Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Compare and Contrast?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Compare and Contrast? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 5:21:10 PM   
juliaoceania


Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline 		Here is an introduction.... One should know the other side before they dismiss them out of hand. I am not a democrat, but the possible rigging of elections should disturb americans enough to learn about it.

The rigging of Florida occurred BEFORE a vote was ever cast.

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=55

_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to Estring)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 5:52:48 PM   
MmakeMme


Posts: 682
Joined: 7/29/2006
From: NC
Status: offline 		Wow.

Dudes. Let's all smoke a bowl of this sticky apolitical. We'll watch Yellow Submarine, eat some seafood, and forget politics even exist. Peace, Babes. Coexist.

_____________________________

Happiness is not something ready made. It comes from your own actions. ~~ Dalai Lama

(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 5:57:34 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		The whale is undoubtably one of the largest mammals alive today.

Tell me what I gotta do to get you to give me a dog licking peanut butter bolwjob...........never mind I will work it out for myself.

I am sorry that you bought into the bullshit of god and country and service, it really don't happen like that.

Ron


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 6:15:52 PM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom

Ownedgirlie,

I just love people who bitch about everyone being corrupt as if it is a bad thing and then vote for the most corrupt and incompetent government this country has seen since probably Grant if ever.

Why so do I.
quote:


I wait on baited breath for the what ...

quote:

the differences are meaningful, if slight enough, that I never vote for the "Demopukes" in any case. :)

What is it you're waiting for?  I was quoting you, with a twist.  If you are waiting for me to point out these differences, it appears you already know them.
quote:


As for pandering to the masses, I don't have to count on the support of people dumb enough to not see through the constant lies and bullshit spewed by this administration. 

I mentioned Demo's.  I made no reference whatsoever about this administration.  Why do you assume there are only two, and therefore if I do not vote for one, I must be voting for the other?

(in reply to CrappyDom)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 6:17:31 PM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang

quote:

ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
However, the differences are meaningful, if slight enough, that I never vote for the "Demopukes" in any case. :)


I knew this from the first. Just please tell me you are clearing several million $$$ a year - then I might consider you self-interested but wrong instead of just deluded.

Most americans are just deluded about who they are and where they stand in the world.


I will ask you the same thing I asked Crappy.  Are there only two parties?  Are there only two ways to vote?  Who is the deluded one, if you are considering others to be whatever it is you are considering them, based only on assumption?  Regardless, you may consider me however you wish to consider me.  It is your right, and has no effect on me.

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 6:20:29 PM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Estring

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom

Julia,

The idiots who believe that Iraq did 9/11 are predominantly watchers of Fox News, big surprise eh?


Actually, I doubt that is true. Fox has never said that Iraq was behind 9/11. And we didn't go in to Iraq because we thought they were behind 9/11. You sure do like to just throw out statements regardless of their truth, don't you?

I have never heard the claim that Iraq was behind 9/11. 

(in reply to Estring)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 6:28:20 PM   
cravespleasure


Posts: 53
Joined: 8/12/2006
Status: offline 		"I have never heard the claim that Iraq was behind 9/11."

lol.

Do you mean.. you didn't hear any of the biased news reports, or any of the President's speechs?

(in reply to ownedgirlie)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 6:33:14 PM   
CrappyDom


Posts: 1883
Joined: 4/11/2006
From: Sacramento
Status: offline 		Girlie,

You are right, there are hundreds of political parties and I definitely think that you should vote for one of the ones never ever likely to elect anyone to anything.

(in reply to cravespleasure)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 6:35:11 PM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom

Girlie,

You are right, there are hundreds of political parties and I definitely think that you should vote for one of the ones never ever likely to elect anyone to anything.

Truly, anyone who votes for anything other than a Demo in your book is an idiot, so I do not see the point in your continuing this conversation with the likes of me, therefore I respectfully bow out.

Edited to point out - Neither did I say I voted for any of the other parties.  I merely made some statements to point out your considerations of people based solely on assumption.  Okay, NOW I'm out. 

< Message edited by ownedgirlie -- 9/8/2006 6:41:02 PM >

(in reply to CrappyDom)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 6:45:54 PM   
CrappyDom


Posts: 1883
Joined: 4/11/2006
From: Sacramento
Status: offline 		girlie,

What I object to you is the way you dance around things and don't take a stand.  If someone backs you into a corner you play "I don't take sides" or some other game.

I dont' take sides either, I would have voted for Dole over Bush OR Gore but Bush slandered him deeply and he lost.  I despise liberals who are soft on facts, I have nailed a couple here for posting things about the military that I thought wrong and I posted facts to back up my reasoning.

You want to discuss facts, fine, I am all for it, you want to play whatever game it is you like to play I have no interest.

You want to hear me curse out a Dem you should hear what I have to say about Feinswine or Schumer. 

(in reply to ownedgirlie)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 7:07:16 PM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline 		Crappy,

I would like to invite you to read through the Illegal Immigration thread that took place a few weeks back and then tell me I don’t take a stand.  Or to read through any of the “no limit” or “safe word” threads in this forum and then compliment me on my dancing.

In this particular thread I think I’ve been pretty clear that I think Michael Moore is has added his own touch of dramatics in his “documentaries,” as well as I have taken a stand to say I believe your thinking is so biased that you have proven judgment against anyone non-democratic, as demonstrated in your previous posts to me.

Those were the purposes of my posts here.  NOT to discuss the politics of George Bush.

Simply because I have chosen not to tell you who and what I vote for, you think I wear dancing shoes.  So be it.  I did that for a reason – and the reason seemed to prove itself. It had nothing to do with the corners you speak of.   

Anyway, the OP was about the movie 9/11 and its reception, versus Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 and its reception.  I spoke to the latter.  Since suffering some huge family loss this past month, I have not paid enough attention to the former to be able to speak on the subject.

No game here, Crappy, regardless of what you think.

(in reply to CrappyDom)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/8/2006 7:25:15 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline 		Does anyone know if this movie addresses the Executive Order from Clinton that required the intelligence community to only hire good guys and not use "shady" guys?

(in reply to ownedgirlie)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/10/2006 1:09:34 PM   
CrappyDom


Posts: 1883
Joined: 4/11/2006
From: Sacramento
Status: offline 		http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/31/reagans/

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,102110,00.html

The Reagans

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, searchThe Reagans is a four-hour miniseries about U.S. President Ronald Reagan and his family which CBS had planned to broadcast in November 2003 during fall "sweeps", but was ultimately broadcast on November 30 of that year on premium cable channel Showtime.





Contents[hide]
1 Production
2 Controversy

3 External links


//


[edit]
Production
The miniseries featured James Brolin as Ronald Reagan, Judy Davis as Nancy Reagan and covers the period in time from 1949 when Reagan was still in Hollywood, through his governorship of California until Reagan's last day in office as President in 1989.
[edit]
Controversy
About a month before it was scheduled to air, portions of a draft script of the documentary-drama were leaked and published by the New York Times and the Drudge Report. As a result of these stories, the miniseries began to be widely criticized by conservatives as an unbalanced and inaccurate depiction of Reagan. CBS reportedly had ordered a love story about Ronald and Nancy Reagan with politics as a backdrop, but instead received what they later claimed was an overtly political film. Supporters of the film claimed that these criticisms were simply partisan bias, and were an attempt to censor a film because it did not always portray the former president in positive light.
Conservatives began criticizing it before it was broadcast and claimed that it put words in Reagan's mouth and condemned it as "leftist" historical revisionism. Some of the criticism was based upon early drafts of the script and featured scenes that were either never shot or dropped from the final version. Eventually, after several weeks of outspoken criticism by conservatives, on November 4, 2003, CBS withdrew the broadcast claiming that it did "not present a balanced portrayal of the Reagans" ([1]). The network chose instead to broadcast the miniseries on the premium cable channel Showtime, which along with CBS is owned by Viacom.

(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/10/2006 1:39:16 PM   
PlayfulOne


Posts: 1047
Status: offline
quote:


The consistency of my posts is the wondering why President Clinton is concerned about a dramatization? Why isn't there the same cavalier attitude regarding the President Reagan movie or Fahrenheit 9/11 movie?


No Merc,

Your concistency is the fact you keep glossing over the fact that the Clinton reaction to this film is the same as the Regan reaction was to that one.  Do you not remember Regan family members crawling out of the woodwork to protest?  Do you not remember it being pulled from network televison (eventually surfacing on Showtime). 
Your more intelligent than that, your just cherry picking your thoughts for a certain response.

The fact that most historical accounts are taken creative license with doesn't matter.  It doesn't matter that many people who watch those movies think what they say is an actual representation.

It does matter when people can't seperate the two (Facts and creative license) on an issue where they are still deciding how to vote and take what they see as accurate.

K

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/10/2006 1:42:32 PM   
PlayfulOne


Posts: 1047
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

Does anyone know if this movie addresses the Executive Order from Clinton that required the intelligence community to only hire good guys and not use "shady" guys?


I know, not using "shady guys" would be terrible.  We would never had the opportunity to build a plan off the lies told by people with agendas like the Iraqi National Congress.

K

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/10/2006 1:57:26 PM   
CrappyDom


Posts: 1883
Joined: 4/11/2006
From: Sacramento
Status: offline 		Kendyky,

What about Bush using a known Iranian double agent as his source for not only intell but sharing with him top secret national secrets like which Iranian codes we had broken?  How about attempting to put that same Iranian double agent on the throne in Iraq?


(in reply to PlayfulOne)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/11/2006 7:28:57 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PlayfulOne

quote:


The consistency of my posts is the wondering why President Clinton is concerned about a dramatization? Why isn't there the same cavalier attitude regarding the President Reagan movie or Fahrenheit 9/11 movie?


No Merc,

Your concistency is the fact you keep glossing over the fact that the Clinton reaction to this film is the same as the Regan reaction was to that one.  Do you not remember Regan family members crawling out of the woodwork to protest?  Do you not remember it being pulled from network televison (eventually surfacing on Showtime). 
Your more intelligent than that, your just cherry picking your thoughts for a certain response.

The fact that most historical accounts are taken creative license with doesn't matter.  It doesn't matter that many people who watch those movies think what they say is an actual representation.

It does matter when people can't seperate the two (Facts and creative license) on an issue where they are still deciding how to vote and take what they see as accurate.
K


K,
The people who "can't separate" a movie docu-drama from factual history will focus on whatever movie or issue that is broadcast the day before the election. You give credit for an attention span that couldn't, by definition, make it from now until November. But note, neither William Clinton, or George W. can be voted for or against for the office of President.

Check the OP again. The focus has been diverted to compare the Reagan movie. There is a point to consider and compare the Reagan movie to this one, and it is noteworthy. But in context shouldn't the current example offer current comparison and contrast? If you compare 1960 Democratic platforms to the current political climate they'd be more similar to current Republican platforms. 

The movie where President Bush was assassinated opened this past weekend in Canada without any attention, without any outcry of opposition. I'll concede the point, if you would like to make it, that Canada movie openings are irrelevant. However, it is my point that with the same reaction so would this TV broadcast.

(in reply to PlayfulOne)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/11/2006 9:21:45 AM   
CrappyDom


Posts: 1883
Joined: 4/11/2006
From: Sacramento
Status: offline
quote:

The movie where President Bush was assassinated opened this past weekend in Canada without any attention, without any outcry of opposition. I'll concede the point, if you would like to make it, that Canada movie openings are irrelevant. However, it is my point that with the same reaction so would this TV broadcast.


Thats probably because everyone in Canada is sitting quietly praying it comes true.  Remember, they opposed the idiotic war Bush's administration said would pay for itself and we would be greeted with flowers.  See they were not dumb enough to fall for it then and they have only gotten more and more pissed.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/11/2006 3:47:54 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline 		Crappy;  you are right   It wasn't Albright that warned the Pakistanis   It was the Vice Chair of the Joint Chiefs   (9/11 commission report pdf version page 134).

Why did Clinton keep reducing Intel budgets until Gingrich infused a ton of money in 1996?   The 9/11 commission sorta glossed over that.

(in reply to CrappyDom)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: Compare and Contrast? - 9/16/2006 6:04:24 AM   
Manawyddan


Posts: 701
Joined: 1/2/2005
From: Petaluma (Northern California)
Status: offline 		I did write a letter to Iger about this. Not to get the tv version pulled or edited ... I don't care about that. By now most folks have made up their minds about Clinton v. Bush and if they can't recognise propoganda, that's their problem.

I complained because, despite the known factual inaccuracies, they have been planning to distribute the film to schools.

_____________________________

_______________________________________________
"She always had a terrific sense of humor"
(Valerie Solonas, as described by her mother)
_______________________________________________

(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Compare and Contrast? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.096