliefs that would have caused conservatives of 1611 to burn him at the stake. Where they are equal is in that they both hold their beliefs out of fear.
Conservatives don't assemble data well, leaving them with a huge area of "Unknown" in their worldview, upon which ground they dare not tread. They just don't have the tools to handle it.
Sounds to me like you're a liberal. That you are for fiscal efficiency doesn't make you a conservative. You are processing the monetary expenditure in the Light of Data, right?
If you fearlessly dive right in, skin each of your data sources alive, and ruthlessly process your information cloud, you are a liberal, regardless of what conclusion the data points to.
Liberal vs Conservative is Light vs Darkness.
JSt0rm
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 27,399
- 3,948
- 126
This is what i hate about a dude like Vic Vega. He just knew in his gut that giving egypt 2 billion was the wrong thing to do. He did no research, he closed his mind instantly to the idea that it could be correct. Then he shows up lolwtf's the idea of giving egypt money and calls someone actually informed about the situation an idiot. These people expect us to vote for the trash they produce? Conservatives think they are smart and end of story they focus on dogma and simple bible stories to answer questions. Liberals are constantly questioning and learning, constantly expanding their minds. No wonder liberals are more educated as a whole then conservatives.
If they were alive today, modern conservatives would call Nixon a Commie, not to mention Eisenhower.
Conservatives don't have areas of "unknown" in a normal sense- what they do have is faith- In Rush, Beck, Hannity, Sarah! and a whole panoply of trusted demi-gods of the Right. What they can't deal with is uncertainty. If they can't figure it out easily, they just tune in to Fox, and believe.
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
Although I actually agree with the loot spelled JStOrm on this one. (Did I use that right? Damn I'm so hood! Um, so geek?) If we HAVE to give away borrowed money, this seems to me like a pretty good cause.
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,386
- 32
- 91
Yeah, but that is actually a reaction to their uncertainty.
Here, let's do a run-through as a conservative. I'll use a belief that's been moved away from a bit so that the conservatards can join in too.
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."
This would comprise the core belief. Not subject to question.
But now, how would a conservative who holds to this belief process it with relation to the real world? How does he go from, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live," to, "This woman in front of me is a witch, therefore I cannot suffer her to live."
His main path is always going to be the logical leap. "A baby in my village was stillborn." *emotional churning; no explanation is immediately apparent to his mind; "oh no, 'unknown';" so he casts the net wide for any emotional convergence. "Well let's see... this is not a good thing, and that woman over there kinda weirds me out, so those things must be related!"*
"WITCH!"
And other conservatards will jump on the train and follow like sheep unless they have a logical path to the known.
But now, what happens when it's not emotional? If nothing has happened, and you go and place in his arm a set of beakers, reagents, and put a speculum in his hand, and say, "Go investigate whether any of these women are witches," what's he going to do?
"Shit himself," is what he's going to do.
He does not have the mental tools to investigate reality. When faced with repercussions on the other side of his cluelessness, he cannot avoid facing the fact that he is clueless. To avoid the repercussions he has to avoid being named to the investigation, so he will squirm out of any such responsibility to investigate. He makes himself teflon, and so such responsibility will always sheet off him, so he instead looks to find someone else on whom he can offload the responsibility so his failure is not laying in a puddle at his feet.
This is where the snake-oil salesmen of "Truth (lol)" come in.
They will take on the mantle of "claimant of fact," and they present a model that is manufactured to be agreeable to simple mindsets. So to avoid facing the unknown on his own, the conservatard's only path is to lay the mantle of godhood upon them.
He will follow until the costs increase or the benefits decrease to the point where reality intrudes and he disposes of them. If the con artists are any good they'll manipulate the system and moderate their take so that doesn't happen.
The conservatards' rush to certainty is because of the unknown. The unknown combined with their inability to handle it means that they must find a shortcut to certainty.
So they do have "unknown" in the conventional sense. They just fill it with garbage really fast.
Matt1970
Lifer
- Mar 19, 2007
- 12,320
- 3
- 0
So I am sure if you ask each of those people you named they'll deny that there isn't any racism in the Hollywood business right? LoL
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
- Jul 22, 2009
- 8,386
- 32
- 91
Ignoring your erroneous double negative, let's stipulate Hollywood has been liberal at times on race.
First and foremost, it's a business. It's affected by the society and audience demand.
If it had made 'The Honymooners' or 'The Brady Bunch' with black families, they would have bombed. It has been racist at times, meeting market demand.
But let's look at when it stuck its liberal nose into the race issue, looking at a couple examples.
Sidney Poitier movies took on race issues - a white daughter bringing home a black man as her romantic dinner partner to her parents. That was widely uncomfortable and opposed for white America at the time, pretty daring - by showing the discomfort, looking at the issue, they helped America progress on the issue.
His character Mr. Tibbs - it wasn't that long after freedom riders had had their busses burned and been beaten traveling the south that Mr. Tibbs shoved race into the face of a southern white sheriff, again exploring what was pretty daring at the time, the very real racism in the south.
Or, take the television series 'Roots' that was a big national event, exploring the history of slavery new to many whites.
Of course, they made the other side too, remember those major movies advocating for the KKK, the racist side of things? Me neither.
So, ya, Hollywood has sometimes been liberal on race - and it's a very good thing.
Funny thing is, nearly everything you might call 'progress' in the last country was a 'liberal' movement.
Right of women to vote, giving workers more power to get more rights and better wages and creating a strong middle class, the civil rights movement, more equal rights for women and protection from sexual harassment (what do you mean, a husband can rape his wife? He has a right), environmentalism, consumer safety, support for freedom over colonialism and dictators we back, and many more.
So, there's a big overlap between Hollywood supporting 'progress' and a 'liberal' position.
It's had a share of some right-wing content too, though - John Wayne the US military hero (in the movies, the person evaded WWII service), the movie 'Patton', in fact there are quite a few movies glamorizing war and war heroes. It's had a good number of stars on the right - I remember a certain disastrous President who used his General Electric corporate spokesman skills well to sell war, I remember a charismatic actor who used his charisma for championing the NRA as its leader, and many more.
In short, ok too late for that, the real objection to the right is not 'bias', but the petulant whining of their ideology not getting its way. If they wanted 'balance', we'd hear more concern from them about talk radio being 90% far right - but they cheer that, switching their standard away from opposing 'bias', to saying 'that's fine, it's the market'. They would have screamed against the 'social activism' of Sidney Poitier at the time, and they scream against the 'social activism' of "An inconvenient truth" today.
They're wrong and simplistic to describe Hollywood as a monolith about liberalism; it's a business, that is sometimes liberal in its movies, helping progress America.
They don't oppose them as fellow Americans they don't agree with, they demonize them as some 'enemy' as the wild-eyed ideologues they are.
Hollywood doesn't always get it right; sometimes it takes a wrong side, does misrepresent an issue. That's art, that's politics. They don't have to always get it right to not be some 'enemy of the country' needing to be 'purged' - excuse me, re-purged after the last time the right got its way, when Hollywood did purge its liberals in the McCarthy era blacklists. Gee, I can't imagine why Hollywood would not be right-wing.
Save234
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
JSt0rm
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 27,399
- 3,948
- 126
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter