Jump to content
My uncle (by marriage, so no tree/fruit at work) found my involvement in the civil rights and women's rights movements of the late 60s appalling, but we both had better manners than to call each other names.
But what am I doing? I'd already decided you were a waste of thought. I'll let you have the last word:
Yes, I understand perfectly. I used to have an uncle who felt the same way about blacks, Hispanics, Filipinos and all food with "foreign" spices in it. All he needed to know was the label and his mind was made up on the spot.
Having seen "America" this afternoon, I have mixed feelings. On my return home, I did read the Forbes review, and shared a few of his criticisms.
Notably, the intro, where Washington is shot down in battle, seemed a little juvenile and was never really tied in to the rest of the show. It gave the impression that the film was going to take an "alternate future" approach, but that never materialized.
I thought D'Souza fairly stated, or rather, allowed their advocates to fairly state, the criticisms of America leveled by the left. The Forbes reviewer called these "myths" about America and D'Souza's effort to debunk them a noble one, but discounted the importance of that because, as he said, nobody believes those myths anyway. I have to say that's not my experience. I've talked to a fair number of recent high school grads and college students, and I'd say those myths are taken as Gospel truth by most of them, although the view is held lightly by most. Those myths, however, were basic to the Occupy movement of a few years back, and held very strongly by a significant subset of the Millenials.
A lot of the Forbes reviewer's other criticisms seemed to me overblown, or at least, he read more in to various segments of the movie than I thought were there. And other "criticisms" seemed to have nothing to do with the movie. It is certainly a fair statement that a major reason Obama won election in 2008 is because the Republicans did not put up a forceful advocate of a counter-position in McCain, but I honestly didn't see anything in the movie that argued otherwise.
I found about 75% of the movie interesting and engaging. I don't recall any actual historical inaccuracies, although certainly there was some tendentious presentations of historically accurate facts.
But can we just be honest here and admit that no political documentary today is likely to be commercially viable and also fairly present every side of the numerous complicated issues involved? Both Moore and D'Souza are propagandists. Propaganda, as long as it's not state-sponsored, is a perfectly legitimate enterprise, and D'Souza's effort has enough to engage and entertain as well as inform (albeit in a biased way) to make it worth watching for conservatives, independents, moderates and the politically unengaged. Died-in-the-wool liberals will probably hate it, but then I hated Moore's efforts, while recognizing their success as propaganda. Rotten Tomatoes lists audience approval rating on "America" at 89%, so apparently it is attracting the audiences it aimed for and pleasing them.
I'll look for "Boyhood." Sounds interesting.
I have now twice refuted your argument that Obama "cut the deficit in half" yet you continue to use it. It is at best a disingenuous argument, or more bluntly, a dishonest one.
That it has taken six years to bring our unemployment rate down by two points, and only at the cost of moving millions out of the labor market altogether, is hardly resounding evidence of successful policy-making.
Obama "saved" the auto industry by skinning its creditors and bondholders to throw a bone to his union-boss cronies. If only Calvin Coolidge had thought of that, we'd probably still have vibrant ice-box and horse-buggy industries. Argentina and Venezuela handle their economic problems this way, and now we do too. Nifty.
You and I and 85% of the country had few or no "health care woes" before Obamacare. The hands dealt to various players have changed, but every benefit someone received from Obamacare has come at the expense of someone else. There's been no net improvement, and because of the inherent inefficiencies of a command-and-control system there are net damages.
Sure, we were "mired" in two wars (and when, pray tell, is any war not a "mire"). After six years of Obama's unintelligible foreign policy, many if not most of the hard-won gains in Iraq and Afghanistan have been lost and we face a Middle East that is possibly in the worst shape it's ever been, a new Cold War with Russia (that Reset button of Hillary's apparently was not wired correctly), a multi-hundred-thousand invasion on our Southern border, and zero respect from either our dwindling allies or our invigorated enemies.
Our "surging" stock market combined with the negative real returns available on savings is in fact one of the prime indicators of our troubles. The market needs some risk takers, but when everybody is forced to be one or lose their capital to inflation, it is NOT a good thing.
Yeah, our big problems now are "income inequality" and climate change, you say. If I believed in God, I would pray morning and night that you are right.
OK, now I've seen the movie.
Not a single one of PeggyJoy's "examples" in her posting above are true.
D'Souza did NOT claim TARP and the bailout were "launched" by Obama, he said they were "embraced" by Obama. And that, of course, is absolutely true.
I swear I was awake through the whole thing and paying careful attention, and I never heard D'Souza or anyone else say a word about Obama's "African identity" or a name change; he never said anything about Obama speeches referring to a "nuclear-free world," or the Lockerbie bomber, or British Petroleum. I think the only mention of nuclear bombs was when D'Souza elicited from leftist academician Ward Churchill the statement that if dropping a nuclear bomb on Hitler would have been justified had we had one in time, then dropping one on the US would be justified as well. Nothing to do with Obama (except the conclusion that having him as President doesn't earn us any points from Professor Churchill).
If the only examples she can come up with of D'Souza claims that are "not rooted in reality" are things that aren't in the movie, it's pretty clear who the liar is. Or possibly PeggyJoy is so quick to leap on some liberal blogger's talking points that she can't be bothered to worry about whether what she's saying is true or false.
Will do. But having now looked at what else is playing here in town, I have to say this looks like it might be the best thing showing no matter how bad it is. You were talking about being embarrassed that America was showing here in town. If I were inclined to that reaction, I'd be embarrassed by the rest of it. What a bunch of trash!
Two can play at that game, PeggyJoy. I could say, "I really believe you and others here really disliked Mitt Romney simply because the man is Mormon. Don't deny it, because you and your friends know for a fact, that it is true."
Of course, I have no idea whether that's true or not, but what the hey? Accusing people you don't know of bigotry is such a boost to your own self-righteousness! And it sure obviates any need for you to consider others' arguments when name-calling is so much easier.
fatherof5 probably isn't aware of this, but I suspect his definition of "serious scholar" is tautological - a conservative scholar, being wrong by virtue of being conservative, couldn't possibly be a 'serious' scholar.
I'll be making an exception to my general rule against spending $$ at movies to see something I can see eventually on Hulu or Amazon Prime, and going to see this today. I don't expect to like it much, since pretty much all commercially viable 'documentaries' nowadays are propaganda pieces and I don't enjoy propaganda even if it favors my views. But I'll at least be able to express an informed opinion about it - possibly the only one on this forum unless pdywgn reports back too.
Good to know you trust your own judgment about at least one thing!
If it embarrasses you to live in a town whose residents might enjoy this film, there are plenty of towns on the West side of the State where you wouldn't have to rub elbows with such dregs of society. Wouldn't you be happier over there? I moved from there not too long ago, and can assure you, you'd hardly ever have to face a contrary thought. All the conservatives left there are too afraid of losing their jobs if they are outed to say much that you might find embarrassing.
Last login: yesterday
2014 Best Of The Best Winners
The latest wine and dine news.
The Valley's people, wine & food.
Find your way around the Valley.
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Union-Bulletin, 112 S. First Ave., Walla Walla, WA 99362/509-525-3300. All rights reserved.